Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: Previous1234567Next
Current Page: 6 of 7
Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: Midnight Toker ()
Date: January 20, 2016 23:36

a bore of a song

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: harlem shuffle ()
Date: January 21, 2016 01:46

Some more Mick Jagger bashing from The Richards clan again as usual.
How about talking about Keith,s mistakes over the last 25 years?
How about his ability to play guitar,very bad in conserts.
He can,t even play Brown Sugar correctly

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: Testify ()
Date: January 21, 2016 02:22

Don't Stop, small masterpiece!

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: January 21, 2016 02:53

Quote
GasLightStreet
Another one of Mick's solo song ideas he "saved" for the Stones.

He's had better songs. He's had worse songs. Don't Stop is not like Start Me Up at all yet it was framed as being like Start Me Up. So, on that note:


For me, doing a solo album or a Stones album is all the same, with one proviso: that when I'm writing for the Rolling Stones I don't mind if the song sounds like the ones the Stones do, whereas if I'm writing, but not recording, with the Rolling Stones, I don't want the song to contain too many of the clichés that one associates with the Rolling Stones, so I try quite hard to avoid them. Before the release of Forty Licks, I wrote Don't Stop in the same period that I was writing the songs for my solo album, and I just put it to one side and said to myself, This sounds very much like the Rolling Stones to me. It might be very useful in the coming months, but I'll leave it for now and I won't record it because I think it's going to be better for the Stones.
- Mick Jagger, 2003



(It's) kind of a stock Mick riff. It's quite a simple song. Mick had the words and the phrasing, which was good, and Keith and I were kind of, All right, we'll give it a try. It ended up sounding like another Start Me Up, out of that stable.
- Ron Wood, October 2002


Woody said it.


Don't Stop is a classic Mick song. I could see that Mick had designed it to come across well in large venues, a Start Me Up-style crowd song, with a simple kind of message and a straightforward sructure. Because Mick is playing guitar, there isn't so much room for Keith, but he did manage to find a way of stabbing away at it, so that he was semi-happy with the result. I took on the stronger guitar part, because I was covering for Keith and also delivering what Mick was expecting from the way he had written the song: he wanted a trademark Woody guitar solo.
- Ron Wood, 2003


Mick played guitar on SOME GIRLS and they managed.


Don't Stop is the single-y one.
- Mick Jagger, 2002


What else can he say about it? He had to say something. And he says that about one of the 4 new songs, of which Stealing My Heart and Keys To Your Love, the blandest Stones music since DIRTY WORK, are absolute shit; that's awesome. Instead of, I dunno, writing and recording good songs.


Don't Stop is probably not as good a song as something like Satisfaction, but as long as it fits in the show it works. What is interesting is that unlike those songs from the 1960s, it will never, in our lifetime, get played as much and acquire the patina of age. But a lot of the songs that we play live were not important songs when they came out... (A) tune like Don't Stop might - or might not - one day acquire the same patina. What is certain is that if you don't play a song onstage, it will never have a chance to be anything.
- Mick Jagger, 2003


They've had the LICKS tours, the BANG tours and the 50 and whatever tours, yet it was only played on the LICKS tour. How is it to acquire the patina if it's not played? Does Mick even remember it? In Mick's words it has officially has not and will not ever "be anything". Doom And Gloom got the same treatment even though it was played in more years than Don't Stop - but a lot less shows.


I can probably live without Don't Stop, although I enjoyed playing it - it's a pretty little thing and you can sizzle it off, but there's not much substance to it.
- Keith Richards, 2003


[www.timeisonourside.com]

mick is amazingly clear of thought when he says, it's probably not as good as Satisfaction. that's nothing short of genius.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: January 21, 2016 07:28

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
GasLightStreet
Don't Stop is probably not as good a song as something like Satisfaction...
- Mick Jagger, 2003

mick is amazingly clear of thought when he says, it's probably not as good as Satisfaction. that's nothing short of genius.

Holy crap.

You're right.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: Hairball ()
Date: January 21, 2016 08:17

It has an all around sissy-pansy-wimpy vibe to it that not many Stones songs have - cringe worthy.
Streets of Love is another...

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: January 21, 2016 08:18

Quote
Hairball
It has an all around sissy-pansy-wimpy vibe to it that not many Stones songs have - cringe worthy.
Streets of Love is another...

Hairball, I think I love youuuuu.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: matxil ()
Date: January 21, 2016 11:18

Quote
harlem shuffle
Some more Mick Jagger bashing from The Richards clan again as usual.
How about talking about Keith,s mistakes over the last 25 years?
How about his ability to play guitar,very bad in conserts.
He can,t even play Brown Sugar correctly

I don't know about you, but I, normally, tend to blame the guy who is responsible. If Keith @#$%& up during a concert, I blame Keith. If Mick makes a song like Sweet Neocon, I blame Mick. I had no idea who came up with Don't Stop, apparantly it was Mick, so then I blame him. I could blame the rest for going along with it, but I guess they have all gone tired of fighting.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-01-21 11:21 by matxil.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Date: January 21, 2016 11:43

Quote
harlem shuffle
Some more Mick Jagger bashing from The Richards clan again as usual.
How about talking about Keith,s mistakes over the last 25 years?
How about his ability to play guitar,very bad in conserts.
He can,t even play Brown Sugar correctly

Would you be able to do it, after a major stroke?

I think he plays that intro mighty fine NOW.

[www.youtube.com]




Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: crholmstrom ()
Date: January 21, 2016 11:49

After the 2nd show I saw on that tour, I started using "Don't Stop" as a good time to shop for tshirts, get a drink etc. It's ok but was definitely the week point of the set for me. For shows I've seen, 40 Licks was the last truly stellar Stones shows. I saw a bunch of shows on that tour & on ABB. I saw them @ the Joint in Vegas & the next night @ MGM Grand. "Sticky Fingers" night. It was actually better than the club show. "Brown Sugar" on the small stage & stripped down was amazing!

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: Doxa ()
Date: January 21, 2016 15:01

Quote
GasLightStreet



Don't Stop is a classic Mick song. I could see that Mick had designed it to come across well in large venues, a Start Me Up-style crowd song, with a simple kind of message and a straightforward sructure. Because Mick is playing guitar, there isn't so much room for Keith, but he did manage to find a way of stabbing away at it, so that he was semi-happy with the result. I took on the stronger guitar part, because I was covering for Keith and also delivering what Mick was expecting from the way he had written the song: he wanted a trademark Woody guitar solo.
- Ron Wood, 2003



Don't Stop is probably not as good a song as something like Satisfaction, but as long as it fits in the show it works. What is interesting is that unlike those songs from the 1960s, it will never, in our lifetime, get played as much and acquire the patina of age. But a lot of the songs that we play live were not important songs when they came out... (A) tune like Don't Stop might - or might not - one day acquire the same patina. What is certain is that if you don't play a song onstage, it will never have a chance to be anything.
- Mick Jagger, 2003



I think those two quotes capture rather nicely the basic problem of many latter-day Stones efforts: they are not designed to be great recordings, but more like templates to be played live. So the recorded songs are not artistic aims of their own, but just means to entertain the live audiences. Probably that is the result of the Stones having been basically just a touring live band for so long, and not any longer any recording artists. They think everything in terms of playing live. And I think the latter affects on the nature of the songs: to entertain the crowds, the songs needs to be Stones-cliche-full - that's the kind of material Jagger knows to work. So I guess for Jagger a song to work for a Stones audience, would basically mean that it resembles, say, "Start Me Up". The result is doomed to be conservative (and probably not inspiring much creative juices). So he picks up those songs for a Stones project.

A BIGGER BANG is like a "Don't Stop" made for as album: a bunch of songs made for a potential live use. But the problem turned out to be that the songs weren't inspiring enough for such a use (who got bored first, them or the audience, I don't know). So they dropped them. And I don't blame them.

Jagger seems to forget that the songs that have acquired the "patina" today were brilliant studio recordings in the first place. That's what they were aimed to be. Probably for that reason they had also the potential to grow up.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-01-21 15:06 by Doxa.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: January 22, 2016 17:31

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
harlem shuffle
Some more Mick Jagger bashing from The Richards clan again as usual.
How about talking about Keith,s mistakes over the last 25 years?
How about his ability to play guitar,very bad in conserts.
He can,t even play Brown Sugar correctly

Would you be able to do it, after a major stroke?

I think he plays that intro mighty fine NOW.

[www.youtube.com]



so was he having strokes while playing scarf me up then? if so, brilliant effort.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: January 22, 2016 18:34

I think the quotes from both Mick and Keith about their solo careers, and giving the "stonesy" songs to the stones and keeping the others for theirs solo albums points to part of the problem.

I have a hard time imagining Mick thinking that "Sympathy for the Devil" was a stonesy song when he first came up with it; ditto Keith with "Gimme Shelter". It's no wonder that their albums from the 80s on have sounded like cliches; the two main songwriters have been deciding which of their songs to contribute based on whether they sound like their own interpretation of what songs are "Stonesy"

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: January 22, 2016 22:06

Quote
Turner68
I think the quotes from both Mick and Keith about their solo careers, and giving the "stonesy" songs to the stones and keeping the others for theirs solo albums points to part of the problem.

I have a hard time imagining Mick thinking that "Sympathy for the Devil" was a stonesy song when he first came up with it; ditto Keith with "Gimme Shelter". It's no wonder that their albums from the 80s on have sounded like cliches; the two main songwriters have been deciding which of their songs to contribute based on whether they sound like their own interpretation of what songs are "Stonesy"

that is a very fair point.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: January 23, 2016 02:53

Quote
Doxa
Quote
GasLightStreet
Don't Stop is a classic Mick song. I could see that Mick had designed it to come across well in large venues, a Start Me Up-style crowd song, with a simple kind of message and a straightforward structure. Because Mick is playing guitar, there isn't so much room for Keith, but he did manage to find a way of stabbing away at it, so that he was semi-happy with the result. I took on the stronger guitar part, because I was covering for Keith and also delivering what Mick was expecting from the way he had written the song: he wanted a trademark Woody guitar solo.
- Ron Wood, 2003



Don't Stop is probably not as good a song as something like Satisfaction, but as long as it fits in the show it works. What is interesting is that unlike those songs from the 1960s, it will never, in our lifetime, get played as much and acquire the patina of age. But a lot of the songs that we play live were not important songs when they came out... (A) tune like Don't Stop might - or might not - one day acquire the same patina. What is certain is that if you don't play a song onstage, it will never have a chance to be anything.
- Mick Jagger, 2003



I think those two quotes capture rather nicely the basic problem of many latter-day Stones efforts: they are not designed to be great recordings, but more like templates to be played live. So the recorded songs are not artistic aims of their own, but just means to entertain the live audiences. Probably that is the result of the Stones having been basically just a touring live band for so long, and not any longer any recording artists. They think everything in terms of playing live. And I think the latter affects on the nature of the songs: to entertain the crowds, the songs needs to be Stones-cliche-full - that's the kind of material Jagger knows to work. So I guess for Jagger a song to work for a Stones audience, would basically mean that it resembles, say, "Start Me Up". The result is doomed to be conservative (and probably not inspiring much creative juices). So he picks up those songs for a Stones project.

A BIGGER BANG is like a "Don't Stop" made for as album: a bunch of songs made for a potential live use. But the problem turned out to be that the songs weren't inspiring enough for such a use (who got bored first, them or the audience, I don't know). So they dropped them. And I don't blame them.

Jagger seems to forget that the songs that have acquired the "patina" today were brilliant studio recordings in the first place. That's what they were aimed to be. Probably for that reason they had also the potential to grow up.

- Doxa

Great points. Although I agree with what you said about the songs on A BIGGER BANG, it seems that they played the wrong songs from that album: none of them are worthy of being played live. It makes for a decent latter day Stones album because, as Mick liked to talk about the goofiness of Emotional Rescue with the falsetto etc, it's the kind of stuff that only happens in a studio. And by that, if you simply listen to the words from Biggest Mistake, She Saw Me Coming, Dangerous Beauty, Laugh..., It Won't Take Long and Let Me Down Slow, those are studio tailored. Live they would be a disaster.

A big reason for that? A great - a perfect example: Shattered has a lot a lyrical sphere of the same ilk, it's very busy and some nice rhyming etc - but live, the song is completely different and, at least in 1994, had swagger. The other live performances of it Mick's been able to blast the words out with the band blasting the song out (SOME GIRLS and TATTOO YOU tours).

Another thing about Shattered vs anything from ABB is... it has patina. It was also on the radio as a single and it was played on more than one tour. Which is part of the astounding shock of them never playing Emotional Rescue live: it had the patina as well. It's a huge song. But they'd rather play Miss You for 25 minutes. So they finally got around to playing it and... well, it would've been nice if they'd given a shit about it. Flopping through it like a fish on a dock doesn't give the song a chance to obtain a live patina for an entire/only one tour like, ha ha, Don't Stop did.

Another thing you pointed out was what a lot of us have known: the Stones have been imitating themselves. Yet they do these new recordings like Don't Stop to let people know they're not like The Beach Boys and just playing the same crap over and over and over when... that's what they've been doing anyway?

It is what it is and 50 AND COUNTING's set lists and since have proved that, even with another ridiculous example of how they've not yet 100% become a nostalgia act by plonking out Doom And Gloom and One More Shot for another pointless hits comp but also the set list being a majority of songs up to 1981, with the odd exception for You Got Me Rocking, Slipping Away and Out Of Control occasionally.

It's a big reason why, to me, they stopped being a creative force (ie making interesting inventive albums) after UNDERCOVER. STEEL WHEELS was the beginning of the cruise control of sounding like the Stones or some like to say, Vegas. Perhaps the only reason it's somewhat heralded is because of Bill Wyman and it was a, at the time, amazing fantastic comeback from The Disaster Of 1986.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: Rocky Dijon ()
Date: January 23, 2016 04:00

I would suggest that when either of them writes more often than not they have to put themselves into a certain frame of mind, remembering what it was like. Who thinks when Mick and Jerry were living in the English countryside with their babies and hanging out with Jack Nicholson and Angelica Huston that Mick's lyrics on DIRTY WORK (and yes, much of the final lyrics are Mick's) reflect that person? It's a role he's assuming. Even Keith, when he's honest, says he plays a role. Fans might want to think he's "that character" but that's why Steve Jordan slowly building him back up was essential to breaking him out of his writer's block and getting him back into something approximating his Winos mode for CROSSEYED HEART. Songs like "Don't Stop" and "One More Shot" and much of what they have written for 30 years now is about trying to recall a frame of mind, an attitude. They say as much as do those around them. Who thinks you're getting what 72 year olds live and breathe in their songs any more than when they were 62 or 52 or 42? They're not really a gang any more, they're not really best friends any more, they're not really outlaws and rock stars to the degree that their images were created by what they lived. For three decades the art has been about reminding audiences of that identity. Building a body of work that fits in with what they do which is playing their old hits for fans who want to remember. That may sound cynical but there is much truth in it. And sure Keith wants to make art and Keith wants to grow the music up, but the truth is Keith wants to keep making the money just as much as Mick and he is equally guilty of trying to paint by numbers when he taps into some sort of creativity. It's nothing shameful. They grew old. They grew apart. They've kept it together to make a living which is terrific, but pretending they're still "The Glimmer Twins" and that the songs still mean what they did when they were 25 is not realistic or fair.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-01-23 04:03 by Rocky Dijon.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: MileHigh ()
Date: January 23, 2016 06:36

Exactly, Don't Stop was Mick (or the Rolling Stones) trying to be the Rolling Stones. Bill Wyman has the right formula for this time in their lives. For the past 20 years, Bill Wyman has been playing stuff with his band that they all enjoy playing, period. They wander around musically and try to have fun doing it with no pressure to be anything. Just play for the pure enjoyment of it.

I don't think there is any more "Rolling Stones juice" left in the Rolling Stones. Who cares anymore, our cup has runneth over and they really pleased their fans with the '89 and onward tours but that should come to an end. Perhaps after the South American tour and the very possible extended two or three year break, the gas tank will be empty. It would be fitting if they ended it in South America because of their genuine Rolling Stones hysteria like it was 1966 or something.

If Mick and the boys would really enjoy jamming in a big room with 50 people hanging out, and playing anything they want, then that's what they should do. Do it just for the fun of doing it with no pressure to be the "Rolling Stones." However, I am not convinced that will ever happen. If Keith puts his guitar down for more than a year, I think it will be very hard for him to get back to where he is right now.

It's time for us to leave Mick, Keith, Ronnie and Charlie alone.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: January 23, 2016 12:55

Quote
MileHigh


It's time for us to leave Mick, Keith, Ronnie and Charlie alone.

Surely this is not what they meant when they sang "Don't stop"!!!

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: Doxa ()
Date: January 23, 2016 14:41

Quote
GasLightStreet
Quote
Doxa
Quote
GasLightStreet
Don't Stop is a classic Mick song. I could see that Mick had designed it to come across well in large venues, a Start Me Up-style crowd song, with a simple kind of message and a straightforward structure. Because Mick is playing guitar, there isn't so much room for Keith, but he did manage to find a way of stabbing away at it, so that he was semi-happy with the result. I took on the stronger guitar part, because I was covering for Keith and also delivering what Mick was expecting from the way he had written the song: he wanted a trademark Woody guitar solo.
- Ron Wood, 2003



Don't Stop is probably not as good a song as something like Satisfaction, but as long as it fits in the show it works. What is interesting is that unlike those songs from the 1960s, it will never, in our lifetime, get played as much and acquire the patina of age. But a lot of the songs that we play live were not important songs when they came out... (A) tune like Don't Stop might - or might not - one day acquire the same patina. What is certain is that if you don't play a song onstage, it will never have a chance to be anything.
- Mick Jagger, 2003



I think those two quotes capture rather nicely the basic problem of many latter-day Stones efforts: they are not designed to be great recordings, but more like templates to be played live. So the recorded songs are not artistic aims of their own, but just means to entertain the live audiences. Probably that is the result of the Stones having been basically just a touring live band for so long, and not any longer any recording artists. They think everything in terms of playing live. And I think the latter affects on the nature of the songs: to entertain the crowds, the songs needs to be Stones-cliche-full - that's the kind of material Jagger knows to work. So I guess for Jagger a song to work for a Stones audience, would basically mean that it resembles, say, "Start Me Up". The result is doomed to be conservative (and probably not inspiring much creative juices). So he picks up those songs for a Stones project.

A BIGGER BANG is like a "Don't Stop" made for as album: a bunch of songs made for a potential live use. But the problem turned out to be that the songs weren't inspiring enough for such a use (who got bored first, them or the audience, I don't know). So they dropped them. And I don't blame them.

Jagger seems to forget that the songs that have acquired the "patina" today were brilliant studio recordings in the first place. That's what they were aimed to be. Probably for that reason they had also the potential to grow up.

- Doxa

Great points. Although I agree with what you said about the songs on A BIGGER BANG, it seems that they played the wrong songs from that album: none of them are worthy of being played live. It makes for a decent latter day Stones album because, as Mick liked to talk about the goofiness of Emotional Rescue with the falsetto etc, it's the kind of stuff that only happens in a studio. And by that, if you simply listen to the words from Biggest Mistake, She Saw Me Coming, Dangerous Beauty, Laugh..., It Won't Take Long and Let Me Down Slow, those are studio tailored. Live they would be a disaster.

A big reason for that? A great - a perfect example: Shattered has a lot a lyrical sphere of the same ilk, it's very busy and some nice rhyming etc - but live, the song is completely different and, at least in 1994, had swagger. The other live performances of it Mick's been able to blast the words out with the band blasting the song out (SOME GIRLS and TATTOO YOU tours).

Another thing about Shattered vs anything from ABB is... it has patina. It was also on the radio as a single and it was played on more than one tour. Which is part of the astounding shock of them never playing Emotional Rescue live: it had the patina as well. It's a huge song. But they'd rather play Miss You for 25 minutes. So they finally got around to playing it and... well, it would've been nice if they'd given a shit about it. Flopping through it like a fish on a dock doesn't give the song a chance to obtain a live patina for an entire/only one tour like, ha ha, Don't Stop did.

Another thing you pointed out was what a lot of us have known: the Stones have been imitating themselves. Yet they do these new recordings like Don't Stop to let people know they're not like The Beach Boys and just playing the same crap over and over and over when... that's what they've been doing anyway?

It is what it is and 50 AND COUNTING's set lists and since have proved that, even with another ridiculous example of how they've not yet 100% become a nostalgia act by plonking out Doom And Gloom and One More Shot for another pointless hits comp but also the set list being a majority of songs up to 1981, with the odd exception for You Got Me Rocking, Slipping Away and Out Of Control occasionally.

It's a big reason why, to me, they stopped being a creative force (ie making interesting inventive albums) after UNDERCOVER. STEEL WHEELS was the beginning of the cruise control of sounding like the Stones or some like to say, Vegas. Perhaps the only reason it's somewhat heralded is because of Bill Wyman and it was a, at the time, amazing fantastic comeback from The Disaster Of 1986.

A great post, Skippy, thank you. I was thinking of what actual songs MIck means by having a "patina" due their 'live history', since they cannot be theit typical war horses, because those songs are to be remembered had the Stones played them ever in a concert or not: "Satisfaction", "Paint It Black", "Flash", "Shelter", "Sympathy", Fighting Man", "Honky Tonk", "Brown Sugar", "Miss You", "Start me Up"... They are a part of cultural heritage or a collective historical consciousness, the radio keeps them well-known, and compilations like HOT ROCKS, FORTY LICKS, GRRR... always to be found on album charts, plus all the use of them in those cinema, TV series, docus, ads, etc. It looks more like the Stones by playing them live are enjoying or even using the success and familiarity of them than making those songs memorable by playing them. That's the material with which they gather their biggest audiences (and money).

So what are those songs that have acquired patina by them playing them live? If we look at their 'war horses' section, my suggestion what Mick might think as such are things like "Midnight Rambler", "Tumbling Dice" and "It's Only ROck'n'Roll", probably even "You Can't Always Get What You Want". Could be that we find those songs odd, since we might loved them by the first listening, but from his point of view, their initial reception probably was not such a triumph he might have hoped for (don't know about "Can't Always Get" though). "Rambler was basically a deep album cut, which reputation grew up due its live versions (YA-YA'S being very influental). Both "Dice" and "Only Rock'n'Roll" were rather chart disappointments by what they were used to by then. But that didn't stop them playing them live, treating them like any of their huge hits. Maybe that helped to cement their status as classical hits.

But it could be that Mick has songs like "Live With Me", "Bitch", "All Down The Line", or, yeah, "Shattered" in his mind - songs that are not exactly 'war horses' and not probably as well-known initially as typical war horses, but whenever played they seem to work very well... But is their 'patina' actually based on their accidental play? That they have made them stand-out Stones tracks by playing them live? Maybe there is some point in that - at least the existence of songs is acknowledged or recognized by giving them a place in their set list. That's why "All Down The Line" is remembered better than some other rocker in EXILE (say, "Soul Survivor"). Probably we could say the same of "You Got Me Rocking" in regards to VOODOO LOUNGE. But then again, Jagger was sincerily surprised how well things like "Shine A Light" were received when they played them in 1995. Sometimes it feels like Jagger can't see how well people (his audience) knows their classical stuff. Even with bigger audiences, things like "Can't You Hear Me Knocking", "Moonlight Mile", etc. seem always get a warm reception (but shit, so did "Streets of Love" when it once played during European leg of recent tour/s).

But what he says of "Don't Stop" - or probably he could say of "Doom and Gloom" - can that really applied or compare to any of above cases? Or could we say it failed the test "You Got Me Rocking" and probably "Out of Control" - or many other older songs ages ago - passed?

But still I find it hard to believe that the 'patina' acquired is much to do with their playing the songs live. In a very small amount of instances we can claim the thing being so. Like GasLightStreet pointed out, the patina is usually and msotly based on some other things (even though playing them live might give a new recognition for a 'deep' album cut/'forgotten' hit song or so). I would claim that the songs being so good initially that people have loved them without even heard the Stones playing them live in most cases. People actually have listened and still listen to those classical records in which they occur. Or the collections at least. Or just by keeping the ears open...

But the thing is, Jagger's looks all these from a radically different perspective than any of us fans. We look at him and he looks at us - hardcore fans, casual fans, customers in the very large sense of term he needs to cope with or take care of. He is testing his act every night he performs and he has an incredible amount of experience and knowledge not any other human being probably is able to gain. Probably there is something we cannot understand in his pragmatism, but then again, it could be that we see something in him and his doings he cannot ever grasp.

Sorry if my post is rather confusing with no clear coherence - I am not even sure what I try to say... Interpretating Mick Jagger is not the easiest task in the world...grinning smiley

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-01-23 14:47 by Doxa.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: January 26, 2016 22:44

Two patinas going on, perhaps: one is the song itself. It may not be a #1 single or even a Top 10 single... but it may have stamina. It may maintain some sense of moment, like Tumbling Dice, Shattered or Emotional Rescue. With and without being played live, because radio likes them. They're on hits albums. They have stamina.

The other patina is probably the one Mick was going on about: being played live enough. Songs like Midnight Rambler that may not have any logical reason to be played live because they are so long, they clearly enjoyed playing live on a tour that was promoting an album that wasn't out yet that the song came from.

They would never do that now. But that song... it's been played on so many tours.

Take a crap song like You Got Me Rocking. It's the newest warhorse. It's possible not many people know it due to:

- not bothering to listen to a recent Stones album
- it's not on the radio

Yet people who go see the Stones at least once on every tour since 1994 when possible probably know it because of the 'Hey hey' parts - it's memorable. At least during the BRIDGES tour they sped it up and made it somewhat palatable for NO SECURITY.


Don't Stop, Doom And Gloom... just tasteless bubblegum to chew on for no good reason. They add nothing to the discography of the Stones other than "new".

And new does not equate to good.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: stanlove ()
Date: January 26, 2016 22:46

Below average song. It is accepted by some because they Stones don't put out anything better anymore. A song of this quality if released anytime from 1964-1989 would be rightfully based as weak..

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: LeonidP ()
Date: January 27, 2016 21:13

I liked it from the beginning, it is the only 1 of the 4 new tracks at the time that I can listen to. Not a great single, but considering the options, it was the only choice. It's not as good as Love Is Strong or even Mixed Emotions, but it will do!

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: HMS ()
Date: January 27, 2016 21:29

Keys To Your Love and Stealing My Heart are very,very enjoyable songs too. Each would have been a great single, although Don´t Stop of course is the best of those three songs. These songs are soft-rocking, radio-friendly tracks, but very good, very catchy indeed.

But the true gem of this Forty-Licks-quartet of new songs is Losing My Touch, simply striking. Keith at his very best, marvelous. Not one single song on CH can catch up with this.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: spsimmons ()
Date: January 28, 2016 04:34

Love the song, love the guitar solo. Very nice latter day Stones!

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: bitusa2012 ()
Date: January 28, 2016 04:37

We like the word "patina" now, don't we?

Rod

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: January 28, 2016 08:12

I've often wondered why this isn't a war horse

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: matxil ()
Date: January 28, 2016 11:26

Quote
Turner68
I've often wondered why this isn't a war horse

Because it would be more like a war pony.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: January 28, 2016 15:08

Quote
HMS
Keys To Your Love and Stealing My Heart are very,very enjoyable songs too. Each would have been a great single, although Don´t Stop of course is the best of those three songs. These songs are soft-rocking, radio-friendly tracks, but very good, very catchy indeed.

But the true gem of this Forty-Licks-quartet of new songs is Losing My Touch, simply striking. Keith at his very best, marvelous. Not one single song on CH can catch up with this.

They're not enjoyable at all, those horrible two songs you mentioned. Why do you like bad music?

Losing My Touch is nice, though. Better than anything on CROSSEYED HEART? That's a stretch considering the styles of music he did for that LP. But it would fit in.

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Date: January 28, 2016 15:09

grinning smiley

Re: Track Talk: Don't Stop
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: February 3, 2016 12:17

Quote
GasLightStreet
Quote
HMS
Keys To Your Love and Stealing My Heart are very,very enjoyable songs too. Each would have been a great single, although Don´t Stop of course is the best of those three songs. These songs are soft-rocking, radio-friendly tracks, but very good, very catchy indeed.

But the true gem of this Forty-Licks-quartet of new songs is Losing My Touch, simply striking. Keith at his very best, marvelous. Not one single song on CH can catch up with this.

They're not enjoyable at all, those horrible two songs you mentioned. Why do you like bad music?

Losing My Touch is nice, though. Better than anything on CROSSEYED HEART? That's a stretch considering the styles of music he did for that LP. But it would fit in.

Losing my touch isn't good enough to be on cross eyed heart
Stealing my heart isn't good enough to be mastered much less released.

Goto Page: Previous1234567Next
Current Page: 6 of 7


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 2009
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home