Coming up on the mean streets of New York City as a kid and there was music everywhere from cover bands at church dances to clubs like Café Wha? and The Night Owl Café in Greenwich Village to the emerging FM stations on the radio that were playing album cuts and whole sides of bands that didnt make it at the AM stations.
For a while there were numerous bands that held my attention such as the raw early sound of The Who and Them and The Yardbirds and James Brown and Otis Redding and many others. Nobody got close to The Rolling Stones even before their breakout with Satisfaction, and while The Beatles were an extremely well crafted pop group, The Stones had a dark immediacy that looking back now seems like an omen.
Their greatest record and they had quite a run in the late-1960s to mid-1970s is Exiles on Main Street that is probably the greatest rock nroll record ever recorded. It is raw, brilliant, and immediate and the roots of their sound are clearly audible while still entangled in a new way in the songs. To this day the album still rocks and captivates in a way that isnt easily explained.
Stones In Exile a documentary directed by Stephen Kijak and produced by Mick Jagger, Keith Richards and Charlie Watts, among others doesnt explain, it shows how the double album got recorded in the basement of Keith Richards house in the south of France and how some of the songs came to be. (The inspiration for Tumblin Dice is a hoot.)
Plus, the Robert Frank connection and plenty of contemporary footage and stills and the music is pretty good, too. Most rocknroll documentaries pretty much suck. The Stones have been lucky in that for some reason they always take better to film than most bands.
On Jul 1, 4:38 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey,
> Coming up on the mean streets of New York City as a kid and there was music everywhere from cover bands at church dances to clubs like Café Wha? and The Night Owl Café in Greenwich Village to the emerging FM stations on the radio that were playing album cuts and whole sides of bands that didnt make it at the AM stations.
> For a while there were numerous bands that held my attention such as the raw early sound of The Who and Them and The Yardbirds and James Brown and Otis Redding and many others. Nobody got close to The Rolling Stones even before their breakout with Satisfaction, and while The Beatles were an extremely well crafted pop group, The Stones had a dark immediacy that looking back now seems like an omen.
> Their greatest record and they had quite a run in the late-1960s to mid-1970s is Exiles on Main Street that is probably the greatest rock nroll record ever recorded.
It's my favorite record of all time and it's been that way for so long
that I feel like I should replace it with something else, particularly
since anymore it's such a conventional pick as the greatest rock and
roll record ever recorded. But I honestly can't think of anything
better. It's impossible to revise the record downward.
On a side-note about the Stones--I have a theory that Mick Taylor is
major beneficiary of the internet. It was easy to buy the
conventional wisdom at the time that he was an ill-fit with the Stones
and Ron Wood was better suited for the job but now when you listen to
the live recordings from the Exile era, especially the Brussels
recordings from 73 and the Leeds show from iirc 71, words can't
describe how good Taylor's playing is at times. But Keith thought it
was best he got someone who played guitar just like he does so they
got Wood and now neither of them can play anymore and as a result the
Stones are fucked at 50.
On Sunday, July 1, 2012 5:21:11 PM UTC-4, nick wrote:
> On a side-note about the Stones--I have a theory that Mick Taylor is
> major beneficiary of the internet. It was easy to buy the
> conventional wisdom at the time that he was an ill-fit with the Stones
> and Ron Wood was better suited for the job but now when you listen to
> the live recordings from the Exile era, especially the Brussels
> recordings from 73 and the Leeds show from iirc 71, words can't
> describe how good Taylor's playing is at times. But Keith thought it
> was best he got someone who played guitar just like he does so they
> got Wood and now neither of them can play anymore and as a result the
> Stones are fucked at 50.
I still think of Ron Wood as the "new" guy. I saw them live with Brian Jones so maybe that explains it.
On Jul 1, 3:38 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey,
> Coming up on the mean streets of New York City as a kid and there was music everywhere from cover bands at church dances to clubs like Café Wha? and The Night Owl Café in Greenwich Village to the emerging FM stations on the radio that were playing album cuts and whole sides of bands that didnt make it at the AM stations.
> For a while there were numerous bands that held my attention such as the raw early sound of The Who and Them and The Yardbirds and James Brown and Otis Redding and many others. Nobody got close to The Rolling Stones even before their breakout with Satisfaction, and while The Beatles were an extremely well crafted pop group, The Stones had a dark immediacy that looking back now seems like an omen.
> Their greatest record and they had quite a run in the late-1960s to mid-1970s is Exiles on Main Street that is probably the greatest rock nroll record ever recorded. It is raw, brilliant, and immediate and the roots of their sound are clearly audible while still entangled in a new way in the songs. To this day the album still rocks and captivates in a way that isnt easily explained.
> Stones In Exile a documentary directed by Stephen Kijak and produced by Mick Jagger, Keith Richards and Charlie Watts, among others doesnt explain, it shows how the double album got recorded in the basement of Keith Richards house in the south of France and how some of the songs came to be. (The inspiration for Tumblin Dice is a hoot.)
> Plus, the Robert Frank connection and plenty of contemporary footage and stills and the music is pretty good, too. Most rocknroll documentaries pretty much suck. The Stones have been lucky in that for some reason they always take better to film than most bands.
Thanks William... I'm usually ahead of the curve when it comes to
music info, but this slipped right past me.
> On Jul 1, 3:38 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hey,
> > Coming up on the mean streets of New York City as a kid and there was music everywhere from cover bands at church dances to clubs like Café Wha? and The Night Owl Café in Greenwich Village to the emerging FM stations on the radio that were playing album cuts and whole sides of bands that didnt make it at the AM stations.
> > For a while there were numerous bands that held my attention such as the raw early sound of The Who and Them and The Yardbirds and James Brown and Otis Redding and many others. Nobody got close to The Rolling Stones even before their breakout with Satisfaction, and while The Beatles were an extremely well crafted pop group, The Stones had a dark immediacy that looking back now seems like an omen.
> > Their greatest record and they had quite a run in the late-1960s to mid-1970s is Exiles on Main Street that is probably the greatest rock nroll record ever recorded. It is raw, brilliant, and immediate and the roots of their sound are clearly audible while still entangled in a new way in the songs. To this day the album still rocks and captivates in a way that isnt easily explained.
> > Stones In Exile a documentary directed by Stephen Kijak and produced by Mick Jagger, Keith Richards and Charlie Watts, among others doesnt explain, it shows how the double album got recorded in the basement of Keith Richards house in the south of France and how some of the songs came to be. (The inspiration for Tumblin Dice is a hoot.)
> > Plus, the Robert Frank connection and plenty of contemporary footage and stills and the music is pretty good, too. Most rocknroll documentaries pretty much suck. The Stones have been lucky in that for some reason they always take better to film than most bands.
> Thanks William... I'm usually ahead of the curve when it comes to
> music info, but this slipped right past me.
> Can't wait to see it.
> Tom
If you have Netlix streaming, it's available there. I keep waiting
for the Springsteen Darkness on the Edge of Town documentary to show
up on Netflix because I sure don't feel like buying the Darkness boxed
set just to get that.
> On Jul 1, 4:38 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey,
>> Coming up on the mean streets of New York City as a kid and there was music everywhere from cover bands at church dances to clubs like Café Wha? and The Night Owl Café in Greenwich Village to the emerging FM stations on the radio that were playing album cuts and whole sides of bands that didnt make it at the AM stations.
>> For a while there were numerous bands that held my attention such as the raw early sound of The Who and Them and The Yardbirds and James Brown and Otis Redding and many others. Nobody got close to The Rolling Stones even before their breakout with Satisfaction, and while The Beatles were an extremely well crafted pop group, The Stones had a dark immediacy that looking back now seems like an omen.
>> Their greatest record and they had quite a run in the late-1960s to mid-1970s is Exiles on Main Street that is probably the greatest rock nroll record ever recorded.
> It's my favorite record of all time and it's been that way for so long
> that I feel like I should replace it with something else, particularly
> since anymore it's such a conventional pick as the greatest rock and
> roll record ever recorded. But I honestly can't think of anything
> better. It's impossible to revise the record downward.
Music is certainly subjective. I don't even think "Exile on Main Street" would make my top ten. Then again, william might have a special version called "Exiles on Main Street", so who knows. There are a lot of great rock double albums--"London Calling", "Quadrophenia", "Physical Graffiti" and "The Wall" to name four, but it really depends on what your particular favorite group is, and mine has never been the Stones. In fact, as far as double albums go, I'm more inclined to pull out Tull's "Living in the Past" because a) the music is outstanding, b) the original version of the album cover is fantastic, and c) around Christmas "A Christmas Song" hits just the right note.
EoMS is too twangy for me. I bought a copy on CD a couple of years ago because it was cheap, and I think I might have liked it better if I'd heard it on record first. Even still, although I like the music, and I'm constantly reminded how underrated Keith Richards is as a guitarist, the whole album has the feel of "What would happen if the Stones recorded a country album?" and that's a question I don't think anybody would ever ask.
"Exiles on Main Street"--was he eating hotscakes when he wrote that?
> > On Jul 1, 3:38 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hey,
> > > Coming up on the mean streets of New York City as a kid and there was music everywhere from cover bands at church dances to clubs like Café Wha? and The Night Owl Café in Greenwich Village to the emerging FM stations on the radio that were playing album cuts and whole sides of bands that didnt make it at the AM stations.
> > > For a while there were numerous bands that held my attention such as the raw early sound of The Who and Them and The Yardbirds and James Brown and Otis Redding and many others. Nobody got close to The Rolling Stones even before their breakout with Satisfaction, and while The Beatles were an extremely well crafted pop group, The Stones had a dark immediacy that looking back now seems like an omen.
> > > Their greatest record and they had quite a run in the late-1960s to mid-1970s is Exiles on Main Street that is probably the greatest rock nroll record ever recorded. It is raw, brilliant, and immediate and the roots of their sound are clearly audible while still entangled in a new way in the songs. To this day the album still rocks and captivates in a way that isnt easily explained.
> > > Stones In Exile a documentary directed by Stephen Kijak and produced by Mick Jagger, Keith Richards and Charlie Watts, among others doesnt explain, it shows how the double album got recorded in the basement of Keith Richards house in the south of France and how some of the songs came to be. (The inspiration for Tumblin Dice is a hoot.)
> > > Plus, the Robert Frank connection and plenty of contemporary footage and stills and the music is pretty good, too. Most rocknroll documentaries pretty much suck. The Stones have been lucky in that for some reason they always take better to film than most bands.
> > Thanks William... I'm usually ahead of the curve when it comes to
> > music info, but this slipped right past me.
> > Can't wait to see it.
> > Tom
> If you have Netlix streaming, it's available there. I keep waiting
> for the Springsteen Darkness on the Edge of Town documentary to show
> up on Netflix because I sure don't feel like buying the Darkness boxed
> set just to get that.
No Netflix for me... I'll go to the library. If they don't have it, I
can rent it from iTunes for $3 or $4...
Exile is in my top ten albums of all time. I think you're right on
about Mick Taylor, too. Wood was OK when he could play, but nowhere
near the talent of Taylor.
Thanks for the heads up on Springsteen. My wife lived in Jersey for
several years when he played the bar circuit and eventually some
larger clubs and venues. She's seen him in one incarnation or another
about 100 times. The Darkness boxed set will make a great birthday
gift later this month.
On Sunday, July 1, 2012 5:21:11 PM UTC-4, nick wrote:
> It's my favorite record of all time and it's been that way for so long
> that I feel like I should replace it with something else, particularly
> since anymore it's such a conventional pick as the greatest rock and
> roll record ever recorded. But I honestly can't think of anything
> better. It's impossible to revise the record downward.
I completely agree with that. Every suggestion for a replacement made in this thread is almost laughable in comparison. (I said that, not you). The thing is, I'm still listening to it and it's just as what it is as the day I heard it on vinyl. Plus, the film captures a lot of the time and situations that created it and with the cooperation of Jagger, Richards and Watts, it has the budget and access needed to work. Saw a recent documentary on The Who -- with their cooperation -- and it was dreadful. Some good info but no imagination as to presentation. "Stones In Exile" is a real package and one could argue a promo for a set of songs that doesn't need any but all the nonsense with drugs and other silliness is right there. Worth seeing, for sure.
> On Sunday, July 1, 2012 5:21:11 PM UTC-4, nick wrote:
>> It's my favorite record of all time and it's been that way for so long
>> that I feel like I should replace it with something else, particularly
>> since anymore it's such a conventional pick as the greatest rock and
>> roll record ever recorded. But I honestly can't think of anything
>> better. It's impossible to revise the record downward.
> On 7/1/12 4:21 PM, nick wrote:
>> On Jul 1, 4:38 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>> Coming up on the mean streets of New York City as a kid and there
>>> was music everywhere from cover bands at church dances to clubs like
>>> Café Wha? and The Night Owl Café in Greenwich Village to the
>>> emerging FM stations on the radio that were playing album cuts and
>>> whole sides of bands that didnt make it at the AM stations.
>>> For a while there were numerous bands that held my attention such as
>>> the raw early sound of The Who and Them and The Yardbirds and James
>>> Brown and Otis Redding and many others. Nobody got close to The
>>> Rolling Stones even before their breakout with Satisfaction, and
>>> while The Beatles were an extremely well crafted pop group, The
>>> Stones had a dark immediacy that looking back now seems like an
>>> omen.
>>> Their greatest record and they had quite a run in the late-1960s
>>> to mid-1970s is Exiles on Main Street that is probably the
>>> greatest rock nroll record ever recorded.
>> It's my favorite record of all time and it's been that way for so
>> long that I feel like I should replace it with something else,
>> particularly since anymore it's such a conventional pick as the
>> greatest rock and roll record ever recorded. But I honestly can't
>> think of anything better. It's impossible to revise the record
>> downward.
> Music is certainly subjective. I don't even think "Exile on Main > Street" would make my top ten. Then again, william might have a
> special version called "Exiles on Main Street", so who knows. There
> are a lot of great rock double albums--"London Calling",
> "Quadrophenia", "Physical Graffiti" and "The Wall" to name four, but
> it really depends on what your particular favorite group is, and mine
> has never been the Stones. In fact, as far as double albums go, I'm
> more inclined to pull out Tull's "Living in the Past" because a) the
> music is outstanding, b) the original version of the album cover is
> fantastic, and c) around Christmas "A Christmas Song" hits just the
> right note.
Wow! High praise coming from someone who characterized classic rock as neanderthal.
> Thanks for the heads up on Springsteen. My wife lived in Jersey for
> several years when he played the bar circuit and eventually some
> larger clubs and venues. She's seen him in one incarnation or another
> about 100 times. The Darkness boxed set will make a great birthday
> gift later this month.
You can buy the Making of Darkness dvd by itself now, but the box, though expensive, is worth it for the early concert dvd, plus the new concert dvd.
I balked at first about these expensive album box sets, but now I see that they are worth it, at least for the important Springsteen albums.
Notice The River has never been remastered. If it takes a $100 box set to finally get it that way, so be it, as long as there are a lot of wonderful extras to go with it.
On Sunday, July 1, 2012 11:51:40 PM UTC-4, really real wrote:
> > I still think of Ron Wood as the "new" guy. I saw them live with Brian Jones so maybe that explains it.
> Ron Wood has been a Rolling Stone for a few years longer than Bill Wyman > ever was.
That must mean something but I don't know what. Look at the list of songs and albums Wyman played on and then the list that Wood played on. The fact is after Wood joined my fascination with the band diminished although I will listen to the Wyman-era stuff anytime. Hence, the "new" guy moniker.
> trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote in
> news:odOdnZK6f7oMT23SnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@mchsi.com: >> Music is certainly subjective. I don't even think "Exile on Main
>> Street" would make my top ten. Then again, william might have a
>> special version called "Exiles on Main Street", so who knows. There
>> are a lot of great rock double albums--"London Calling",
>> "Quadrophenia", "Physical Graffiti" and "The Wall" to name four, but
>> it really depends on what your particular favorite group is, and mine
>> has never been the Stones. In fact, as far as double albums go, I'm
>> more inclined to pull out Tull's "Living in the Past" because a) the
>> music is outstanding, b) the original version of the album cover is
>> fantastic, and c) around Christmas "A Christmas Song" hits just the
>> right note.
> Wow! High praise coming from someone who characterized classic rock as
> neanderthal.
On Jul 2, 12:13 am, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, July 1, 2012 11:51:40 PM UTC-4, really real wrote:
> > > I still think of Ron Wood as the "new" guy. I saw them live with Brian Jones so maybe that explains it.
> > Ron Wood has been a Rolling Stone for a few years longer than Bill Wyman
> > ever was.
> That must mean something but I don't know what. Look at the list of songs and albums Wyman played on and then the list that Wood played on. The fact is after Wood joined my fascination with the band diminished although I will listen to the Wyman-era stuff anytime. Hence, the "new" guy moniker.
Yeah, after Some Girls it was pretty much over. Some Girls came out
around the same time as Darkness on the Edge of Town (both records
scream "summer of '78" whenever I listen to them) and while
Springsteen had a few more good records left in him than the Stones
did, he never got any better than Darkness.
> > On Jul 1, 4:38 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hey,
> >> Coming up on the mean streets of New York City as a kid and there was music everywhere from cover bands at church dances to clubs like Café Wha? and The Night Owl Café in Greenwich Village to the emerging FM stations on the radio that were playing album cuts and whole sides of bands that didnt make it at the AM stations.
> >> For a while there were numerous bands that held my attention such as the raw early sound of The Who and Them and The Yardbirds and James Brown and Otis Redding and many others. Nobody got close to The Rolling Stones even before their breakout with Satisfaction, and while The Beatles were an extremely well crafted pop group, The Stones had a dark immediacy that looking back now seems like an omen.
> >> Their greatest record and they had quite a run in the late-1960s to mid-1970s is Exiles on Main Street that is probably the greatest rock nroll record ever recorded.
> > It's my favorite record of all time and it's been that way for so long
> > that I feel like I should replace it with something else, particularly
> > since anymore it's such a conventional pick as the greatest rock and
> > roll record ever recorded. But I honestly can't think of anything
> > better. It's impossible to revise the record downward.
> Music is certainly subjective. I don't even think "Exile on Main
> Street" would make my top ten. Then again, william might have a special
> version called "Exiles on Main Street", so who knows. There are a lot
> of great rock double albums--"London Calling", "Quadrophenia", "Physical
> Graffiti" and "The Wall" to name four, but it really depends on what
> your particular favorite group is, and mine has never been the Stones.
> In fact, as far as double albums go, I'm more inclined to pull out
> Tull's "Living in the Past" because a) the music is outstanding, b) the
> original version of the album cover is fantastic, and c) around
> Christmas "A Christmas Song" hits just the right note.
> EoMS is too twangy for me. I bought a copy on CD a couple of years ago
> because it was cheap, and I think I might have liked it better if I'd
> heard it on record first. Even still, although I like the music, and
> I'm constantly reminded how underrated Keith Richards is as a guitarist,
> the whole album has the feel of "What would happen if the Stones
> recorded a country album?" and that's a question I don't think anybody
> would ever ask.
But the Stones were a fucking good country band. The best stuff from
their 68-72 peak has a country influence, thanks to Gram Parsons and/
or the increasing Americanization of Keith's musical tastes.
Living in the Past, you're on your own on that one. The Wall,
terrible, just terrible, Pink Floyd's worst up to that point, mainly
Waters feeling sorry for himself and exploiting Syd Barrett's mental
illness for profit (which PF did a lot of--Syd's loss was their
gain). Quadrophenia, excellent but the Who's stuff has dated way more
than I would have thought. Physical Graffiti and London Calling,
maybe in the same league as Exile but not as good. Graffiti is more
about its mystique as the definitive hard rock record than anything
else and while London Calling is great, it's been overplayed and I can
only guess how many times we're going to hear the title track attached
to footage of the upcoming Olympics.
> On Jul 1, 6:43 pm, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>> On 7/1/12 4:21 PM, nick wrote:
>>> It's my favorite record of all time and it's been that way for so long
>>> that I feel like I should replace it with something else, particularly
>>> since anymore it's such a conventional pick as the greatest rock and
>>> roll record ever recorded. But I honestly can't think of anything
>>> better. It's impossible to revise the record downward.
>> Music is certainly subjective. I don't even think "Exile on Main
>> Street" would make my top ten. Then again, william might have a special
>> version called "Exiles on Main Street", so who knows. There are a lot
>> of great rock double albums--"London Calling", "Quadrophenia", "Physical
>> Graffiti" and "The Wall" to name four, but it really depends on what
>> your particular favorite group is, and mine has never been the Stones.
>> In fact, as far as double albums go, I'm more inclined to pull out
>> Tull's "Living in the Past" because a) the music is outstanding, b) the
>> original version of the album cover is fantastic, and c) around
>> Christmas "A Christmas Song" hits just the right note.
>> EoMS is too twangy for me. I bought a copy on CD a couple of years ago
>> because it was cheap, and I think I might have liked it better if I'd
>> heard it on record first. Even still, although I like the music, and
>> I'm constantly reminded how underrated Keith Richards is as a guitarist,
>> the whole album has the feel of "What would happen if the Stones
>> recorded a country album?" and that's a question I don't think anybody
>> would ever ask.
> But the Stones were a fucking good country band.
The Stones were good whatever the genre. Hell, they were a good disco band too.
The best stuff from
> their 68-72 peak has a country influence, thanks to Gram Parsons and/
> or the increasing Americanization of Keith's musical tastes.
Well, here's the problem. You and william talk about "best" as if there were some sort of meter that quantifiably says what is best. Maybe I need to repeat my first line: "Music is certainly subjective". You can choose to ignore that, that's fine, but it doesn't leave much room for discussion. I've been on Usenet for over ten years now and the only thing that I've learned is that is well nigh impossible to get someone to discuss things in a rational or adult matter. You listen to different stuff than I do, so your tastes are certainly going to run differently, but I would be surprised if you'd heard the length and breadth of my music collection. Still, if you like the Stones and/or EoMS as great or "the best" more power to you, but if I listen to the whole CD of EoMS and it gives me a headache I probably won't refer to it as "the best". sir william is of course discounted for being too motherfucking stupid to even get the album's title correct.
> Living in the Past, you're on your own on that one.
I'm fine with that. None of these groups discussed can hold a candle to my favorite anyway: Procol Harum. I'm looking for rock music to be sophisticated, your mileage may vary.
The Wall,
> terrible, just terrible, Pink Floyd's worst up to that point, mainly
> Waters feeling sorry for himself and exploiting Syd Barrett's mental
> illness for profit (which PF did a lot of--Syd's loss was their
> gain).
I don't listen to any Floyd other than the Barrett era. Waters became more and more pedestrian, but "The Wall" is still a pretty big spectacle in the annals of rock.
Quadrophenia, excellent but the Who's stuff has dated way more
> than I would have thought.
That's reasonable. The other problem with the Who is I wonder how many of their fan base really hoped they had died before they got old.
Physical Graffiti and London Calling,
> maybe in the same league as Exile but not as good.
On the Kelvin scale? I think "London Calling" is the best of the bunch--the Clash at their best had an incendiary quality that most bands can't touch. Even in the studio they sound like they're trying to set the master tape on fire.
Graffiti is more
> about its mystique as the definitive hard rock record than anything
> else and while London Calling is great, it's been overplayed and I can
> only guess how many times we're going to hear the title track attached
> to footage of the upcoming Olympics.
Here's a question: were the Stones better of trying to sound like a blues band or a country band?
Anyway, what do I know, my favorite Stones song is "Paint it Black".
>> Ron Wood has been a Rolling Stone for a few years longer than Bill Wyman
>> ever was.
> That must mean something but I don't know what. Look at the list of songs and albums Wyman played on and then the list that Wood played on. The fact is after Wood joined my fascination with the band diminished although I will listen to the Wyman-era stuff anytime. Hence, the "new" guy moniker.
It's true, the Stone's haven't produced a decent new song in decades, but their live performances remains top notch. From the just released Some Girls dvd, to the Martin Scorsese concert, The Stones continue to deliver great rock n roll in concert, better than any other band I can think of.
It's hard to maintain a creative song writing career. Dylan has found a way to do it, but not any of the original rock n roll poets like Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, Little Richard, or Jerry Lee Lewis.
The Beatles dried up after they broke up. When was the last decent McCartney song?
Sure, Ronnie is the new guy but we're all old farts.
On Monday, July 2, 2012 10:36:50 AM UTC-4, really real wrote:
> It's true, the Stone's haven't produced a decent new song in decades, > but their live performances remains top notch. From the just released > Some Girls dvd, to the Martin Scorsese concert, The Stones continue to > deliver great rock n roll in concert, better than any other band I can > think of.
I saw them in '64 and '69 (right before Altamont at MSG), they were effing astounding. Seen the Beatles, the Who, Traffic, and numerous other bands at that time and the Stones were just incredible. No argument at all about their live shows and that's why they're still touring. My "new guy" reference was a bit of humor since I've been a fan so long.
> I saw them in '64 and '69 (right before Altamont at MSG), they were effing astounding. Seen the Beatles, the Who, Traffic, and numerous other bands at that time and the Stones were just incredible. No argument at all about their live shows and that's why they're still touring. My "new guy" reference was a bit of humor since I've been a fan so long.
I too am being humorous, or trying to be.
I remember seeing them in '64, with Jagger sitting on the stage cross legged, in a huff, after the plug was pulled,while the police tried to get us back in our seats.
Was it 1970 when I saw them when Stevie Wonder opened for them? Their concerts got bigger and less fun.
You've got to admit, Ronnie Wood looks way more like a Stone than Mick Taylor ever did. But yes, I like the recordings with Brian Jones best of all.
And Ronnie Wood with the Faces was perhaps a match for the Stones back then. I had more fun at a Faces concert than I've ever had with the Stones. Ah, if only Rod Stewart hadn't died and come back to earth as a Vegas guy.
On Jul 2, 12:57 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, July 2, 2012 12:09:18 PM UTC-4, really real wrote:
> > Was it 1970 when I saw them when Stevie Wonder opened for them? Their
> > concerts got bigger and less fun.
> Think it was '72. Footage of that tour is in "Cocksucker Blues," the Robert Frank documentary that has a bizarre history and is now readily available.
What do you think of Godard's Sympathy for the Devil? Revolutionary
footage aside (which I don't mind), it's a great picture of Jones in
advanced deterioration shuffled off to a sound booth and oblivious to
what's going on, as well as the Stones' peak years perfectionism.
Cocksucker Blues has a druggy lethargic boredom to it that makes me
not envy the Stones' rock and roll lifestyle. I got the impression
that the only time they ever shake off their bored superior cynicism
is when they're around black Americans or black music.
On Monday, July 2, 2012 1:45:07 PM UTC-4, nick wrote:
> What do you think of Godard's Sympathy for the Devil? Revolutionary
> footage aside (which I don't mind), it's a great picture of Jones in
> advanced deterioration shuffled off to a sound booth and oblivious to
> what's going on, as well as the Stones' peak years perfectionism.
I suppose I could be critical of how didactic the politics in the film appear but I think it's also funny and an interesting take on the '60s. What's really cool about the Stones in those days is that they even knew who Godard was. Or Andy Warhol. Jagger seems totally wired into all that stuff. When you look at the utterly lame films made about other bands of the time, it's almost prescient in a cultural way that the Stones knew who to hook up to. Peter Max? Gimme a break.
> Cocksucker Blues has a druggy lethargic boredom to it that makes me
> not envy the Stones' rock and roll lifestyle. I got the impression
> that the only time they ever shake off their bored superior cynicism
> is when they're around black Americans or black music.
A life on the road takes its toll, as it were. Frank did a great job of demystifying that whole world and what's cool is that the Stones let him do it. Would love to see all the footage back in, re-edited and remixed and released in a decent print. Although the bootlegs have their own mystique of peering through a dusty window. It adds a lot.
On Jul 2, 10:53 am, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, July 2, 2012 10:36:50 AM UTC-4, really real wrote:
> > It's true, the Stone's haven't produced a decent new song in decades,
> > but their live performances remains top notch. From the just released
> > Some Girls dvd, to the Martin Scorsese concert, The Stones continue to
> > deliver great rock n roll in concert, better than any other band I can
> > think of.
> I saw them in '64 and '69 (right before Altamont at MSG),
So you were at the Get Yer Ya Ya's Out show(s)?
The biggest concert I ever saw was Zep's first show at Knebworth in
79. They were terrible.
