I am not a huge fan of Rolling Stone magazine - in fact if I didn't have a free subscription, I'd probably never look at it. But this month there is a good article on Zeppelin.You may recall that Rolling Stone and Led Zep have a very negative history due to RS dissing LZ when they first started out. It wasn't until Cameron Crowe (article is linked) convinced them to do an interveiw that the contempt was replaced with a reserved trust.
This months issues has an article with an in depth history of the beginnings of what I consider to be one of the best bands ever.
Rolling Stone Magazine , Classic Rock, Led Zeppelin
technorati tags: Music,
4 comments:
Oddly, I just began getting Rolling Stone also for no reason. I think it came with some concert tickets I bought or something.
I also read the article and I agree it is worth reading.
I read what was available to read online, I no longer am a subscriber to Rolling Stone because so little of the magazine interests me (not to mention their terrible reviews.) Anyway, I thought it was a pretty good article, frankly I am somewhat sick of Zeppelin although that may be harsh words because I do think they are one of the greatest bands ever. It is just the radio stations by me play them as if they were the only cd's they spin.
Anyway, from what I read I don't really think they really gave a good reason of why they crossed over into this generation so smoothly but like I said I only read what was available online. However I do really like the article that compares a few current bands to them such as my new found love Wolfmother. They were good articles though, I definitely agree they were worth reading.
I read what was available to read online, I no longer am a subscriber to Rolling Stone because so little of the magazine interests me (not to mention their terrible reviews.) Anyway, I thought it was a pretty good article, frankly I am somewhat sick of Zeppelin although that may be harsh words because I do think they are one of the greatest bands ever. It is just the radio stations by me play them as if they were the only cd's they spin.
Anyway, from what I read I don't really think they really gave a good reason of why they crossed over into this generation so smoothly but like I said I only read what was available online. However I do really like the article that compares a few current bands to them such as my new found love Wolfmother. They were good articles though, I definitely agree they were worth reading.
Rolling Stone and the band Chicago still have a rather hostile relationship. It's largely due to comments by Peter Cetera in an interview he did for another magazine in the late 70s ("Yes I read Rolling Stone, usually when I'm taking a shit.") and because the band shattered their musical credibility when they sold out their creativity and musical adventurousness for the success of commercial prom fodder (it is kind of sad to know the band that gave us 25 or 6 to 4 in 1970 turned around and gave us You're the Inspiration in 1984)-- not exactly the way to ingratiate yourself with Rolling Stone. I think Chicago's negative opinion of RS started with the negative reviews of their first few albums written by the late Lester Bangs.
The editor-in-chief of Rolling Stone, Jann Wenner, is on the nominating committee for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland. Chicago, 2nd only to the Beach Boys in sales by an American rock band, has been elgible for induction into the RRHOF since 1992. Not only have they not been inducted, they've never even been nominated! Something's rotten in Wenner's office!
Post a Comment