Looks like The Band is on a full fledged tour next year! How do you feel about that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

I don’t believe that’s the main reason why they are touring. IMO they are touring primarily b/c they are musicians and performing is what they do. And they enjoy performing these songs as a group on the same stage. Off-stage they may not have much to do with each other. If they hated performing together there wouldn’t be enough $ to make them do it; they are rich already.



If this was meant to be a positive thread, why wasn’t the comment posted on the thread that already exists (the 2018 North American tour which touched on the subject of the #of shows)?

The OP can clarify but it appears the topic was meant to renew debate about the new line-up’s tour.

---

I was replying to another poster's comment with the first part you quoted. I should have quoted the post to make it clear. Looks like the post has now disappeared.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ive always been a dreamer

for those that are only interested in seeing the songs performed live, one option is, save yourself a lot of money and go see a tribute band. There are actually quite a few excellent ones out there. .

---

The better option, if you want to experience Don Henley singing Don Henley-lead vocal Eagles songs, Timothy B. Schmit singing Tim-lead vocal Eagles songs, and Joe Wals singing Joe-lead Eagles and solo songs, is to go see this lineup of the Eagles when they go on tour next month. Right? I think it’s so disrespectful to these guys to insinuate that a tribute band is comparable or an option.

I feel sorry for anyone who didn't see the group in their original form, and that includes me.

It looks like 2018 will be very busy and fits with an observation by Marc Eliot (in the article he wrote immediately after Glenn died) that Don Henley had said he would have liked to tour a lot more. I've also seen something about Joe finding life easier when he was touring (this may have been in his dark days). Obviously, they could all tour as solo artists but they've always said that that's a lot harder than being part of a band where you share leads.

I don't see the suggestion of seeing a tribute band as disrespectful. I liked being able to hear the songs up close in a smaller venue. Of course, I'd have preferred to see the real deal under similar conditions but it compared quite favourably with sitting far away in a large venue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaryCalifornia

The better option, if you want to experience Don Henley singing Don Henley-lead vocal Eagles songs, Timothy B. Schmit singing Tim-lead vocal Eagles songs, and Joe Wals singing Joe-lead Eagles and solo songs, is to go see this lineup of the Eagles when they go on tour next month. Right? I think it’s so disrespectful to these guys to insinuate that a tribute band is comparable or an option.

---

Agreed. It's one thing to say they're not the same without Glenn, and quite another to say that a tribute band would be better than 3 Eagles plus other talented musicians.

But we've debated all this endlessly. I thought we weren't going to rain on other people's excitement over the new lineup. It's disappointing to see how many of the responses (including the first one) are pretty much just insulting Eagles 3.0.

To address the original topic, I'm surprised they've booked so many shows, especially when some of their voices seemed a little worn after a not-nearly-as-busy schedule last year, even when counting solo shows. I guess time will tell how well their voices hold up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WalshFan88

I totally don't get the Jason Bonham/Deacon Frey comparison. The only thing in common is that they stood in for their dad after his death.

John Bonham and Glenn Frey aren't not on the same level of importance to the band. Let me just say that right off the get go. They just aren't.

Glenn was the founder, co-leader, and songwriter of the Eagles. The driving force. He was not just another musician or band member. Not to say John Bonham wasn't great - one of the best drummers. And look, even with all that said, other than a one off reunion, that was it.

Can you imagine if it was Robert Plant that had passed and Page, Jones, and Bonham did what the guys are doing now? It wouldn't be Led Zeppelin. But even though he was just their drummer, they realized it wouldn't be right to continue it. Now take someone of Glenn's importance. It should be even more significant than Bonham's death ending the band. But no, they are going on as a caricature of what they used to be.

So no, I don't think it's a good comparison at all.

---

I guess you casual forgot the reunions of the 80s and 90s. Funny how you leave that out.

John Bonham is the most legendary drummer ever. He is part of what made Zepplin grate. That is why they broke up after his death. He set the whole drum sound of the 1980s and is as important as Robert Plant and Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones. Saying that John Bonham was not an important member of Zepplin is an insult to him and Led Zeppelin

Can you imagine if AC/DC replaced Bon Scott? Oh wait...What I ment to say is how in the world can they replace Brian Johnson? No way in hell can they find someone other the Brian Johnson? Oh thats right because they have Axl “freaking” Rose singing his :censored: off.


See I can do that to

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chaim

I was replying to another poster's comment with the first part you quoted. I should have quoted the post to make it clear. Looks like the post has now disappeared.

---

Yes, I missed the context of your post, sorry about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ive always been a dreamer

And Delilah, I know you feel that the band hasn’t really been legitimate since Bernie, Randy, and Felder departed and you are certainly entitled to your opinion. However, I respectfully disagree and, honestly, I feel the majority of fans had no problem with the band continuing at any point after losing these men. As far as HFO, I believe fans were elated at the news that the band was reuniting and there wasn’t hardly any backlash about the lineup in the fandom that I am aware of. I’ve said before that if you believe losing Glenn was equivalent to losing the others, then nothing I say will convince you otherwise. But, suffice it to say when Leadon, Meisner, and Felder departed, you never heard fans and the band members, collectively or individually, declare that the band was over. With all due respect, IMO, they were right then - it was different with Glenn because he was essential to the Eagles.

---

I agree that most fans during the pre-Wiki/pre-google era probably didn’t care about line-up changes, if they were aware of them at all. Just seeing Henley, Frey and Walsh (the most recognizable members from the 80s) was probably enough for excited fans during HFO, especially.

For the record, I don’t believe losing Glenn is equivalent to losing the other 3. I recognize and appreciate the impact of Glenn’s role in the band. I’ve said it before that the band isn’t the same without him and never will be.

However I do take issue with the notion that the loss of Glenn completely wrecks the legitimacy and/or authenticity of the band, as if that authenticity had been intact all along. And therefore fans who have seen or plan to see a Glenn-less “inauthentic” Eagles are different from those who saw a less than authentic version of the band with Glenn.

The band may have churned along just fine without the other 3 but that doesn’t transform the Final 4 line-up into something it is not. The fact is that line-up does not reflect the version that recorded most of the songs on the typical setlist. So I don’t see that as a valid argument for why its wrong for fans to go see the current line-up (and I’m not saying it’s you necessarily making all these claims, I’m speaking generally about what I’ve come across on this board).

Finally, this generation of music-lovers is the most informed ever in the era of popular music, thanks to the internet and social media, which wasn’t around in the past to gauge how fans felt about the absence of some band members. Interesting that in the current backlash, the most common criticism seems to be that Henley is now the only original member. At any rate, I suspect there were many fans who missed Felder over the last couple of decades, but they attended and enjoyed the concerts anyway. And now, many of us will miss Glenn and regret his absence, but as last summer showed from concert attendance, reviews and social media, fans still attended and managed to enjoy the concerts, thanks to Don H, Joe and Timothy, plus Vince and Deacon, who are also very talented and have much to offer.

Don Henley described the HOTE tour as "intense". Frankly, I think that is a gross understatement.

Second, as much as they might like recording and touring SOLO it is no where near as profitable as being in the Eagles. It is also considerably more work and pressure.

I have lost track of how many times Don Henley has proclaimed this or that Eagles concert could be the last.

I suppose that is part of their marketing strategy. Who knows. All I know for certain is for me, without Glenn Frey in the lineup this is not the Eagles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delilah

Yes, I missed the context of your post, sorry about that.



I agree that most fans during the pre-Wiki/pre-google era probably didn’t care about line-up changes, if they were aware of them at all. Just seeing Henley, Frey and Walsh (the most recognizable members from the 80s) was probably enough for excited fans during HFO, especially.

For the record, I don’t believe losing Glenn is equivalent to losing the other 3. I recognize and appreciate the impact of Glenn’s role in the band. I’ve said it before that the band isn’t the same without him and never will be.

However I do take issue with the notion that the loss of Glenn completely wrecks the legitimacy and/or authenticity of the band, as if that authenticity had been intact all along. And therefore fans who have seen or plan to see a Glenn-less “inauthentic” Eagles are different from those who saw a less than authentic version of the band with Glenn.

The band may have churned along just fine without the other 3 but that doesn’t transform the Final 4 line-up into something it is not. The fact is that line-up does not reflect the version that recorded most of the songs on the typical setlist. So I don’t see that as a valid argument for why its wrong for fans to go see the current line-up (and I’m not saying it’s you necessarily making all these claims, I’m speaking generally about what I’ve come across on this board).

Finally, this generation of music-lovers is the most informed ever in the era of popular music, thanks to the internet and social media, which wasn’t around in the past to gauge how fans felt about the absence of some band members. Interesting that in the current backlash, the most common criticism seems to be that Henley is now the only original member. At any rate, I suspect there were many fans who missed Felder over the last couple of decades, but they attended and enjoyed the concerts anyway. And now, many of us will miss Glenn and regret his absence, but as last summer showed from concert attendance, reviews and social media, fans still attended and managed to enjoy the concerts, thanks to Don H, Joe and Timothy, plus Vince and Deacon, who are also very talented and have much to offer.

---

You are so right. The only problem I have is that everytime a new thread is made the people who are against it are the ones who reply immatedly and make the whole thing a bash fest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by travlnman2

I guess you casual forgot the reunions of the 80s and 90s. Funny how you leave that out.

John Bonham is the most legendary drummer ever. He is part of what made Zepplin grate. That is why they broke up after his death. He set the whole drum sound of the 1980s and is as important as Robert Plant and Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones. Saying that John Bonham was not an important member of Zepplin is an insult to him and Led Zeppelin

Can you imagine if AC/DC replaced Bon Scott? Oh wait...What I ment to say is how in the world can they replace Brian Johnson? No way in hell can they find someone other the Brian Johnson? Oh thats right because they have Axl “freaking” Rose singing his :censored: off.


See I can do that to

---

Once again, Led Zeppelin DID NOT REFORM. They played a couple of shows, including those you mention. They never reformed on a full time basis. They never toured.

I think you have hoist yourself with your own petard by your comments about John Bonham. You are absolutely right; he was so important to Led Zeppelin that they disbanded.

Neither Bon Scott, Brian Johnson or Glenn Frey, apparently, were as important to AC/DC or the Eagles as John Bonham was to Led Zeppelin. And you may be OK with that, but I am not.

Oh, and your 'see I can do that too' and 'bash fest' comments are completely inappropriate. Unless some sort of block is placed on people llike me posting in threads like this, you can't just force us all to go away. That's up to Soda, I guess. The thread was started & people, including myself, responded. That is the way message boards work.

FP- would this mean in your opinion that a hypothetical lineup of Don and Glenn with backing musicians would be more authentic than a hypothetical lineup of Don, Bernie, Randy, Timothy, Felder, and Walsh?