Come on Rolling Stone

More than a little confused. Rachel Maddow on the cover?? I get that RS loves to publish politically charged articles and I am fine with that. I subscribe for the music though. And when we lose an icon like Gregg and I see Rachel Maddow is on the cover, I have to wonder what this world is coming to. Just my opinion, for what it's worth...if more people would spin an Allman Brothers album than tune in to Rachel Maddow or Hannity or any of the others, the world would be a much happier and peaceful place.

Actually the fact that the ABB have never liked RS from the very beginning isn't lost on them ... or us.

RS sucks anyway. Fortunally some mags know how to properly honour fallen legends:

I guess Trump hatred is more important than the legacy of Gregg and the Bros.

Rolling Stone lost it's relevance to me when show biz cover articles took over for music reporting. I did love the Hunter Thompson articles...but I'm showing my age

RS sucks anyway. Fortunally some mags know how to properly honour fallen legends:
![]()
Good magazine, but kinda pricey here in the states! 😉
I will pick it everyone and awhile.
Everyone has a plan, till you get punched in the face,

RS hasn't been relevant for decades. Who cares?

In 73 they were bit better.............. special fond memories...... 17 years old had double page center spread of GA on my hippie pad wall in New Mexico..............
.
.
.

RS hasn't been relevant for decades. Who cares?
I don't know what you mean by this - I can only assume that you don't read Rolling Stone. Sure,
they wasted a bunch of pages a few issues ago with that huge feature on John Prine(!). Maybe
they should have devoted that space to the Beebs or somebody more deserving.....in any event,
they didn't put Chris Cornell on the cover so I knew Gregg wouldn't get that honor. But a feature
article from Mikal Gilmore?! I'm certainly digging it.

But a feature
article from Mikal Gilmore?! I'm certainly digging it.
And I just finished it, and as usual Rolling Stone just got short-changed on this website again.
OK, OK, I agree that Gregg should have made the cover. That doesn't make Mikal Gilmore's TREMENDOUS, comprehensive and very respectful tribute to Gregg any less great than it is. READ THE MAGAZINE, read the article. Any Gregg fan who does will be thanking Rolling Stone, not worrying about who is on the cover. Here's some quotes from the last page of this 7 page history:
"Allman, for his part, was thankful he had sobered up in time to enjoy the music - that he 'had woken up before all the innings of the game were over,' he said. In 2011, he released 'Low Country Blues', produced by T-Bone Burnett. It's a modern-day blues album like no other. In Skip James' 'Devil Got My Woman,' Allman sings like the ghost of the original singer, with a brooding storm selling up behind to act out his vengeance, to cover for his fear."
And the final paragraph:
"Gregg Allman died on May 27th, of complications from liver cancer. He'd gone through all the years of hell -- much of it his own making -- and found himself in a hard-earned place. 'I sit here in my house in Savannah, look out over the water at the oaks, and know that I have a reason to live,' he wrote during the last years of his life. 'After all I've been through, I can't help but feel I've been redeemed, over and over. Sometimes I scratch my head about why, but the only answer I c an come up with is that maybe I deserved it because I've brought a lot of happiness to people's hearts. I get letters by the week from people thanking me for my music, and you can almost see the tears on the paper. Not that this justifies anything I've done, or says that it's okay I got f*cked up because I made a lot of people happy --no way. One right doesn't snuff out a wrong. All I'm saying is that maybe God just needed me down here to make some folks happy. Maybe it's that simple."

Plenty of better things to waste our time on than reading Rolling Stone... like ironing beach towels...

ANY magazine that puts Rachel Maddow on the cover isn't worth the ink, I guess Mika and Forehead Joe will be on this months cover. They've sent me 5 free issues and I haven't cracked open one. Straight to the recycling bin.

But a feature
article from Mikal Gilmore?! I'm certainly digging it.And I just finished it, and as usual Rolling Stone just got short-changed on this website again.
OK, OK, I agree that Gregg should have made the cover. That doesn't make Mikal Gilmore's TREMENDOUS, comprehensive and very respectful tribute to Gregg any less great than it is. READ THE MAGAZINE, read the article. Any Gregg fan who does will be thanking Rolling Stone, not worrying about who is on the cover.
It was beautiful and one of the best things written about Gregg after his passing. Every other obituary used the last words from his book, but nobody else used the lines Gilmore did and he found so much meaning there. That's a lot more important than who's on the cover. People are mostly reading these articles on the web or their phones, where the cover is almost irrelevant and an article is an article, and complaining about the cover is petty. Is everyone here a publicist or something? They gave him a good sendoff from a compassionate writer, which is a shitload better than Duane got.
Also, Rolling Stone in general and David Fricke in particular were huge boosters of the ABB in its last decade, and they remained so long after they stopped releasing albums and touring much and other major music publications basically stopped paying attention to them. They also cover the TTB a lot and I know people here read Derek's long remembrances of Gregg and Butch after they died. They cover the Mule plenty, too. Shit, they called Duane and Derek two of the best guitarists ever in their polls, silly as those kinds of polls are, and 10 years ago they put Derek on the cover - next to two (inferior) guitarists who are MUCH more famous than he is. If they made that call based on sales and fame alone, Derek would not have been there. It would've been Dan Auerbach or Jack White or some other people. Their support was probably very helpful to him as his career has gone along. If you don't like the way RS treated the ABB in recent years, are you going to say Spin or NME or someone else did better? And aggregators like Jambands are fine, I guess, but that's a different ballgame. HTN was the best, of course, but that was on a smaller scale.
I guess what I'm saying is, be honest. Either admit you actually do care about coverage in magazines like RS, which is fine and understandable, or ignore that stuff whether it's negative *or positive*. When those places publish something good everyone loves it, and when they don't, some of the same people get all defensive and pull this insecure "who needs you anyway?" game. Puh-lease. It doesn't fool anybody. People who are apathetic to the music press don't talk about it this much.
[Edited on 7/2/2017 by Marley]

I let my subscription to RS expire after years of subscribing, but it's not really because RS became irrelevant; it is because I did.
Plenty of people on this site argue that The Allman Brothers peaked in 1970-1971 - yet they argue that RS's failure to put Gregg on the cover shows RS's irrelevancy. There's a clear contradiction there.
Because I am a backward-looking middle-aged man, I read more about bands from the past than from the present. As a result, I read MOJO more than RS.
Rolling Stone focuses more on the present. That does not make them irrelevant.

It was beautiful and one of the best things written about Gregg after his passing. Every other obituary used the last words from his book, but nobody else used the lines Gilmore did and he found so much meaning there. That's a lot more important than who's on the cover.
We have a WINNER! Someone actually read the article!! Now I'm in shock...............
I let my subscription to RS expire after years of subscribing, but it's not really because RS became irrelevant; it is because I did.
Plenty of people on this site argue that The Allman Brothers peaked in 1970-1971 - yet they argue that RS's failure to put Gregg on the cover shows RS's irrelevancy. There's a clear contradiction there.
Because I am a backward-looking middle-aged man, I read more about bands from the past than from the present. As a result, I read MOJO more than RS.
Rolling Stone focuses more on the present. That does not make them irrelevant.
THANK YOU. An honest, intelligent opinion.

RS is in business to sell magazines and adverts and paid a lot of $$$$
recently for a poorly researched article that never should have gone to print.
The voice of a generation they are not. I unsubbed from them long ago.
If I want solid journalism about favorite artists
RS isn't even a third choice, they don't make the list.
The most touching words are from GA - they are quotes.
The best remembrances have been delivered by family and friends
of the ABB inner circle
But if it gets you off hey whatevs!

If you can find a better written tribute by a mainstream writer, please do post it. I love reading good rock journalism.

Just an FYI, since I initiated the topic. I did read the article as soon as I received my copy. I thought it was a good article...not exactly great like many here, but good. I enjoyed the read. There were some other good articles in there as well.
And forgive me if I am being "petty" when I think Gregg deserved the cover instead of Rachel Maddow. It's just my opinion...nothing more, nothing less. Seems like it is getting more and more difficult to have opinions these days.
[Edited on 7/3/2017 by tiderule1]

And forgive me if I am being "petty" when I think Gregg deserved the cover instead of Rachel Maddow.
Here's from my original post:
OK, OK, I agree that Gregg should have made the cover.

And forgive me if I am being "petty" when I think Gregg deserved the cover instead of Rachel Maddow. It's just my opinion...nothing more, nothing less. Seems like it is getting more and more difficult to have opinions these days.
If you post an opinion, don't take it personally when someone politely disagrees with you. Everyone gets what you are saying, but you didn't expect a choir here, did you?
Gregg Allman isn't quite the international music icon that Prince or Bowie were (whose deaths did make the RS cover), and his death was hardly a surprise. But also, Rolling Stone can't be an rock obituary magazine. If they put everyone who died in 2016 on the cover, it would get kind of depressing. They have always been about the present, while respecting the past. It was a nice column and lots of ink, let Bieber poop his pants for not making the cover.

Here's from my original post:
OK, OK, I agree that Gregg should have made the cover.
If you post an opinion, don't take it personally when someone politely disagrees with you. Everyone gets what you are saying, but you didn't expect a choir here, did you?
OK, good points and feedback taken. I guess I was just a little cranky yesterday when I posted.
Hope everyone has a good 4th!

RS hasn't been relevant for decades. Who cares?
What a drag it is getting old...
- 75 Forums
- 15 K Topics
- 191.8 K Posts
- 16 Online
- 24.7 K Members