...
I really want to get this new "Exile" release from the Stones with never before heard tracks. It's sounds like fun. The newest song I've heard is "Plundered My Soul" and it is so good. I love it. I need to get this album quite soon.
I wonder how many Stones fans know that they have a new single? I don't really actually have any money for this, but I'm trying. Now what I need to do is get a job for this. It kind of feels like I'm the only one in my school who tries to promote the Stones. I'm out there trying to give word of the Stones.
What I want to do is to be able to get people more interested. I've gotten a certain person interested in the Stones. I just really want to be able to get this.
I've also been through a very interesting thread about Stephen Davis' book on the Stones called "Old Gods Almost Dead". I would buy it only for pure amusement but I don't like some of the things that he has written. It seems as though he favors Zeppelin over the Stones. That Zeppelin soled out MSG and the Stones also, but how can Zep play to more people?
It also seemed like a strung together book. He does get many facts wrong and it seems like it was copy pasted and very little knowledge went into this. Just to sell type of book.
Yeah, I think that Zep sold more albums is because they chose to play to more people and they were dedicated to playing more shows and touring where as the Stones had a type of schedule, like touring every so years and such. Zeppelin in '72 were playing to large crowds. In '72, they might have sold more albums, but the Stones had every single date on the '72 tour sold out. The demand for the Stones was high. Over a million people signed up to get Earls Court tickets in '75 or was it '76?
I really like Zeppelin, but I don't think I could actually stand to go to a concert. I don't want the over indulgent hour long solo's and such. A lot of people tend to fantasize about Led Zeppelin concerts about being this mystifying thing when it can actually get pretty boring.
Like this is what with the Beatles. If the Beatles hadn't broken up in '70, and had kept going on today, they wouldn't be talked about like they were supreme gods. I think that they would have probably been listenable up to '74 and then would have sort of just faded out. All of their solo work would have been combined. If the Stones followed the way the Beatles went, in say either '72 or '78, they would have been praised like the Beatles.
I mean, I love the Beatles, it's just that when I look at them, they have this "Holier Than Thou" image. I think they don't deserve as much credit as they get. Many people love to say that they invented everything after '64. There were already psychedelic bands doing that music before the Beatles ever thought about it. I think that without Dylan and the Beach Boys' influences on the Beatles, then "Sgt. Pepper" wouldn't exist and the Beatles would be referred to as just a British Invasion act.
I actually think that if they toured in '69 with the Stones, the Beatles would have been billed as the larger act and headliner. But over time, the Stones would have over shadowed them through it. The Stones had the communication with the audience. How he moved around and got close to them, along with the band. Most acts stood away and were stationary in terms of performing. I just think that they would have blown the Beatles off stage.
It really depends on who you ask. I usually don't like comparing because I know I might not give a certain band it's credit and the fact that it is a bit pointless.
No music. Just silence.
