I always thought it was a bland market-research ballad, but not terrible. I think what really killed it for me was the deal with the soap opera. There was a deal with some daytime soap in the US where they played SOL as background music to a story line about two characters having an affair. I still cringe just thinking about it. If I remember correctly, Keith did a Howard Stern interview where Howard brought this up, and Keith tried to change the subject, then finally said something to the effect of 'that was Mick's attempt to market to the women who used to find him attractive.' Wish Mick would think about Otis Redding and give us a new 'You Got the Blues' instead of Glenn Ballard next time he writes a ballad.

[www.non-filters.com]

I like Streets of Love, it's a very well crafted pop song with a good hook. Everyone I've played it for thinks it does sound like the Stones.

It's also better than any Mick-sung ballad on Voodoo Lounge.

There's really nothing wrong with doing a good commercial pop song and not sounding like blues rock every time. They have done it all before to varying degrees of success.

Quote
KeefintheNight82

There's really nothing wrong with doing a good commercial pop song and not sounding like blues rock every time. They have done it all before to varying degrees of success.

Correct. Except this isn't one of the good ones.

i try not to get in on these "this song is great"-"this song sucks" threads because its just an opinion.people hear things differently and it becomes about as meaningless as debating an ice cream flavor.

having said that..this song doesnt suck,it doesnt even achieve suckness.its a failed attempt at making a hit single,mick sounds[once again] as if hes reciting the lyrics instead of singing them,the lyrics are cliche,they dont flow..awful bad,awful truth ,so you finish the setence for him ..awful song.the melody is lame,the song drags on too long...

its like neocon- maybe if green day hadnt already sold 5 million copies of "american idiot" expressing basically the same opinion it wouldnt have looked so contrived.even if you agreed with the politics it was just ...weak

you could almost see them going down the list-hit single,check-fast rocker,check-blues,check-keith songs,check....they need a producer,badly.

The thing about SOL is it was on it's way to becoming a different song. Even strong critics said it was the highlight of the live shows. They should have kept on developing it. You know...playing your new single in concert.

Quote
KeefintheNight82
I like Streets of Love, it's a very well crafted pop song with a good hook. Everyone I've played it for thinks it does sound like the Stones.

It's also better than any Mick-sung ballad on Voodoo Lounge.

Not even in the same universe as Out Of Tears. That song is superb, their last great ballad.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
KeefintheNight82

There's really nothing wrong with doing a good commercial pop song and not sounding like blues rock every time. They have done it all before to varying degrees of success.

Correct. Except this isn't one of the good ones.

Well, if that's what you think, fine. I still think it's a good lite pop song with a catchy hook.

Quote
skipstone

Quote
KeefintheNight82
I like Streets of Love, it's a very well crafted pop song with a good hook. Everyone I've played it for thinks it does sound like the Stones.

It's also better than any Mick-sung ballad on Voodoo Lounge.

Not even in the same universe as Out Of Tears. That song is superb, their last great ballad.

It's a bit hyperbolic and rediculous to call either of those songs superb.

I'd rate them about equal. Both are tossed off pieces of pop fluff. But Streets of Love has the more interesting melody/hook.

Had it been Macca or Phil Collins singing / a Macca or Phil Collins song it would have reached the tops.
Imagine a horrendous song like "Mull of Kintyre" becoming No. 1 and selling millions of copies. If it had been made by Stones it would have been criticized as the worst Stones song ever.
That's the difference.

As much as I think this song is a very bad outtake from the even worse Goddess ITD, when they did it live in the Amsterdam Arena it was one of the better moments of the gig, which had very, very few better moments.

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs
As much as I think this song is a very bad outtake from the even worse Goddess ITD, when they did it live in the Amsterdam Arena it was one of the better moments of the gig, which had very, very few better moments.

Mathijs

You're sick. Now i know i will beat you this sunday.

Quote
Mathijs
As much as I think this song is a very bad outtake from the even worse Goddess ITD, when they did it live in the Amsterdam Arena it was one of the better moments of the gig, which had very, very few better moments.

Mathijs

I think the reason why "Streets of Love" turned out be such a crowd pleaser when performed live was due to the band finding some kind of fresh inspiration to try something different. it is probably the only song from A BIGGER BANG that they need to do something else than to play with an autopilot (like they do with "Rough Justice", etc.). The audience reflected that, too. A sign of life. Not much to do with the quality of the song.

- Doxa

Quote
alimente

Quote
Gazza
What didnt help was that after keeping us waiting eight years for a new Stones album, THIS (being the first song released to radio stations and the first single in most countries) was what they chose to tell the world that they were 'back'.

Yes, that is exactly the point. I would forgive them such an "awful bad, awful sad, awful mad, awful...whatever" trash lyrics song if they were still forced to spill out two albums and three or four singles a year like in the sixties, but for a studio comeback after eight (!!!!!) years (I do not count the 40 Licks new tracks as a full album session) I simply expected some more quality stuff than what was actually on ABB in general, and Streets Of Love in particular.

Streets Of Love - some may like it, I dont - is just not the kind of stuff I and many others expected from the Stones after an 8 years gap since Bridges To Babylon.

The irony of A BIGGER BANG is that after 8 years of rest the band used less energy to it than any album they did since mid-60's. I think the album is an insult towards their audiences. They probably think that a casual Rolling Stones fan is an idiot. Probably he/she is. The only function I can imagine the album have is to be offered as an introduction to a person who has never heard any Rolling Stones album. If he/she already is, A BIGGER BANG does not have any function.

If A BIGGER BANG is all they have to offer these days I hope they will NEVER enter a studio again.

But just my opinion.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-03-26 10:43 by Doxa.

Streets of Love is my favorite on ABB because it's a ballad with 'Little Indian girl'-qualitys...Hi Hi Hi

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Mathijs
As much as I think this song is a very bad outtake from the even worse Goddess ITD, when they did it live in the Amsterdam Arena it was one of the better moments of the gig, which had very, very few better moments.

Mathijs

I think the reason why "Streets of Love" turned out be such a crowd pleaser when performed live was due to the band finding some kind of fresh inspiration to try something different. it is probably the only song from A BIGGER BANG that they need to do something else than to play with an autopilot (like they do with "Rough Justice", etc.). The audience reflected that, too. A sign of life. Not much to do with the quality of the song.

- Doxa

C'mon! Rough Justice is so much a better song than Streets Of Love! Autopilot? Maybe, but still it rocks! Especialli live in the 2007 leg it was awesome!

It's a calculated attempt to write a Coldplay-style festival-singalong power ballad for the Stones, which is why it works better live than on record. I remember singing along to it quite happily myself at Twickenham. The trouble is that 90% of Coldplay's crowd know their ballads and join in, but almost nobody at Twickenham knew Streets of Love...

I don't particularly dislike it myself, but I can see why people do. It's written in a style which was already an ageing cliche, which we've already heard done as well or better a hundred times from other bands. Every other rock band descends to writing cheesy power-ballads - but we expect better from the Rolling Stones.

I think of it as an unfinished song.

Streets of Love has a very good chorus. The falsetto part just sticks in my head. It has something that other ballads don't have.

The verse has the C to Am chromatic run that is not at all original (in fact it is quite common for guitar based ballads) but is very powerful on paper.

What I don't like on the studio version is above all the guitarwork: it is probably the most banal and uninspired playing by them ever recorded. Live, SOL takes life thanks to Ronnies tasteful soul licks on strat, and Keith's touches on acoustic. That is exactly what is missing on the ABB SOL.

Second, Jagger over dramatized the contrast between verse and chorus.

Third, the parts of the song are very predictable. They should have mixed things up a little.

C

Quote
Mathijs
As much as I think this song is a very bad outtake from the even worse Goddess ITD, when they did it live in the Amsterdam Arena it was one of the better moments of the gig, which had very, very few better moments.

Mathijs

schocking coming from you .

Quote
Doxa

Quote
alimente

Quote
Gazza
What didnt help was that after keeping us waiting eight years for a new Stones album, THIS (being the first song released to radio stations and the first single in most countries) was what they chose to tell the world that they were 'back'.

Yes, that is exactly the point. I would forgive them such an "awful bad, awful sad, awful mad, awful...whatever" trash lyrics song if they were still forced to spill out two albums and three or four singles a year like in the sixties, but for a studio comeback after eight (!!!!!) years (I do not count the 40 Licks new tracks as a full album session) I simply expected some more quality stuff than what was actually on ABB in general, and Streets Of Love in particular.

Streets Of Love - some may like it, I dont - is just not the kind of stuff I and many others expected from the Stones after an 8 years gap since Bridges To Babylon.

The irony of A BIGGER BANG is that after 8 years of rest the band used less energy to it than any album they did since mid-60's. I think the album is an insult towards their audiences. They probably think that a casual Rolling Stones fan is an idiot. Probably he/she is. The only function I can imagine the album have is to be offered as an introduction to a person who has never heard any Rolling Stones album. If he/she already is, A BIGGER BANG does not have any function.

If A BIGGER BANG is all they have to offer these days I hope they will NEVER enter a studio again.

But just my opinion.

- Doxa

jagger is the idiot not the other way around .the well has run dry and jagger passes off his solo crap which then makes it's way on to a rolling stones album .keith just goes along because mick says think of all the money we will make from the tour and keith is like bloody right .if keith had a backbone he would stop mick dead in his tracks but when that kind of money is coming in it's so easy to go along .now jagger has moved into a new direction with the MINING OF THE VAULTS because he sees the writing on the wall as far as the rolling stones touring machine with the various physical issues afflicting the band .mick is no dummy about this ,he was always like i dont look backword and now he is going thru the cobwebs in the vault .about damn time if you ask me .

Quote
liddas
I think of it as an unfinished song.

I think this summarizes the whole thing about "Street of Love" and A BIGGER BANG. For reason other they didn't have energy to finish the song and the album properly. It could be the case that the songs weren't any spectular to start with but in any case: they didn't use any creative juices in forming them into finished tracks. Every decision in every instrument, vocal and arrangemnt sounded like being the first idea coming to mind, and that's it.

- Doxa

It is not a bad song but it's like " As tears go by" or to a certain extent "Angie" those songs don't fit with the rocker image of the stones. I prefer when the Stones rock and play dirty, nasty littles rock and roll songs.
Rock and Roll,
Mops

Quote
rollmops
It is not a bad song but it's like " As tears go by" or to a certain extent "Angie" those songs don't fit with the rocker image of the stones. I prefer when the Stones rock and play dirty, nasty littles rock and roll songs.
Rock and Roll,
Mops

i couldn´t disagree more! they are not a rock´n roll band. i wouldn´t be a fan if that was all and what they are.

and this is not a solo tune. if mick writes it and it is on a stones record it is a stones song.

if keith would write better songs and also more songs i am sure mick would happily accept those "hit" keith songs, problem is there are none from keith other than a nice ballad every record.

and sol also sound like the stones. no one has drums and guitars and vocals like that, no one. it´s got that signature sound.

it is a stones song, everyone can hear it after a first listen.
on a solo record mick would have never accepted that sloppy drums.
that´s the real problem of the album version, it´s not played tightly.

Quote
T&A
a bad song is a bad song is a bad song - live or in studio. SOL is so bad that it makes most averagely bad songs sound good by comparison.

RJ is also a bad song.

Oh, and ABB is a bad album.

And...this is a bad thread.

haha, agree 100%...no i like the thread because it gives me once more the possibility to shout it out loud what an absolute unlistanable crap SOL is. it's even worse than back to zero....i even prefer any shakira song to that musical nonsense...
ufff, i feel better now! ;-)

Even though it's on a Stones album and is played by them, it doesn't have the feel of a Stones song, not even the ballads to which people are comparing it. It's pure Jagger solo dreck, a transparent attempt at one of those godawful Bonjovi/Aerosmith type power ballads.

Maybe Jagger thought it would segue well into "Livin' on a Prayer."

Maybe if they'd hired Alicia Silverstone for the video it would have been a hit.

Maybe it's a reason for having a skip button on the CD player.

i have my computer on endless repeat of sol!!

Quote
KeefintheNight82

Quote
Gazza

Quote
KeefintheNight82

There's really nothing wrong with doing a good commercial pop song and not sounding like blues rock every time. They have done it all before to varying degrees of success.

Correct. Except this isn't one of the good ones.

Well, if that's what you think, fine. I still think it's a good lite pop song with a catchy hook.

Each to their own. and I respect your opinion. I just expect more from the Stones than a song where the word 'lite' is used as a compliment.

Quote
rollmops
It is not a bad song but it's like " As tears go by" or to a certain extent "Angie" those songs don't fit with the rocker image of the stones. I prefer when the Stones rock and play dirty, nasty littles rock and roll songs.
Rock and Roll,
Mops

If that was the only 'style' they were capable of, they wouldnt be a tenth of the band that they are.

Restricting them to one genre does them a disservice.

Quote
stoneswashed77
i have my computer on endless repeat of sol!!

are u suicidal? ;-)

Don't forget that there is another great tune, as great as SOL - Keys to Your Love

i like keys to your love - very mayfieldish r&b - jagger's vocal is suprisingly devoid of most of the bad habits he's typically fallen into...best of the four new songs from '02....