Tell Me :
Talk
I agreee - Stern is not funny and not worthy of a connection.
However, I saw a replay of Mick doing the Letterman Top Ten List from December last year and it was great! Mick loves to do TV skits. He's good at that craft.
Very well said. It's amazing reading all this criticism being thrown Howard's way from people who probably don't listen and only know what the media report about him from 20 years ago.
Exactly! Howard is an amazing interviewer who can sense which guests he can get personal with and which ones he has to play it straight with. JMO but I think he would be so excited to interview Mick and or Keef that he would stick with their careers and the music like he does with Macca.
He did an interview with Metallica just before they did the Sirius members special concert and all he talked about was music.
And I agree most of the haters here most likley have not heard him do real interviews with Artists to have any clue what he is like.
Go to youtube and look up his Macca or other musician interviews as they are amazing.
learned that Joni Mitchell could take a car apart and put it back together..
Your argument makes no sense as who has more dignity then Paul McCartney? I would also say Graham Nash, Steven Stills, Roger Daltry, Willie Nelson, James Brown, Rod Stewart and many other musicians who have appeared on Sterns show are very dignified.
and not to mention all the hundreds of actors and other notables who have been on over the last 25+ years...
Come on that is the best you can come up with? As if Keith and Ronnie have never done an interview high.
So I guess all the hundreds of musicians and actors who have been on Howards show all these year made a mistake? or can you just not accept the fact that Howard is an amazing interviewer and does not do the ususal fluff interviews we have come to expect from the Stones?
How the hell many TV shows has Mick been interviewed on in the US?
I recall something on 60 Minutes, what, like 10 years ago for the Licks tour I think, and then there was Barbra Walters I think around 1981 or 82.
The rare occurrence that it is, if he was going to go on a tv show, I'd sure as hell hope he wouldn't go on that moron's program.
Not to forget Larry King in 2010.
The full interview is on YouTube in several parts. Lemme know if you wish to see the complete interview.
As a women I would understand why you dislike Howard Stern but he would do one of the best Stones interviews you would ever hear should they ever go on his show. Mick is too much of a tight ass to go on but I think Keef would be radio gold if he ever did.
As far as classy folks not going on Stern see the posts above which disprove that theory as hundreds of "classy" actors and musicians regularly go on his show and his interviews with them are always amazing.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-22 02:32 by oldschool.
And not to forget Geraldo in the 70s for that matter.
...and I guess Mike Douglas for the 60s.
OK, so one interview every ten years on US TV.
Which is more than enough, because as everyone knows it's always been his UK TV interviews that are more substantial and interesting, whereas the U.S. interviews tend to be more superficial and based on cliche and sensationalism.
There has never been a U.S. equivalent to "World in Action".
To be honest, we didn't care that much about Mick Jagger in the U.S. in 1967. We had our own rich supply of rock stars and other celebrities. And if we looked to England it was still the Beatles who were tops.
Yes, and we obviously didn't care about hearing anything of substance from The Beatles during that time, being so whipped up in various forms of hysteria. It probably wasn't until Mike Douglas in 1972 when John (& Yoko) and later George were on that there was ever a talk show of any intelligence done with members of The Beatles.
The first opportunity was when John and Paul came back from India to discuss TM and Apple and the like on The Tonight Show. But, Johnny Carson went on vacation, so they got a former baseball player a generation older than them to do the interview. I've always thought of that as a sadly squandered opportunity.
Stern is to shock radio what the Beatles were to British Invasion
Well, that's an interesting thought, but I'm not sure the Johnny Carson of 1968 would have had anything of substance to ask the Beatles. Maybe about fame in general, but I'm not sure he would have understood their art. And of course Johnny wasn't there for Jimi Hendrix' appearance on the Tonight Show in the summer of 1969. Once again I'm not sure Carson was geared up for someone like Hendrix.
Dick Cavett was actually the first in America to have Lennon and Ono on in a serious interview situation. And Harrison a year later to promote the Bangla Desh concert. I remember when Carson would have the Maharishi on as some kind of giggling Tiny Tim type oddity.
But I do think the Mike Douglas week long interview was kind of fun.
Yes, you can see how Carson would have been intimidated at that time, or just plain uninterested, but he seemed to have caught up by 1984, which was a bit surreal because Paul was still very much like the Macca of 1968.
It's an amusing interview, because you'll notice the guitar head protruding from the back of McCartney's chair, which Carson uses in an attempt to oblige the audience with a song, but this was Macca's non-touring phase, so he politely--if cagily--refuses.
And yes, the thrust of Carson's initial questions are based around fame in general.
Funny? yes!...annoying? perhaps...sad? huh?!
oh and grumpy old men? ABSOLUTELY!
What's sad was watching Stern and his goons sexually humiliate an older woman who clearly had mental health issues. This was in the late 90s or so. They goaded this poor feeble-minded person into removing her top, then made sophomoric comments about her saggy "pancake batter" boobs and played sound effects like a cuckoo clock referring to her mental state.
This is the kind of person you and OldSchool admire. And that is sad.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
Chris Fountain
()
Date: October 13, 2013 08:52
Quote
windmelody
The Stones never were on the Stern show because they never needed to go there.
I agreee - Stern is not funny and not worthy of a connection.
However, I saw a replay of Mick doing the Letterman Top Ten List from December last year and it was great! Mick loves to do TV skits. He's good at that craft.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
RollingFreak
()
Date: October 13, 2013 11:53
Mick likes to do whatever gets him out to the most amount of people and where its totally safe for him. Howard is neither of those things.
Keith on the other hand, would probably love and be great with Howard. Keith is honest and Howard is as honest as you can get in media without twisting things. Problem is, Keith probably doesn't have the energy to do any publicity that isn't required of him. Like, I feel he could never bring himself to go on Howard even if he wanted to do it. Its just not his style. He has to be coerced at this point in life. Most likely, they tell him he has to go on Fallon, etc. And they won't tell him he has to go on Howard because they are afraid of what he might say, particularly about Mick. Its sad, but it sounds very much that that could be a logically reason.
Keith on the other hand, would probably love and be great with Howard. Keith is honest and Howard is as honest as you can get in media without twisting things. Problem is, Keith probably doesn't have the energy to do any publicity that isn't required of him. Like, I feel he could never bring himself to go on Howard even if he wanted to do it. Its just not his style. He has to be coerced at this point in life. Most likely, they tell him he has to go on Fallon, etc. And they won't tell him he has to go on Howard because they are afraid of what he might say, particularly about Mick. Its sad, but it sounds very much that that could be a logically reason.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
fahthree
()
Date: October 13, 2013 14:02
Quote
24FPS
Mick would be a drag on Howard's show. He wouldn't drop his guard and actually answer questions truthfully. Keith would probably enjoy it, but he's have to be allowed to smoke in the studio. Mick could not control that situation, which is the positive aspect of Howard's interviewing technique, being able to draw things out of people they wouldn't normally talk about.
An advantage to a Howard interview would be that Howard is not a Rolling Stones geek. His questions would be fresh and might force some amusing recollections from the former Glimmer Twins. I say former because I just realized the two of them probably would not consent, through their people, to be interviewed together.
If Howard is such a terrible blight on our planet, then why has Paul McCartney gone on Howard's show at least 3 or 4 times for extended interviews? It's not like he needs the publicity.
Very well said. It's amazing reading all this criticism being thrown Howard's way from people who probably don't listen and only know what the media report about him from 20 years ago.
Howard Stern plays Take It So Hard this morning
Posted by:
mnewman505
()
Date: October 21, 2013 15:58
Howard started the show by playing "Take It So Hard" this morning talking about how much he loves it and the entire album. "I love this song so much" "This is one of the best Stones songs the Stones never recorded" He played almost the entire song while discussed how much he liked it. Pretty sweet way to start the week.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-21 16:00 by mnewman505.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-21 16:00 by mnewman505.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
oldschool
()
Date: October 21, 2013 18:29
Quote
fahthreeQuote
24FPS
Mick would be a drag on Howard's show. He wouldn't drop his guard and actually answer questions truthfully. Keith would probably enjoy it, but he's have to be allowed to smoke in the studio. Mick could not control that situation, which is the positive aspect of Howard's interviewing technique, being able to draw things out of people they wouldn't normally talk about.
An advantage to a Howard interview would be that Howard is not a Rolling Stones geek. His questions would be fresh and might force some amusing recollections from the former Glimmer Twins. I say former because I just realized the two of them probably would not consent, through their people, to be interviewed together.
If Howard is such a terrible blight on our planet, then why has Paul McCartney gone on Howard's show at least 3 or 4 times for extended interviews? It's not like he needs the publicity.
Very well said. It's amazing reading all this criticism being thrown Howard's way from people who probably don't listen and only know what the media report about him from 20 years ago.
Exactly! Howard is an amazing interviewer who can sense which guests he can get personal with and which ones he has to play it straight with. JMO but I think he would be so excited to interview Mick and or Keef that he would stick with their careers and the music like he does with Macca.
He did an interview with Metallica just before they did the Sirius members special concert and all he talked about was music.
And I agree most of the haters here most likley have not heard him do real interviews with Artists to have any clue what he is like.
Go to youtube and look up his Macca or other musician interviews as they are amazing.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
duke richardson
()
Date: October 21, 2013 18:41
how about Springsteen? has he ever been on that show?
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
Claire_M
()
Date: October 21, 2013 18:44
Springsteen has too much dignity to appear on that show.
Stones are waaaayyy above the odious HS. They should never lower themselves. Mick Jagger is a knight of the realm for heaven's sake.
Stones are waaaayyy above the odious HS. They should never lower themselves. Mick Jagger is a knight of the realm for heaven's sake.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
duke richardson
()
Date: October 21, 2013 20:51
that Graham Nash interview was pretty good..Quote
Claire_M
Springsteen has too much dignity to appear on that show.
Stones are waaaayyy above the odious HS. They should never lower themselves. Mick Jagger is a knight of the realm for heaven's sake.
learned that Joni Mitchell could take a car apart and put it back together..
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
oldschool
()
Date: October 21, 2013 21:25
Quote
Claire_M
Springsteen has too much dignity to appear on that show.
Stones are waaaayyy above the odious HS. They should never lower themselves. Mick Jagger is a knight of the realm for heaven's sake.
Your argument makes no sense as who has more dignity then Paul McCartney? I would also say Graham Nash, Steven Stills, Roger Daltry, Willie Nelson, James Brown, Rod Stewart and many other musicians who have appeared on Sterns show are very dignified.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
2000 LYFH
()
Date: October 21, 2013 22:07
Quote
oldschoolQuote
Claire_M
Springsteen has too much dignity to appear on that show.
Stones are waaaayyy above the odious HS. They should never lower themselves. Mick Jagger is a knight of the realm for heaven's sake.
Your argument makes no sense as who has more dignity then Paul McCartney? I would also say Graham Nash, Steven Stills, Roger Daltry, Willie Nelson, James Brown, Rod Stewart and many other musicians who have appeared on Sterns show are very dignified.
and not to mention all the hundreds of actors and other notables who have been on over the last 25+ years...
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
Claire_M
()
Date: October 21, 2013 22:27
Graham Nash is a lovely man, Sir Paul too. Everyone makes mistakes.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
oldschool
()
Date: October 21, 2013 23:47
Quote
Claire_M
Graham Nash is a lovely man, Sir Paul too. Everyone makes mistakes.
Come on that is the best you can come up with? As if Keith and Ronnie have never done an interview high.
So I guess all the hundreds of musicians and actors who have been on Howards show all these year made a mistake? or can you just not accept the fact that Howard is an amazing interviewer and does not do the ususal fluff interviews we have come to expect from the Stones?
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 22, 2013 01:03
Quote
2000 LYFHQuote
oldschoolQuote
Claire_M
Springsteen has too much dignity to appear on that show.
Stones are waaaayyy above the odious HS. They should never lower themselves. Mick Jagger is a knight of the realm for heaven's sake.
Your argument makes no sense as who has more dignity then Paul McCartney? I would also say Graham Nash, Steven Stills, Roger Daltry, Willie Nelson, James Brown, Rod Stewart and many other musicians who have appeared on Sterns show are very dignified.
and not to mention all the hundreds of actors and other notables who have been on over the last 25+ years...
How the hell many TV shows has Mick been interviewed on in the US?
I recall something on 60 Minutes, what, like 10 years ago for the Licks tour I think, and then there was Barbra Walters I think around 1981 or 82.
The rare occurrence that it is, if he was going to go on a tv show, I'd sure as hell hope he wouldn't go on that moron's program.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
mickschix
()
Date: October 22, 2013 02:07
The question is WHY WOULD the Stones go near Stern? He's trashy! The Stones have class, and classy folks do not go near Howard Stern.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: October 22, 2013 02:12
Quote
treaclefingers
How the hell many TV shows has Mick been interviewed on in the US?
I recall something on 60 Minutes, what, like 10 years ago for the Licks tour I think, and then there was Barbra Walters I think around 1981 or 82.
The rare occurrence that it is, if he was going to go on a tv show, I'd sure as hell hope he wouldn't go on that moron's program.
Not to forget Larry King in 2010.
The full interview is on YouTube in several parts. Lemme know if you wish to see the complete interview.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: October 22, 2013 02:14
Howard Stern is a fart man, and that is not an opinion.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: October 22, 2013 02:15
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
oldschool
()
Date: October 22, 2013 02:31
Quote
mickschix
The question is WHY WOULD the Stones go near Stern? He's trashy! The Stones have class, and classy folks do not go near Howard Stern.
As a women I would understand why you dislike Howard Stern but he would do one of the best Stones interviews you would ever hear should they ever go on his show. Mick is too much of a tight ass to go on but I think Keef would be radio gold if he ever did.
As far as classy folks not going on Stern see the posts above which disprove that theory as hundreds of "classy" actors and musicians regularly go on his show and his interviews with them are always amazing.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-22 02:32 by oldschool.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
Rip This
()
Date: October 22, 2013 03:41
does anyone seriously believe hat Howard Stern wouldn't dare to ask Mick about all the women....and that's where Mick refuses to go..his personal life...off limits.....better chance that Keith Richards would go on...but after writing his autobiography and the dust up from that he may not want to go back there...would be funny though.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 22, 2013 03:46
Quote
stoneheartedQuote
treaclefingers
How the hell many TV shows has Mick been interviewed on in the US?
I recall something on 60 Minutes, what, like 10 years ago for the Licks tour I think, and then there was Barbra Walters I think around 1981 or 82.
The rare occurrence that it is, if he was going to go on a tv show, I'd sure as hell hope he wouldn't go on that moron's program.
Not to forget Larry King in 2010.
The full interview is on YouTube in several parts. Lemme know if you wish to see the complete interview.
And not to forget Geraldo in the 70s for that matter.
...and I guess Mike Douglas for the 60s.
OK, so one interview every ten years on US TV.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: October 22, 2013 04:01
Quote
treaclefingers
OK, so one interview every ten years on US TV.
Which is more than enough, because as everyone knows it's always been his UK TV interviews that are more substantial and interesting, whereas the U.S. interviews tend to be more superficial and based on cliche and sensationalism.
There has never been a U.S. equivalent to "World in Action".
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
hypnohighball
()
Date: October 22, 2013 04:16
This is pretty sad reading the Stern-hater comments here. Sounds like a bunch of grumpy, uptight old men. Oh, that's right........
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: October 22, 2013 04:21
Quote
stoneheartedQuote
treaclefingers
OK, so one interview every ten years on US TV.
Which is more than enough, because as everyone knows it's always been his UK TV interviews that are more substantial and interesting, whereas the U.S. interviews tend to be more superficial and based on cliche and sensationalism.
There has never been a U.S. equivalent to "World in Action".
To be honest, we didn't care that much about Mick Jagger in the U.S. in 1967. We had our own rich supply of rock stars and other celebrities. And if we looked to England it was still the Beatles who were tops.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: October 22, 2013 04:42
Quote
24FPS
To be honest, we didn't care that much about Mick Jagger in the U.S. in 1967. We had our own rich supply of rock stars and other celebrities. And if we looked to England it was still the Beatles who were tops.
Yes, and we obviously didn't care about hearing anything of substance from The Beatles during that time, being so whipped up in various forms of hysteria. It probably wasn't until Mike Douglas in 1972 when John (& Yoko) and later George were on that there was ever a talk show of any intelligence done with members of The Beatles.
The first opportunity was when John and Paul came back from India to discuss TM and Apple and the like on The Tonight Show. But, Johnny Carson went on vacation, so they got a former baseball player a generation older than them to do the interview. I've always thought of that as a sadly squandered opportunity.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
Rip This
()
Date: October 22, 2013 05:27
Quote
hypnohighball
This is pretty sad reading the Stern-hater comments here. Sounds like a bunch of grumpy, uptight old men. Oh, that's right........
Stern is to shock radio what the Beatles were to British Invasion
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: October 22, 2013 06:31
Quote
stoneheartedQuote
24FPS
To be honest, we didn't care that much about Mick Jagger in the U.S. in 1967. We had our own rich supply of rock stars and other celebrities. And if we looked to England it was still the Beatles who were tops.
Yes, and we obviously didn't care about hearing anything of substance from The Beatles during that time, being so whipped up in various forms of hysteria. It probably wasn't until Mike Douglas in 1972 when John (& Yoko) and later George were on that there was ever a talk show of any intelligence done with members of The Beatles.
The first opportunity was when John and Paul came back from India to discuss TM and Apple and the like on The Tonight Show. But, Johnny Carson went on vacation, so they got a former baseball player a generation older than them to do the interview. I've always thought of that as a sadly squandered opportunity.
Well, that's an interesting thought, but I'm not sure the Johnny Carson of 1968 would have had anything of substance to ask the Beatles. Maybe about fame in general, but I'm not sure he would have understood their art. And of course Johnny wasn't there for Jimi Hendrix' appearance on the Tonight Show in the summer of 1969. Once again I'm not sure Carson was geared up for someone like Hendrix.
Dick Cavett was actually the first in America to have Lennon and Ono on in a serious interview situation. And Harrison a year later to promote the Bangla Desh concert. I remember when Carson would have the Maharishi on as some kind of giggling Tiny Tim type oddity.
But I do think the Mike Douglas week long interview was kind of fun.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: October 22, 2013 06:53
Quote
24FPS
I'm not sure the Johnny Carson of 1968 would have had anything of substance to ask the Beatles. Maybe about fame in general, but I'm not sure he would have understood their art.
Yes, you can see how Carson would have been intimidated at that time, or just plain uninterested, but he seemed to have caught up by 1984, which was a bit surreal because Paul was still very much like the Macca of 1968.
It's an amusing interview, because you'll notice the guitar head protruding from the back of McCartney's chair, which Carson uses in an attempt to oblige the audience with a song, but this was Macca's non-touring phase, so he politely--if cagily--refuses.
And yes, the thrust of Carson's initial questions are based around fame in general.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 22, 2013 16:38
Quote
hypnohighball
This is pretty sad reading the Stern-hater comments here. Sounds like a bunch of grumpy, uptight old men. Oh, that's right........
Funny? yes!...annoying? perhaps...sad? huh?!
oh and grumpy old men? ABSOLUTELY!
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
Claire_M
()
Date: October 22, 2013 22:11
Quote
hypnohighball
This is pretty sad reading the Stern-hater comments here. Sounds like a bunch of grumpy, uptight old men. Oh, that's right........
What's sad was watching Stern and his goons sexually humiliate an older woman who clearly had mental health issues. This was in the late 90s or so. They goaded this poor feeble-minded person into removing her top, then made sophomoric comments about her saggy "pancake batter" boobs and played sound effects like a cuckoo clock referring to her mental state.
This is the kind of person you and OldSchool admire. And that is sad.
Re: Why have The Stones never gone on The Howard Stern Show?
Posted by:
dadrob
()
Date: October 22, 2013 22:21
Wood did the Stern show and admitted he was on crack..Stern thought he was joking. I have a copy of that show someplace
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Amarant , bobo , ChrisMahavishnu , crholmstrom , deardoctor , falo01 , filoca , intinublado , jstones , latvianinexile , mighty stork , Nobbi82 , rastakeith , riccardo99 , steffialicia , stonesmuziekfan , thecitadel , TumblinDice76 , WorriedAboutYou
Guests:
1554
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10