• Please use the following thread to discuss any bugs, issues, or feature requests related to the forum software upgrade.

    Click here for Thread

     


At what point should famous rockers hang it up?

taez555

Member
Maybe they all want to retire. Raising the ticket prices, to mortgage payment levels, is just their way of saying, "see.... we can't hack it anymore, no one will pay to see us, time to call it quits"

:)
 
Last edited:

Rotten

Silver Supporting Member
I think they should play as long as they can. I just wish they would age gracefully. There is nothing sadder than seeing an old man with obviously dyed long hair, with a belly hanging over skinny legs in tight leather -- not a good look.
 

84Bravo

Member
I wish I had seen Muddy and Wolf, live, old and sitting on a stool, wouldn't have mattered. Never got to see them live. Not so much respect for those who age in this culture. Pity.
 
I think they should play as long as they can. I just wish they would age gracefully.
This is exactly how i feel. Paul Stanley and David Lee Roth doing leaps and splits on stage when they were in their 20's was cool, now that their near 60, do away with the acrobatics (which i think both of them have).
Also, i don't think it's unreasonable to expect that someone's abilities may diminish with age, but if your playing (or singing) is just a shadow of it's former self, then i say it's time to hang it up.
 
So, at some point, these guys could be damaging their long-term legacies and reputations by having too many of the really bad performances saved for all time on the internet.


.
Honestly I don't think any of them give a flying rats-a$$ about their long-term legacy. Why would anyone worry about what other people think about them after they're dead. That's something their fans worry about.
 

Bob Longo

Member
Many years ago I went to John Lee Hooker's 70th birthday party in Madison Square Garden. EC, G Allman, Bonnie Rait, Joe Cocker, and many other aged rockers were there. It was awesome!!

Also, I just saw Paul McCartney two years ago. He rocked.

Who cares if some people think you should hang it up? I thought rock'n roll was about not giving a ****.
 

wundergussy

Member
Johnny Cash put out some of the most relevant, interesting, and listenable music of his life in his last years. So I'm not willing to put a specific date on it. But, I think it's easier for a folky to sound relevant as he/she nears death than a rocker.
 

Ben R

Member
Honestly I don't think any of them give a flying rats-a$$ about their long-term legacy. Why would anyone worry about what other people think about them after they're dead. That's something their fans worry about.
Oh, I disagree.

If I were a world famous performer / song writer, I'd care about what people might think about me some day after I was gone. Your work is your legacy. It's the footprint that you leave behind. I would want my grandchildren and great grandchildren to see and hear me at my best. I would want to be remembered for my top work. Whatever my peak and best material was - that's what I would want people to remember me for. I acknowledge that you have to be proud and willing to stand by everything that you put out there. But, you probably would prefer that the best stuff stands out more often than not when people judge you through history. So, once the stuff that you're "putting out there" sucks, I don't think you're helping your legacy any. If I were already super rich, cashing in on those people still willing to pay me (even though I sucked) would be less important to me than my reputation. Then again, it's easy for me to say that from my obscure non-musical desk job.
.
.
 
Last edited:

Mule

Member
When you cant bring it any more and people dont want to pay to see you it's time to hang it up. Until then....keep at it.
 

guitaristanyc

Senior Member
When your sports cars and mansions are paid off, the paternity suits settled, and the interest generated by your investment portfolio guarantees you a regular supply of cocaine and hookers for the rest of your natural life.
 
With this question, I'm referring to the rock and roll bands who hang on into their 60's, 70's, and (gulp!) beyond. Your "Rolling Stones", "Queen", "Aerosmith", "Paul McCartney" types of acts. At what point should they say, "OK. Enough. I'm embarrassing myself and look/sound ridiculous. I am officially retiring from performing music for money." ???

Personally, I feel that once you sound much worse than you used to and are no longer overly entertaining, you should hang it up and enjoy spending your money in retirement. You can't hide your flaws any more. In this world of smart phone video recordings from all angles throughout every arena that you perform in, people are going to know what you really sound like. So, at some point, these guys could be damaging their long-term legacies and reputations by having too many of the really bad performances saved for all time on the internet.

I feel as though we're on the verge of that with some hall of famers and wanted to see what others thought.

.
It's all very clear when you're 16 how silly adults can look when they're over the hill and pretending they're young. However, most people lose this insight once they're over the hill. Hopefully you won't. I didn't. I know how ridiculous I could look at 56 by trying to do certain material or to try to look the part in more youthful bands.

My advice (YMMV etc etc.): The key is to simply get a full length mirror, install it in your house where you face it when you get up in the morning. Take a good look each day so that your mental image matches the reality of your appearance. Then you'll be less likely to mistakenly believe that you are 20 years younger than you really are.

Frankly, Keith scares me in Shine a Light. Mick does also. It was even more weird when they stacked all those 18 year-old beauties in the first 5 rows and you get the age contrast making them even look older. When Buddy Guy came on, he made them look like aged dandies. Still, Mick, Keith, Charlie, Ron... you're playing great so what do I know?
 

Kiwi

Silver Supporting Member
Oh, I disagree.

If I were a world famous performer / song writer, I'd care about what people might think about me some day after I was gone. Your work is your legacy. It's the footprint that you leave behind. I would want my grandchildren and great grandchildren to see and hear me at my best. I would want to be remembered for my top work. Whatever my peak and best material was - that's what I would want people to remember me for.
.
The work, or rep, is harder to destroy than you might think. The early, great stuff will last despite the decades that may follow of sub-par performances. It's the original songs and the playing that endure, and those can't ever be erased.

If I were already super rich, cashing in on those people still willing to pay me (even though I sucked) would be less important to me than my reputation.
.
I think you're missing the third reason (besides money or rep) why aging rockers keep at it. They've got plenty of money, and their reputations are secure for generations to come. Why keep at it?

What they want now is attention, to be seen, to stay current in the culture. Led Zep tunes selling Caddys, the Who at the Super Bowl, McCartney or the Stones touring as they near their 70s, or Les Paul playing every week at the Iridium past the age of 90.

That's payment in a very different currency than cash or legacy. That's what's valuable, and that's what you're proposing that they should give up.
=K
 
I really don't care about how they look, I just hope they can still perform. And as long as they can....and people are buying tickets to see them, why not? Rock isn't just for 20 somethings, it's for everyone.
 

TravisE

Supporting Member
I think it's different for everyone and, in part, every genre. When an artist ceases to be an artist and becomes a parody of their former self, it's time to stop.

Dylan, Petty, Neil Young, Paul Simon, etc, should absolutely continue. As long as they keep introducing great music to the world, there's no reason to quit.


IMO, Skynard should stop.
 

JPF

Member
I think there's a huge difference in the whys and how's of not hanging it up that depends on whether said aging rocker has attained financial security or not. I suspect that many a big name didn't, for whatever reasons, and are now trying to catch up in the midst of the baby-boomer fuelled nostalgia vacuum.
 


Trending Topics

Top