I'm prepared to throw my theory out, although since i was re-reading The Dark Stuff I noticed how Kent was fascinated by Mozzer's fear for thugs, crowds and rude violent behaviour (I put 2 and 2 together and built myself a hypothesis, nothing to serious, so I'll take those comments on the wooden rhythm section & the heavyosity of The Smiths with a pinch of salt).
― Omar, Friday, 23 March 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago) link
― the pinefox, Friday, 23 March 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago) link
― Mike Bourke, Friday, 23 March 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago) link
― Roger Fascist, Friday, 26 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link
― o. nate (onate), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 13:02 (twenty-two years ago) link
― alex in mainhattan (alex63), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 13:41 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Mike (mratford), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 14:13 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Ben Williams, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 14:46 (twenty-two years ago) link
― wl, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 15:34 (twenty-two years ago) link
"Oh, I bet they'd be billionaire marrionette ghouls by now..."
― g.cannon (gcannon), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 15:50 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Yancey (ystrickler), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 16:16 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Jody Beth Rosen, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 17:02 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Yancey (ystrickler), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 17:56 (twenty-two years ago) link
― alex in mainhattan (alex63), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 17:58 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Jody Beth Rosen, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 18:01 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Burr, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 18:05 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Ben Williams, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 18:20 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Nate Patrin, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 19:39 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Nate Patrin, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 19:51 (twenty-two years ago) link
But Eminem has come along to CHANGE all that!
― Jody Beth Rosen, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 20:09 (twenty-two years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 20:12 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Jody Beth Rosen, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 20:41 (twenty-two years ago) link
Pretty awful, by and large.
Jody Beth - comparing a Jagger vocal and a B&S vocal seems odd - the one is operatic (i.e. meaning lies in what he does with the voice), the other theatrical (i.e. meaning lies in the relation the words and phrases have to 'natural' speech),
― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 20:50 (twenty-two years ago) link
good point...don't know how i would anwer this.
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 21:09 (twenty-two years ago) link
good point...don't know how i would answer this.
Good answer, if a bit glib.
Does your taste in rock music run to the hard stuff at all? (Thinking of all the "wimp rock" stuff mentioned above.)
― wl, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 21:37 (twenty-two years ago) link
I don't think I have a "taste in rock music" anymore. I like noise and aggression in music sometimes but for me the particular form of 'rock' as The Stones et al. practised it seems to diminish the noise and aggression, straitjacket it and make it an 'attitude'. (I love attitudes and striking poses but this particular one is 35-plus years old and doesn't connect with me any more.)
That's not a hard-and-fast rule, of course - but take the Stooges, who you mentioned. I like them, but the bits of them that draw a bloodline from the Stones (Iggy as onstage 'Rock God', the extroverted attitude of Raw Power as opposed to the introversion of "No Fun"/"1969"/"Dirt") are the bits that stop me loving them. And on the G'n'R thread I suspect I'd be one of those beside-the-point people who like the band for their 'genre synthesis' (the New York Dolls, too), i.e. for their pop qualities. The Stones tracks I do like, I like for those qualities too.
― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 21:59 (twenty-two years ago) link
Doesn't seem too odd to me... both bands play variations on fairly straightahead rock music, so it's not really apples and oranges. The B&S vocal sound is pretty monotonous, though; the entire range of emotions is sung EXACTLY the same way. It's not a very creative expression of feeling.
― Jody Beth Rosen, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 22:16 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 22:39 (twenty-two years ago) link
― wl, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 22:44 (twenty-two years ago) link
"Now let's remember the most fundamental fact of life, folks: everything good is the Beatles, everything awful and bogus and pretentious and gross and condescending is the Rolling Stones.Okay?Mainstream pop has routinely offered two paths... One is all about happy times and getting lucky and being not miserable, while the other, at its most fruitful, might lasoo you something venereal in the East Village if you yap long, loud, and boringly enough. If you're past age 23 and the latter is still your idea of fun then you probably thought Will Self's "My Idea of Fun" was too, and, pal-o-mine, all your ideas are wrong. About Everything."
- Mike McPadden in "Bubblegum Music is The Naked Truth"
― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Wednesday, 4 September 2002 22:46 (twenty-two years ago) link
Most of Jagger's lyrics, save the occasional stutter, bear more than a passing resemblance to normal conversational speech. I can't even think of a case where this isn't so.
― Jody Beth Rosen, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 23:05 (twenty-two years ago) link
The amount of "emotion" wasn't my point (and I fucking KNEW you lot would get on my case about that, which is why I hesitated to use the word) -- it was the range of things Jagger DOES with his voice within the course of a single song, vs. Murdoch, who doesn't offer the listener that much variety.
I don't KNOW whether Jagger would cover B&S well, but to be fair, the stately Britpop of Between the Buttons and Their Satanic Majesties Request isn't really very different from B&S, is it?
― Jody Beth Rosen, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 23:13 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Clarke B., Wednesday, 4 September 2002 23:14 (twenty-two years ago) link
(Mind you I think the stately Britpop era of the Stones is staggeringly awful, loads loads worse than their 'rock' stuff (or even their disco stuff!) precisely because Mick sounds like he's having to squeeze his tongue into a corset for every song. How anyone can listen to "Lady Jane" and enjoy it is a great mystery to me.)
― Tom (Groke), Thursday, 5 September 2002 05:15 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Tom (Groke), Thursday, 5 September 2002 05:25 (twenty-two years ago) link
...just because he's sounding like he has to squeeze his tongue into a corset... it's quirky in a good way. also, it matches the harpsichord.
― willem, Thursday, 5 September 2002 07:23 (twenty-two years ago) link
A good alternative to "Lady Jane" is "Play With Fire." Similar mood, similar era, similar theme, much less mannered, much more biting.
― Ben Williams, Thursday, 5 September 2002 13:17 (twenty-two years ago) link
bubblegum is good too
it's a continuum
― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 5 September 2002 13:54 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Ben Williams, Thursday, 5 September 2002 14:03 (twenty-two years ago) link
SO THERE.
― Nate Patrin, Thursday, 5 September 2002 14:12 (twenty-two years ago) link
And yeah yeah the beatles weren't all sunshine and lollipops any more than the stones were all needles and spoons. That's a total red herring. But I think the strength in McPadden's attack isn't that he hates that The Stones are dark, it's that he hates that they are bogus and ... pretentious and condescending and, love em as I do, THEY ARE!
― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 5 September 2002 14:19 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Ben Williams, Thursday, 5 September 2002 14:31 (twenty-two years ago) link
As for the influence thing I guess the most obviously Stones-influenced artists I like are 70s Aerosmith, Patti Smith, and the Blue Oyster Cult. I recognize they're probably all more limited than the Stones but I like their voices or songs or beats more. They all added something else too. Zeppelin got into Stones-influenced territory sometimes but not usually on my favourite songs by them. Is "Houses Of the Holy" Stones-y? I don't know. I like "Night Flight" if that counts. On the whole, I'd probably take Zeppelin-influenced or Purple-influenced or Cream/Hendrix-influenced or even Velvets-influenced.
― sundar subramanian, Friday, 6 September 2002 15:43 (twenty-two years ago) link
― sundar subramanian, Friday, 6 September 2002 15:45 (twenty-two years ago) link
a late comment: I think there's more cross-pollenization than borrowing going on there: Dylan had certainly listened to "Aftermath" more than once by the time he made "Blood on the Tracks," say
― J0hn Darn1elle, Friday, 6 September 2002 15:50 (twenty-two years ago) link
― Dave M. (rotten03), Friday, 6 September 2002 16:12 (twenty-two years ago) link
Do you think Dylan stole anything from the Stones?
― Jody Beth Rosen, Friday, 6 September 2002 16:26 (twenty-two years ago) link
Does anyone know anything about the Rolling Stones remasters? I have a few of them - the cool digipack setup with great looking artwork and everything - but I just saw them in the store today and now they're all in shitty looking jewel cases with "DSD remasters" written down the side. Are there any differences between them, and are the digipack versions still available?
― Reatards Unite, Sunday, 27 May 2007 22:05 (seventeen years ago) link
The digipacks are dual layer SACD/CD hybrids. Normal CD players will play the CD layer. Players that can handle SACD will play the SACD layer. I recently got an Oppo, a player which can seemingly play almost anything you put into it, and the SACD Stones are kind of mind blowing. I suspect the normal jewel case versions don't have the SACD layer. I don't know if the digipacks are still in print, but I'm sure you can get them if you look around.
― Thus Sang Freud, Monday, 28 May 2007 01:45 (seventeen years ago) link
I can always tell when Wyman plays on those '70s records as opposed to Wood, Taylor, or Keef.
― the talented mr pimply (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 24 May 2024 15:42 (four months ago) link
I think this whole show is in broad daylight - when's the last time the Stones have done a show completely in the day?
three weeks ago!
https://www.setlist.fm/setlist/the-rolling-stones/2024/fair-grounds-race-course-new-orleans-la-babb9fe.html
― fact checking cuz, Friday, 24 May 2024 16:15 (four months ago) link
“I was dreamin last nigbt / I was crying’ like a child”
― calstars, Monday, 27 May 2024 01:51 (four months ago) link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyFg_iWZedM
― Thus Sang Freud, Monday, 27 May 2024 15:58 (four months ago) link
It looks like Keith's playing the opening riff real hard - and after that it's a loop of what he just played because he's just miming after that as he softens up his strokes, even missing the beat occasionally. Am I seeing that right? He doesn't have any pedals by his feet so I guess someone's doing it offstage? (I'm not a guitarist so I have a very shaky familiarity with this.) Not complaining though, Keith's arthritis will only get worse and it probably makes sense to save his joints for a solo rather than wear them down from repeating the same figure over and over again. You see the same thing play out when the riff changes.
― birdistheword, Monday, 27 May 2024 18:56 (four months ago) link
i think that's all live, bird.
― Thus Sang Freud, Monday, 27 May 2024 19:06 (four months ago) link
It looks like Ron is playing the same riff? ie. covering where Keith looks like he's missing it.
― visiting, Monday, 27 May 2024 19:08 (four months ago) link
Yeah, I was about to post what visiting saw, but when I went back to those spots, I think I was hearing really Ronnie off-camera playing those notes when Keith was sort of relaxing or softening up his strokes.
― birdistheword, Monday, 27 May 2024 19:13 (four months ago) link
Like at 0:30, look how vigorous Keith plays on the downstroke - that's pretty much how I picture Keith all the time, but I'm not sure anyone with arthritis can really sustain that without getting a sore wrist. And just seconds later, like at 0:35 or 0:36, he's relaxes a lot more, to the point where he isn't dead on the beat like before. But then the camera eventually moves left and you see Ronnie's playing the same notes.
― birdistheword, Monday, 27 May 2024 19:16 (four months ago) link
Great performance though, I'm glad they brought this song back. It was the highlight when I saw them in 2019 and it was one of the few numbers where the massive echo heard in the nosebleed section worked in its favor - it sounded like a ghost train out of hell with with Charlie's drums rumbling forward and Mick's harmonica wailing the whole way.
― birdistheword, Monday, 27 May 2024 19:23 (four months ago) link
oh yeah no doubt he plays this song differently than the 60s/70s when he was chomping down on the rhythm all the time. back then there was a simpler division of labor. now they call it the "weave" where they're constantly and intuitively trading voices. keith's arthritis has taken away a lot of dexterity, and the larger ensemble does a lot of gap-filling, but at the same time there is something even more primal going on where they use rhythm and volume and timing. because of their age it sometimes doesn't *look* like they're doing it. gosh i just love this band.
i went both nights at metlife -- one of them (ironically the one with the much better seats) i made use of their "lucky dip" web option for fast-fingered fans who want to save some bucks and don't care where they wind up sitting. they pulled out a whole bunch of songs they hadn't played the previous night. some were tour "firsts." i never thought i'd hear "rambler" though. i thought it had gone the way of "brown sugar."
― Thus Sang Freud, Monday, 27 May 2024 19:42 (four months ago) link
you can kind of tell from ron wood's expression at the end they're just as surprised they pulled it off as anyone else.
― Thus Sang Freud, Monday, 27 May 2024 20:34 (four months ago) link