Golden Earring: Why Weren't They As Big as Zeppelin, Sabbath, Purple...?

I like the band although I have not heard some of the material that they have did over the years. I think "Moontan" is a great album and have heard a few other things that I also liked, I really cannot say how I would rate the band now , as I don't know much of what they have put out the past several years. It is nice to know that they have stuck together all these years , as there aren't many bands that reach that point these days.

 

There is talk of a new album. No details though.

 

I think of Earring's fringe status as similar to--and caused by some of the same factors as--the fringe status of bands like Blue Oyster Cult, Cheap Trick, and Nazareth: fluke hits, eclectic styles, occasionally obtuse lyrics, mid-career production issues during the 80s in the interest of following trends, late-career vindication as fairly influential, but often overlooked, 70s rock acts. All of these bands are clearly not on the same level as the "all-time rock greats," but for my money, that's what makes them so compelling.

By the way, B. Collins, in another thread you were asking about GE sound options, and the recent 180g vinyl reissues of many of the classic catalog LPs are amazing. Normally, I prefer original copies, but some of the older GE stuff is pretty rare, and you can get these reissues for about $10-20 each. (Also, some of the Red Bullet CD reissues have glitches in the masters--most notably the first live album).

 

Sigh. Of course I got rid of my original fatboy version of that after I "upgraded" to the Red Bullet reissue (as well as most of the others as well).

Which of the Red Bullets have glitches? And where/how bad are they? The good news is I didn't notice at least.

 

Golden Earring put out some amazing stuff from their studio work. But live, were GE that good and/or great live.

That's what you need, imo, to achieve the greatness of a Zeppelin, or Deep Purple.

And I mean truly great live, not just "I was heavily doped, and _______ sounded great".

 

Yes.

www.youtube.com/v/irZi18VR31M?hl=en_US&version=3&rel=0

 

Answer: because they were not in the same league.

 

Is this one of those Fútbol/soccer things?

Watch the video link above. I think they were world class and in the same league performance-wise, but that's just my opinion; YMMV.

 

The first double live album is a brilliant set. Not a dud track to be found. I think it was taken from a live to air, and the 'glitches' noted earlier, are actually momentary transmission drop outs. If you were not told where they are, you would never notice them.
I rate this as good as "STRANGERS IN THE NIGHT" ( and that had two studio tracks inserted).
They were, and remain, a classy band.

 

I would say they were. If anything, Golden Earring were/are a great live band. I have seen them in concert numerous times and they always delivered. They were able to put on a great show with expanded versions of their classic songs. The first and to a lesser extent their second live album are testimony to that, as well as the three 'unplugged' albums they did later on.

Judging by their live performances, they deserved to be among the all-time greats IMO. It's other reasons that prevented them from being there. Most of these have been mentioned in this thread - they were unable to sustain the momentum they had built, some bad business decicions and the fact that that they decided not to settle in the US permanently. And as I stated earlier - as a whole their output doesn't hold up well enough to be in the same league as, say, Led Zeppelin or Deep Purple. They just didn't release that many albums that were strong from start to finish.

Of course, in Holland they are viewed as one of the all-time greats. But worldwide? Unfortunately not. I think they are judged just right - second or third tier, depending on one's personal judgement of the band's output. But for a band from Holland it's quite a feat to have released a few songs that will always be remembered and recognized on a world-wide level.

 

That's kind of ironic coming from a Kenney Jones fan.

 

I managed to get original Dutch vinyl copies of most of the early GE albums along with a couple of stray UK and German pressings. Not really as expensive as I feared for most of them.

 

Are you really asking why they aren't as big as Zeppelin ?

 

Unlike Golden Earring; Zeppelin, Sabbath, Purple and Aerosmith all have cool band names.

 

Well the question was asked, and I simply answered it honestly.

Hey - people are letting their own feelings and emotions be a substitute for the truth. For example, I am a huge fan of bands like the Stooges, New York Dolls, Velvet Underground and the Ramones. But I fully understand these bands are no where near to being in the same league as Led Zeppelin. Let's get real.

 

Golden Earrring are more in the league of "Bad Company" than they are of Led Zeppelin. You get the picture.

 

Sorry if I am late to the party.
Golden Earring never became as great as Sabbath, Zep and Purple for the simple reason that they were not innovators.
Sometimes I tease my friends who really love Golden Earring by saying that this band only has one rhythm.
While it may be an unkind joke, there is actually some truth in it.
The scope of Golden Earring is very limited.
Having said all this, Moontan is one of my favourite albums and in my opinion the best Golden Earring album.

 

That's pretty funny.

I've spent a lot of time with To the Hilt, and out of the thousands of rock songs I've fallen in and out of love with over the years, for whatever reasons I have always considered this one of my top ten favorites to crank up...(or at least the first 5+ minutes). Can't really explain it...I just love the funk and two-part harmonies, to say nothing about the monkey motion.

 

This is most definitely not true - Violins alone (see above) proves your argument wrong,
The opposite, however, might be true, the scope is too wide to really pin them down - if scope were a determining factor for success bands like AC/DC or Black Sabbath with a very limited stylistic range wouldn't have had any success at all

 

songwriting?

label promotion?

 

Point taken!

B

 

Ditto, same two albums were big among my group of friends in 1974. Still like them both!

 

and didn't "play the show biz game." Part of rock success is smoozing, making nice, doing interviews, kissing corporate ass, showing up for interviews on time and reasonably sober.

 

I think one must take into consideration that when they first became successful in the early 70's with hits like Buddy Joe, Back home and of course Radar love it was very unusual for a non- native speaking band to break through in the U.S. or even the U.K. , but I think they did more than ok , they did 13 US tours between 1973 and 1985 , Kiss and Aerosmith supported them. One problem might have been, that they couldn't follow Radar love with similar smash hit and it took over a decade until they charted the US Top Ten again with Twilight Zone . I can' t think of no other band who has been around this long , of course they had their ups and downs but all in all a very solid and successful but not groundbreaking rock band

 

I was lucky enough to be stationed in Europe for 12 years during my military career so I got to hear a lot of musical artists that most Yanks don't get to hear. Golden Earring is, IMHO, an incredible collection of musicians and are tough enough to keep it going after all these years. There are some of their albums where I only like about half of the songs, but those songs are brilliant and worth getting the album. You're right about most Yanks only knowing 2 of their songs. I try to fix that when I can. On Christmas Eve a couple of years ago, I drove my sister-in-law's boyfriend over to his family's house and had the second side of Moontan playing. He has no idea who the group was and I didn't tell him until told me it was some of the best jazz music he'd heard in a long time. I told him who it was and he has since become a big fan. Rock on, GE.