Why don't older bands create new music?

1. Because they have peaked. People want to see them play the classics at concerts and that brings in the $$. A new album of mediocre songs won’t.

2. They’re old. Many have been touring for decades and they’re tired. The creative spark is gone.

3. They don’t really care for the music anymore and have moved on to other interests that don’t bore them.

Lots of other reasons….

Why should they? Creativity is hard, and needs inspiration. You don’t just sit down and write something and automatically becomes a hit.

At their age, it’s easier to live off their royalty income.

Creativity comes much easier when you’re young, have nothing and are out to prove something to the world. Once you’re old, have every need accounted for, every hunger satiated and every whim, no matter how outlandish, fulfilled it’s a lot harder to find anything to drive you creatively. But you keep touring and playing the hits because you’re the central cog in this huge money machine and the money must keep flowing, whether you need any of it or not.

The Rolling Stones have published some of their best work in recent years. But everyone wants to hear Brown Sugar and Jumping Jack Flash at concerts.

Elton John is still putting out new stuff, too.

Queen isn’t really Queen anymore since Freddie died.

They can coast on their classics. More likely than not, I would bet, that most of them now focus on wider interests. Those with a passion for composition will carry on turning out masterpieces, but if you can make a fortune working the goldmine of former big hits, the smart and lucrative move is to work the gold you have rather than open new mines.

OMG! Elton John? He has recorded 476 songs. What more can you ask of the man?

I heard on the radio on Wednesday that the Stones say they are working on a new album but “it’s going to take some time.”

I remember hearing, a few years ago, that Phil Collins said he was no longer going to put out new music because he didn’t feel that there was an audience for his music now. People may love to attend concerts and hear hits from the 70’s – 90’s but would there be a big market for new music from a band that people’s grandparents liked?

There was an article in the NY Times about some old British rocker (maybe Steve Wynwood?), living on his big English estate and puttering around with his Wellies on. Why leave that to have to go into the studio and work, if you can afford to stay home in your 70’s? Unless there’s a big audience willing to pack stadiums, like for the Stones, it’s probably not worth it for the majority of them.

Some of them do, I guess I’m lucky in that a few of my fave bands still churn out new stuff occasionally.
Depeche Mode, Tears for Fears etc.

I’m not sure what their reasons are but if the Stones never perform or make new music I’ll be alright with that.
They were the worst live band I’ve ever seen….and this was back in the early ‘80’s.
On the flip side, I saw Bad Company & Lynyrd Skynyrd a few years ago.
They didn’t play anything new but still sounded great.
Especially Paul Rodgers. That is who I went there for and I wasn’t disappointed.His voice is just as powerful as it was years ago.

Caravan recorded a new album just a few years ago. Their first album was in 1968.