The 50 Greatest Singles in Rock and Roll

[melon1]

The End of the Innocence is pure shit! Again, sorry Ken.

"Hotel California" is well-written no matter what anyone says. I'm a guitarist and the chord progressions as well as the simultaneos solos are very impressive. However, it's up there with "Sweet Home Alabama" and "Sweet Child 'O Mine"(which I like too) as one of the most classic rock burned out songs ever.

[frag]

With U2, it's not the new music so much that irritates me. It's not enthralling enough to spur me one way or the other. It's Bono's cavalier attitude toward world issues...rather, largely American tragedies. The Edge too. Something terrible happens and in steps Bono or The Edge to vow their support and to air their opinions on the matter. Millions of people want to hear you play...doesn't necessarily mean they give a shit about what you've got to say outside of an album and some songs. I really don't understand...and definitely do not agree with the obvious milking of grief and despair for the sake of making yourself heard. Because really neither has ever said or done anything on the matter that truly had an impact. This started to get to me badly after I saw the 9/11 footage with "Walk On" playing over it. I loved that song. I had my own fabulous little interpretation of the meaning. And now it's gone. Damn, I'm bitching and ranting; getting more and more pissed off at Bono. And they've got a killer catalogue of material too. One of rock's finest. It's such a shame that they want to disassociate themselves from that.

[strat-0]

I thought the Eagles were pretty cool when I was in high school and after - in their early days. That's when I got into the idea of an acoustic act, and I worked up a bunch of Eagles tunes: Take it Easy, Peaceful Easy Feeling, Desperado, etc. (Hey, I did other stuff, like CCR, CSN, traditional blues tunes, all kinds of stuff, but you need some nice pop fluff too!)

But they really kinda went south. They bring in Joe Walsh to try and turn them into a rock and roll band and it just didn't work for me. And I love Joe Walsh. The James Gang kicked ass, and his solo work has always been superb. It was just a mix that didn't gel. Hotel is a well crafted and produced song / album, but it just doesn't pull you in. Me, anyway. They then exited the fast lane and accelerated down Cheeze Road.

What tore it for me was when they wanted $100+ a seat for their first reunion tour. This was many moons ago and they were well ahead of the ticket price curve on that one. No thanks, guys...

But I can still do a pretty nice Desperado. I use more jazz-type chords - it's real sweet.

[tuneschick]

I don't even want to get started on Bono... but let me just say that Frag, you pretty much summed up how I feel about him in your last post. It's not so their new music, as you said (although what I've heard bored me silly) - it's him having to open his mouth about everything that happens in the world. Everything. And what really set me off was when Joey Ramone died and Bono came out and said, "Without the Ramones, there would be no U2." And then Joe Strummer died, and Bono said "Without the Clash, there would be no U2." And then when Johnny Cash died, he made some similar comment. What the fuck?!? Dude, sometimes it's OK to just keep it to yourself. You don't really need to comment on EVERYTHING that happens in the world.

Argh. OK, I'm done. Stupid Bono, trying to ruin my morning.

[Dr. Drum]

I dunno… I know a rant is just a rant and I’m really not trying to start anything, but it’s clearly inaccurate to say that Bono’s just milking grief and despair for ego gratification or that he’s had no impact on the causes he’s thrown himself into, IMHO.

[kmc]

I don't believe that Bono is at all insincere about his world concerns; that said, I still hate him and his music. In my opinion, no one buys more into the U2 hype than Bono. He thinks they are great, he thinks their music moves the world or figures prominently in the lives of rock enthusiasts, and that just isn't true anymore. They are just a nice stadium rock band. They are no better than the Stones are right now.

[phil]

Is is true that the Rolling Stones got censured by the NFL
during the Super Bowl half-time show ... ??

They[U2] are no better than the Stones are right now.

[kmc]

It's true.

[frag]

Did Keith expose a nipple?

[Paul]

I think these are the lyrics that got censored "you make a dead man cum". Or is it "she makes?"

[rockysigman]

There was also a line in "Rough Justice" that got censored.

Supposedly the Stones agreed to the censorship ahead of time, but then complained about it later.

Now I'm not angry at ABC about the censorship -- the FCC has made all of the networks paranoid, so it's more the government's fault that things are being over-censored than it is the fault of the censorship offices of the networks themselves.

Here is my issue with the censorship at this year's Super Bowl:

It all could have been a non-issue if the Rolling Stones weren't so fucking predictable and so fucking boring. Before the game started, I told my friends that I was watching with, "I bet the Stones play 'Start Me Up', 'Satisfaction' and something off the new album." Sure enough, they came out with "Start Me Up", then into "Rough Justice" and then "Satisfaction".

Now, I recognize that they were playing for a mass audience, and not their core audience of fans (although I'm not even sure what the "core audience" is for the Stones anymore). No, I didn't expect some obscure Between the Buttons album cut. But the Stones have at least 10 (maybe closer to 30) songs that everyone knows (not to mention the fact that, well, some people are perfectly capable of enjoying a performance of a song they've never heard before, but I'll ignore that point for now). Seriously, they have a ton of wildly popular songs that nearly everyone knows. So what if, instead of "Start Me Up", they'd played "Jumping Jack Flash'" or "You Can't Always Get What You Want" or "Gimme Shelter" (or would this be too controversial because of the war references?) or "Street Fighting Man". And if they insisted on doing something off of their newest album, well, I'm sure there was something else that could do the job just as well, because barely anyone would know anything they played off that album anyway.

I guess my point is, they could have easily avoided the censorship issue, and made the show a little more exciting anyways by playing something other than the two most tired songs in their catalogue. Actually, that's probably my bigger issue than the censorship--that it was just so goddamn predictable--but why not kill two birds with one stone?

[Fuzznuts]

rockysigman said:

Before the game started, I told my friends that I was watching with, "I bet the Stones play 'Start Me Up', 'Satisfaction' and something off the new album." Sure enough, they came out with "Start Me Up", then into "Rough Justice" and then "Satisfaction".

I had this exact same conversation with my brother before the game started.

[Kensterberg]

I was really hoping they'd play "Jumpin' Jack Flash," but when they brought "Start Me Up" out one more time ... good lord, that song wasn't THAT good when it was new, and time has not been particularly kind to it, either.

The new song just sounded like sludge ... why bother?

[phil]

So what if, instead of "Start Me Up", they'd played "Jumping Jack Flash'" or "You Can't Always Get What You Want" or "Gimme Shelter"

Naahhh ! Those songs were not acceptable either.

Because in the ears of the NFL censors ...

"Jumping Jack Flash" is clearly about some coked-up exhibitionist ...

"You Can't Always Get What You Want" is definitely anti-Bush...

"Gimme Me Shelter" is a communist protest song for the homeless ...

Can't have none of that !!

[rockysigman]

But they don't use the word "cum" and that seems to be much more important.