1977. Worldwide Texas Tour. ZZ Top is hitting an intense stride, night after night playing loud, gritty, powerful Texas blues.
1980. Touring on the strength of "Deguello". The beginning of countless renditions of "Cheap Sunglasses" and "I'm Bad, I'm Nationdwide". Each show is full of energy, moderate variation, guts and glory.
1981. "El Loco". Flawless and more polished performances. Featuring cuts such as "Don't Tease Me" and "I Wanna Drive You Home". Billy especially is aggressive and fluent in his leads.
A study of ZZ's performances over the years inevitably results in an analysis of what period, or what year, the band reached their live peak. The very early years, '70 - '75, shows the band fleshing out their sound, full of boundless enthusiasm but lacking the structure and confidence of a mature band, wherein each member is assured of the other members' next move.
To me the band would reach a summit under the stage lights in 1977, during the Texas tour. The shows featured an abundance of "Tejas" material (an underrated record) as well as an ever changing collection of the group's earlier works. Each 28 years of age, they display the perfect combination of youth and maturity, looseness and structure, grit and polish. The tour was very well received by fans and critics, and did much to get the groups name on the public's mind.
But then, having exhausted themselves, the band took a break, a long one. Two years. The return to the stage in 1980 would present a different group. Still hungry, but with a new mindset. A determination to make it big, really big. The group played hard, sang hard, toured hard. They would present to festivals and multi-band concerts. They would push their name, riding the success of the rock radio play of select tracks from "Deguello". ZZ would also begin to flesh out their live sound, piping in basic keyboard chords and drum beats. This would serve to further polish the live presentation, perhaps at the expense of the rugged and aggressive playing of the past.
"El Loco" as an album, while pleasing to the ZZ fan, would present as a misfire. Featuring minor hits in the form of "Tube Snake Boogie" and "Pearl Necklace" the album did little to enhance the popularity of the Texas trio. The subsequent tour however once again proved to be an exhibition of the band's ability to motive and cultivate the audience into a frenzy. 1981 may have been the last year Billy let fly on the guitar, consistently changing his solos to reflect his moods. His playing would prove flawless, full of intense blues and blazing notes, set against the background of a mean rhythm section. The setlist itself became more structured and featured less frequent inclusions of rare tracks, the occasional variation often coming during the encore.
We all know what happened in 1983. There have been other excellent tours, 1994's Antenna (excellent) and 1990's Recycler (very long shows). But post '81, the group just didn't mix it up as much, and became increasing predictable, to the extent that each night would showcase the same moves, the same sequence of songs, the same solos. But history shows that many bands, as they mature, leave spontanaeity behind. Of late the band, especially Billy, have received moments of inspiration, and have broken out into "Dust My Broom" and an almost complete "My Head's In Mississippi". A refreshing change, leaving one wanting more and longing for nostalga.
1977. Worldwide Texas Tour. ZZ Top is hitting an intense stride, night after night playing loud, gritty, powerful Texas blues.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Monday, November 23, 2009
Thank you / What type of fan?
Sorry about the slow down in updates this month. As the holidays approach things get busy. I would like to take this opportunity to thank those who visit the site and come back to see updates. I try to bring a good mixture of subjective vs. objective, opinion vs. fact in the various topics. I've got some considerations for future entries however would love to here any ideas for topics, design changes, additions or new features. Please don't hesitate to e-mail me or make suggestions under the comments section.
I mainly created the blog as there is little info out there about the band. Despite being around for 40 years the band is somewhat of an underground scene. There are the diehards, the casuals, and the indifferents. The diehards will come to the show in their town, hell or high water be damned. Diehards will love everything the band does, regardless of any ruts or routines the band may be in. They will rarely if ever criticize. The casuals will present to the shows if it's convenient. They will buy the albums if they remember too. They can become frustrated and disillusioned, and will limit the spending of their greenbacks with regard to the concert scene. They also associate ZZ to be just a part of the many bands within the blues / rock genre that they dig hearing. Casuals have Tres Hombres and Eliminator, and maybe Fandango. The indifferents left the band behind long ago, after the heights of Eliminator and Afterburner faded from view.
I would have to place myself as a diehard / casual hybrid. I love the band, and am quick to hunt down any news or info regarding the band. I will happily see the band when they come 'round my way, even if the set list is the same old. I will however criticize and call out the frustrations that I, and many fans, can often feel about certain aspects of the band's current state. I will never however be an indifferent.
So what type of fan are you? With 40 years of music to choose from it's hard to lose interest, and there is a ZZ album to suit any mood. Fans are what motivate the group. What do you love about the Top? What do you love about their music? What keeps you from being an indifferent?
I mainly created the blog as there is little info out there about the band. Despite being around for 40 years the band is somewhat of an underground scene. There are the diehards, the casuals, and the indifferents. The diehards will come to the show in their town, hell or high water be damned. Diehards will love everything the band does, regardless of any ruts or routines the band may be in. They will rarely if ever criticize. The casuals will present to the shows if it's convenient. They will buy the albums if they remember too. They can become frustrated and disillusioned, and will limit the spending of their greenbacks with regard to the concert scene. They also associate ZZ to be just a part of the many bands within the blues / rock genre that they dig hearing. Casuals have Tres Hombres and Eliminator, and maybe Fandango. The indifferents left the band behind long ago, after the heights of Eliminator and Afterburner faded from view.
I would have to place myself as a diehard / casual hybrid. I love the band, and am quick to hunt down any news or info regarding the band. I will happily see the band when they come 'round my way, even if the set list is the same old. I will however criticize and call out the frustrations that I, and many fans, can often feel about certain aspects of the band's current state. I will never however be an indifferent.
So what type of fan are you? With 40 years of music to choose from it's hard to lose interest, and there is a ZZ album to suit any mood. Fans are what motivate the group. What do you love about the Top? What do you love about their music? What keeps you from being an indifferent?
Monday, November 16, 2009
For Your Entertainment
ZZ Top - entertaining through the medium of music.
Ever fan of music has there favorite genres, favorite styles, favorite instruments, favorite musicians. Consciously, or subconsciously, the musician or performer's attitude and presentation influences the listeners interpretation of the sounds and lyrics. Celine Dion singing Zeppelin's "In My Time of Dying" is not going to come across in any shape or form as well as Plant's rendition. The listener is not going to "feel" the swagger, the ego, the pomp and circumstance of Zeppelin's lofty heights in the mid '70's. I suppose the listener would not "feel" the sincerity and passion if Plant covered a Dion tune. No matter, not my tastes, but some people dig it.
This sets up the question: Has ZZ over applied the attitude and presentation to the detriment of the sounds and lyrics. Certainly "El Loco" was the last album to feature the majority of songs containing meaningful lyrics, "Pearl Necklace" and "Heaven, Hell or Houston" notwithstanding. Most of the albums since have been very simplistic in their lyrical approach, even if the song isn't full of double entades. There is a stark contrast between the musical and lyrical approach of the band's songs in the 1970's and the post "El Loco" period. Maybe perhaps the band didn't approach songwriting differently, the results were just different.
My argument is that live the band has gone over the top with regard to "entertaining" and has as a consequence lost the feel for the music. There has been limited variation in the band's set list since 1997, wherein a few tracks from the current or most recent album are played but the core songs are hammered on year after year. "Cheap Sunglasses", "Nationwide", "Got Me Under Pressure", the Eliminator trilogy, "La Grange", "Tush", "Pincushion", Bus / Chicago, "Tube Snake Boogie". I mean come on, do you have to end with Tush EVERY NIGHT. The Top, like every good band, feeds off the energy of the audience. An the argument can be made that these songs result in the most enthusiastic response. But go back to 1977. The band played every song from "Tejas" save for "Asleep In the Desert" during the tour, often featuring seven or eight of the songs a night. They would bring out the rare, obscure number, like "Neighbor Neighbor", a song that wasn't a hit per se and was a blip on ZZ's first album. The confidence in the music and the desire and excitement in playing the new songs is infectious, and shows a band at the top of their musical chops and ability (in a live forum).
I believe the lack of a new album in six years is a direct result of this overemphasis on "entertaining". Why waste time in the studio when you can perform for the masses? Of course, this whole topic is mitigated and tempered by the fact the band has been together for 40 years. They don't need to prove a thing, and the wealth of music they have given fans over the past four decades is a fantastic gift. Many bands burn out overnight, petty in their disagreements and financial discontent. ZZ doesn't have that problem. They have proven to be shining examples of longevity. But perhaps a change of focus is needed in order to keep things from getting stale. Perhaps a renewed focus on the music. Perhaps a new album.
Ever fan of music has there favorite genres, favorite styles, favorite instruments, favorite musicians. Consciously, or subconsciously, the musician or performer's attitude and presentation influences the listeners interpretation of the sounds and lyrics. Celine Dion singing Zeppelin's "In My Time of Dying" is not going to come across in any shape or form as well as Plant's rendition. The listener is not going to "feel" the swagger, the ego, the pomp and circumstance of Zeppelin's lofty heights in the mid '70's. I suppose the listener would not "feel" the sincerity and passion if Plant covered a Dion tune. No matter, not my tastes, but some people dig it.
This sets up the question: Has ZZ over applied the attitude and presentation to the detriment of the sounds and lyrics. Certainly "El Loco" was the last album to feature the majority of songs containing meaningful lyrics, "Pearl Necklace" and "Heaven, Hell or Houston" notwithstanding. Most of the albums since have been very simplistic in their lyrical approach, even if the song isn't full of double entades. There is a stark contrast between the musical and lyrical approach of the band's songs in the 1970's and the post "El Loco" period. Maybe perhaps the band didn't approach songwriting differently, the results were just different.
My argument is that live the band has gone over the top with regard to "entertaining" and has as a consequence lost the feel for the music. There has been limited variation in the band's set list since 1997, wherein a few tracks from the current or most recent album are played but the core songs are hammered on year after year. "Cheap Sunglasses", "Nationwide", "Got Me Under Pressure", the Eliminator trilogy, "La Grange", "Tush", "Pincushion", Bus / Chicago, "Tube Snake Boogie". I mean come on, do you have to end with Tush EVERY NIGHT. The Top, like every good band, feeds off the energy of the audience. An the argument can be made that these songs result in the most enthusiastic response. But go back to 1977. The band played every song from "Tejas" save for "Asleep In the Desert" during the tour, often featuring seven or eight of the songs a night. They would bring out the rare, obscure number, like "Neighbor Neighbor", a song that wasn't a hit per se and was a blip on ZZ's first album. The confidence in the music and the desire and excitement in playing the new songs is infectious, and shows a band at the top of their musical chops and ability (in a live forum).
I believe the lack of a new album in six years is a direct result of this overemphasis on "entertaining". Why waste time in the studio when you can perform for the masses? Of course, this whole topic is mitigated and tempered by the fact the band has been together for 40 years. They don't need to prove a thing, and the wealth of music they have given fans over the past four decades is a fantastic gift. Many bands burn out overnight, petty in their disagreements and financial discontent. ZZ doesn't have that problem. They have proven to be shining examples of longevity. But perhaps a change of focus is needed in order to keep things from getting stale. Perhaps a renewed focus on the music. Perhaps a new album.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Liver than you'll ever be / One bullet in the chamber
So the Top touring machine continues. The train has rolled, unabated, since early 2007. The group obviously loves to play, both for the joy of working together and the response of the audience. They continue to this day to have a strong following in Europe, despite the fact they did not catch on across the pond until Eliminator.
The band has always sounded and acted, at each stage of their career, younger than they were. Listen to a performance in 1977 and hear Billy scorch and jump, Dusty hit notes in Robert Plant fashion, and Frank mixing up the beat. By this time the group had been around 8 years and the three were nearing 30. I know that's not old, but to 16 year old kids, 30 is old. Listen to Dusty belt out "I Got The Six" in 1983. They were 34. Listen to "Sleeping Bag" in 1991, they were 42. And the assault of "Fool For Your Stockings" from '05, at the age of 56. As recently as earlier this month, "Just Got Paid" is as dirty, grungy and bad ass as ever, after 40 years of playing together and 60 years on this earth.
Perhaps performing live serves as a fountain of youth, each second a moment in time when the rules of Father Time and the obligations of aging don't apply. I would love to be 60 and play to adoring fans, some a quarter of my years.
But time will not yield. All roads come to an end. The Rolling Stones have proved that you can keep going well into your 60's, although the quality of their current work is debatable. Bill Wyman, who granted has not been a member for a long time, is 73! Charlie Watts is 68! My point is ZZ's fans need to celebrate and enjoy every minute of the Top's touring machine, especially as it continues to run flawlessly. The excitement the band continues to create is unique for artists who exceed 50. Soak it up.
The ever increasing gap of 6 years + since the last album may need to be heeded as a warning. Exactly how many more albums do you expect this band to make before they hang it up? Billy and Dusty have been quoted for years (since 2005) stating they are preparing to work on a new album, discussing in interviews the sound they are looking to make and noting the number of tracks and ideas that have been laid down in rough draft form. There may only be one album left in the chamber, one final go round. Perhaps Billy wants it to be perfect. Maybe encompassing of all of ZZ's sounds through the years. Maybe reflective and somber. Maybe energetic and timeless. Probably none of these. But he may simply be biding his time until the moment is right, so that perhaps this final album can make the definitive statement about the band, a group of boys who sure could play.
The band has always sounded and acted, at each stage of their career, younger than they were. Listen to a performance in 1977 and hear Billy scorch and jump, Dusty hit notes in Robert Plant fashion, and Frank mixing up the beat. By this time the group had been around 8 years and the three were nearing 30. I know that's not old, but to 16 year old kids, 30 is old. Listen to Dusty belt out "I Got The Six" in 1983. They were 34. Listen to "Sleeping Bag" in 1991, they were 42. And the assault of "Fool For Your Stockings" from '05, at the age of 56. As recently as earlier this month, "Just Got Paid" is as dirty, grungy and bad ass as ever, after 40 years of playing together and 60 years on this earth.
Perhaps performing live serves as a fountain of youth, each second a moment in time when the rules of Father Time and the obligations of aging don't apply. I would love to be 60 and play to adoring fans, some a quarter of my years.
But time will not yield. All roads come to an end. The Rolling Stones have proved that you can keep going well into your 60's, although the quality of their current work is debatable. Bill Wyman, who granted has not been a member for a long time, is 73! Charlie Watts is 68! My point is ZZ's fans need to celebrate and enjoy every minute of the Top's touring machine, especially as it continues to run flawlessly. The excitement the band continues to create is unique for artists who exceed 50. Soak it up.
The ever increasing gap of 6 years + since the last album may need to be heeded as a warning. Exactly how many more albums do you expect this band to make before they hang it up? Billy and Dusty have been quoted for years (since 2005) stating they are preparing to work on a new album, discussing in interviews the sound they are looking to make and noting the number of tracks and ideas that have been laid down in rough draft form. There may only be one album left in the chamber, one final go round. Perhaps Billy wants it to be perfect. Maybe encompassing of all of ZZ's sounds through the years. Maybe reflective and somber. Maybe energetic and timeless. Probably none of these. But he may simply be biding his time until the moment is right, so that perhaps this final album can make the definitive statement about the band, a group of boys who sure could play.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)