Happy 80th, Mick
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2023 2:09 am
Mick Fucking Jagger, 80 years old. Who would have ever thought *any* of the Stones would make to 80, let alone still be doing live dates.
https://forums.metalsludge.tv/forums/
https://forums.metalsludge.tv/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=382857
I was pretty young so I'm sure someone will correct me on this, but I remember the Stones being parents' music while Aerosmith was considered a contemporary band that young people liked.Mojo wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 9:16 pm Those of you who were around for Permanent Vacation, Pump, etc, did you make fun of Aerosmith for being old? I know the Stones have been called old for decades and I don't remember Aerosmith really being held to that standard. Though Aerosmith were bigger in the current pop world, so that could account for a lot of that.
I love Aerosmith. But, they have never, ever been as big as the Stones.Mojo wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 9:16 pm Those of you who were around for Permanent Vacation, Pump, etc, did you make fun of Aerosmith for being old? I know the Stones have been called old for decades and I don't remember Aerosmith really being held to that standard. Though Aerosmith were bigger in the current pop world, so that could account for a lot of that.
I was talking "bigger" in the pop sense, as it explicitly states in my OP. Aerosmith had the larger MTV/VHI presence and had way more of the soccer mom demo cornered with their ballads. I don't remember the Stones charting videos into the 2000's. They made them, sure, but they weren't "Jaded" type big. Aerosmith played the pop game while the Stones remained the Stones. That made Aerosmith more visible in the media to "the kids" and made them seem younger and more contemporary than the Stones. I don't really think that's debatable.bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 7:11 am I love Aerosmith. But, they have never, ever been as big as the Stones.
Mojo wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 7:47 amI was talking "bigger" in the pop sense, as it explicitly states in my OP. Aerosmith had the larger MTV/VHI presence and had way more of the soccer mom demo cornered with their ballads. I don't remember the Stones charting videos into the 2000's. They made them, sure, but they weren't "Jaded" type big. Aerosmith played the pop game while the Stones remained the Stones. That made Aerosmith more visible in the media to "the kids" and made them seem younger and more contemporary than the Stones. I don't really think that's debatable.bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 7:11 am I love Aerosmith. But, they have never, ever been as big as the Stones.
All that said, Aerosmith have sold more ctertified units than the Stones have, but who gives a fuck? The Stones were around ten years earlier and everyone in Aerosmith worships them. No Stones, no Aerosmith. The Stones don't need anyone to defend them. They're obviously the more impactful, historically and culturally, band between the two. "Bigger" is debatable based on your criteria.
bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 7:59 amMojo wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 7:47 amI was talking "bigger" in the pop sense, as it explicitly states in my OP. Aerosmith had the larger MTV/VHI presence and had way more of the soccer mom demo cornered with their ballads. I don't remember the Stones charting videos into the 2000's. They made them, sure, but they weren't "Jaded" type big. Aerosmith played the pop game while the Stones remained the Stones. That made Aerosmith more visible in the media to "the kids" and made them seem younger and more contemporary than the Stones. I don't really think that's debatable.bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 7:11 am I love Aerosmith. But, they have never, ever been as big as the Stones.
All that said, Aerosmith have sold more ctertified units than the Stones have, but who gives a fuck? The Stones were around ten years earlier and everyone in Aerosmith worships them. No Stones, no Aerosmith. The Stones don't need anyone to defend them. They're obviously the more impactful, historically and culturally, band between the two. "Bigger" is debatable based on your criteria.
Stones = Throughout their career, they have sold over 200 million certified records worldwide, making them one of the best-selling music artists of all time. Billboard ranked them as the 2nd Greatest artist of all time (behind the Beatles).
THE ROLLING STONES sold over 85,060,583 albums, including 59,131,001 in the United States and 6,220,000 in the United Kingdom. The best-selling album by THE ROLLING STONES is HOT ROCKS 1964-1971, which sold over 6,917,540 copies .
Aerosmith = As of November 2021, the band has sold 69.5 million albums in the United States in terms of certification units.
bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:02 ambigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 7:59 amMojo wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 7:47 am
I was talking "bigger" in the pop sense, as it explicitly states in my OP. Aerosmith had the larger MTV/VHI presence and had way more of the soccer mom demo cornered with their ballads. I don't remember the Stones charting videos into the 2000's. They made them, sure, but they weren't "Jaded" type big. Aerosmith played the pop game while the Stones remained the Stones. That made Aerosmith more visible in the media to "the kids" and made them seem younger and more contemporary than the Stones. I don't really think that's debatable.
All that said, Aerosmith have sold more ctertified units than the Stones have, but who gives a fuck? The Stones were around ten years earlier and everyone in Aerosmith worships them. No Stones, no Aerosmith. The Stones don't need anyone to defend them. They're obviously the more impactful, historically and culturally, band between the two. "Bigger" is debatable based on your criteria.
Stones = Throughout their career, they have sold over 200 million certified records worldwide, making them one of the best-selling music artists of all time. Billboard ranked them as the 2nd Greatest artist of all time (behind the Beatles).
Aerosmith = As of November 2021, the band has sold 69.5 million albums in the United States in terms of certification units.
bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:04 ambigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:02 ambigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 7:59 am
Stones = Throughout their career, they have sold over 200 million certified records worldwide, making them one of the best-selling music artists of all time. Billboard ranked them as the 2nd Greatest artist of all time (behind the Beatles).
Aerosmith = As of November 2021, the band has sold 69.5 million albums in the United States in terms of certification units and 120 million worldwide.
Not according to the RIAA website.bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 7:59 am Stones = Throughout their career, they have sold over 200 million certified records worldwide, making them one of the best-selling music artists of all time. Billboard ranked them as the 2nd Greatest artist of all time (behind the Beatles).
It's like comparing Jesus with John the Apostle. Jesus is the bigger deal.
Wait, did you keep trying to edit out the part where it says Aerosmith sold more records in the States?
It's such a stupid argument to even be having. It's the Rolling Fucking Stones. Absolutely unfuckwithable. Mariah Carey sold more albums than both Aerosmith and the Stones. I don't think that makes Mariah bigger than the Stones.Chip Z'Hoy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:40 amIt's like comparing Jesus with John the Apostle. Jesus is the bigger deal.
But according to Sirrloin's numbers, Aerosmith sold more in the States? Record sales are only part of the story but that looks like the exact opposite of what he was trying to say.
Excellent point. And by my criteria, Elvis is bigger than Garth, Aerosmith and the Stones combined.Turner Coates wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 9:06 amYep. Garth Brooks sold more records than Elvis.
Does that make him a bigger icon?
So what? I left it out cause we are talking worldwide sales here. Pay attention.Chip Z'Hoy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:41 amWait, did you keep trying to edit out the part where it says Aerosmith sold more records in the States?
Who the fuck is Sirrlon? This is the second time you've accused me of being someone else?Chip Z'Hoy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 8:40 amIt's like comparing Jesus with John the Apostle. Jesus is the bigger deal.
But according to Sirrloin's numbers, Aerosmith sold more in the States? Record sales are only part of the story but that looks like the exact opposite of what he was trying to say.
Saw the Permanent Vacation (their best album) tour. Album was absolutely great. Show was great. But...yes. We looked at them as some old band that had somehow risen back from the dead. They were considered old fuckers.Mojo wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 9:16 pm Those of you who were around for Permanent Vacation, Pump, etc, did you make fun of Aerosmith for being old? I know the Stones have been called old for decades and I don't remember Aerosmith really being held to that standard. Though Aerosmith were bigger in the current pop world, so that could account for a lot of that.
Okay, so how does leaving that info in cancel out the worldwide sales? Sure looks like you tried to pull one over on us, Sirrloin!bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 9:12 amSo what? I left it out cause we are talking worldwide sales here. Pay attention.
This is easily the 9th or 10th time I've called you Sirrloin, Sirrloin.bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 9:16 amWho the fuck is Sirrlon? This is the second time you've accused me of being someone else?
My actual real name is John. Does that make you happy now? I don't mind debating with you, but please stop your delusions and get it right.
10 times? That's interesting since I rarely post. Whatever makes your pee pee rise there sport!Chip Z'Hoy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 9:54 amOkay, so how does leaving that info in cancel out the worldwide sales? Sure looks like you tried to pull one over on us, Sirrloin!bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 9:12 amSo what? I left it out cause we are talking worldwide sales here. Pay attention.
This is easily the 9th or 10th time I've called you Sirrloin, Sirrloin.bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 9:16 amWho the fuck is Sirrlon? This is the second time you've accused me of being someone else?
My actual real name is John. Does that make you happy now? I don't mind debating with you, but please stop your delusions and get it right.
It's funny that you still pretend to be confused. "Huh? What? Who is this Sirrloin you speak of?"
Okay, Sirrloin.bigmakoshark wrote: ↑Thu Jul 27, 2023 12:06 pm10 times? That's interesting since I rarely post. Whatever makes your pee pee rise there sport!
No. It was clear at the time that Aerosmith were on the comeback trail and the Stones never went away. But yeah...it was silly that the media thought of guys in their 40's as SOOO old! Now here we are saying Happy Birthday to him at 80!!!Mojo wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 9:16 pm Those of you who were around for Permanent Vacation, Pump, etc, did you make fun of Aerosmith for being old? I know the Stones have been called old for decades and I don't remember Aerosmith really being held to that standard. Though Aerosmith were bigger in the current pop world, so that could account for a lot of that.