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: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2
Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: skipstone ()
Date: March 30, 2010 03:23

It has swagger!

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: Pokalheld ()
Date: March 30, 2010 04:25

Every version of Shattered is powerful, aggressive, loud, cool and fast. Until 1982. Since 1989 they play it too slowly and too well-behaved. So, to me it's one of just a few tracks that doesn't work in these days anymore.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-03-30 04:26 by Pokalheld.

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: Hillside Blues ()
Date: March 30, 2010 04:41

Quote
schillid
I don't think I've ever heard them use that wacky phase sound on the guitar live.

I believe Keef uses similar guitar effects on the '78 live versions.

I generally like the live versions better because Jagger is more loose. He sounds a bit forced to me on the studio version, although I like it a lot. For ex. when he screams, very forced.

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: Mathijs ()
Date: March 30, 2010 10:42

Quote
skipstone
This version is supreme:



But, there are no guitars!

About the Hampton version (which is the Still Life version): it's a train that starts rolling and never stops, it's aggressive, bold, punchy and punk.The guitars sound fabulous and are in my opinion true examples of 'weaving'. Jagger's vocals are fantastic too -low, mature, loud and strong.

As the the rest of the Hampton show: the Stones just do not get better than this.

Mathijs

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: Paul Kersey ()
Date: March 30, 2010 11:18

Quote
Mathijs
Quote
skipstone
This version is supreme:



But, there are no guitars!

About the Hampton version (which is the Still Life version): it's a train that starts rolling and never stops, it's aggressive, bold, punchy and punk.The guitars sound fabulous and are in my opinion true examples of 'weaving'. Jagger's vocals are fantastic too -low, mature, loud and strong.

As the the rest of the Hampton show: the Stones just do not get better than this.

Mathijs

This version is embarrassing. Crap guitars, those horrible backing singers. Urgh!

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: boston2006 ()
Date: March 30, 2010 11:21

Quote
StonesTod
well, we seem to have quite difference of opinion!!! what is it?

dog's bollocks?
tits?
balls?

can't we ever agree on anything here?

The packaging desribed here seems to be the whole package , some kind of a cross between a dog and a transvestite .

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Date: March 30, 2010 12:36

Quote
Paul Kersey
Quote
Mathijs
Quote
skipstone
This version is supreme:



But, there are no guitars!

About the Hampton version (which is the Still Life version): it's a train that starts rolling and never stops, it's aggressive, bold, punchy and punk.The guitars sound fabulous and are in my opinion true examples of 'weaving'. Jagger's vocals are fantastic too -low, mature, loud and strong.

As the the rest of the Hampton show: the Stones just do not get better than this.

Mathijs

This version is embarrassing. Crap guitars, those horrible backing singers. Urgh!

I kind of agree; it is a good version. I like the Stones on Gibsons.

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: Erik_Snow ()
Date: March 30, 2010 13:50

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Quote
Paul Kersey
Quote
Mathijs
Quote
skipstone
This version is supreme:



But, there are no guitars!

About the Hampton version (which is the Still Life version): it's a train that starts rolling and never stops, it's aggressive, bold, punchy and punk.The guitars sound fabulous and are in my opinion true examples of 'weaving'. Jagger's vocals are fantastic too -low, mature, loud and strong.

As the the rest of the Hampton show: the Stones just do not get better than this.

Mathijs

This version is embarrassing. Crap guitars, those horrible backing singers. Urgh!

I kind of agree; it is a good version. I like the Stones on Gibsons.

This was the version I mentioned on page 1 of this thread; the first seconds sounds very good - but then that horrible slick background choir chimes in; and the guitars gets buired.

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: Greg ()
Date: March 30, 2010 15:11

Never been done justice live, imo, there's just too much going on in the studio version - the Stones song that probably comes closest to a collage.

----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."

"Shit!... No shit, awright!"

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: VoodooLounge13 ()
Date: March 30, 2010 15:24

Quote
StonesTod
Quote
boston2006
Quote
VoodooLounge13
God neither version please!

You're kidding me , right ?

Shattered is the balls !!

oh, please! everyone knows it's the tits.


I wish I was but it's my 3rd least favorite Stones song. Although I must say I was happy to hear it (having never heard it live before) at opening night in Fenway, since it gave me another song for my list of songs heard live....

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: shortfatfanny ()
Date: March 30, 2010 15:59

Quote
VoodooLounge13
I wish I was but it's my 3rd least favorite Stones song.

At least there are two songs you dislike more...


Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: skipstone ()
Date: March 30, 2010 16:49

I concur that the backing vocals stink of the 1994 onward performances of Shattered but what I love about that 1994 version (and that one in particular seeing that it's on the Sparks Will Fly boot) is the way the band plays it. Charlie plays a more fluid beat that pushes through the bridge, Keith lays a bit back on the lick - the phase isn't too much and Ronnie plays the solo in the bridge fantastically.

And Mick sings it pretty goddamn good.

I could do without Lisa and Bernard entirely.

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: Anonymous User ()
Date: March 30, 2010 17:22

Quote
Mathijs
Quote
skipstone
This version is supreme:



But, there are no guitars!

About the Hampton version (which is the Still Life version): it's a train that starts rolling and never stops, it's aggressive, bold, punchy and punk.The guitars sound fabulous and are in my opinion true examples of 'weaving'. Jagger's vocals are fantastic too -low, mature, loud and strong.

As the the rest of the Hampton show: the Stones just do not get better than this.

Mathijs
agree hampton is the best. great guitar work on the solo by ronnie and i like the backup vocals by keith and ronnie .

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: Anonymous User ()
Date: March 30, 2010 17:25

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Quote
Paul Kersey
Quote
Mathijs
Quote
skipstone
This version is supreme:



But, there are no guitars!

About the Hampton version (which is the Still Life version): it's a train that starts rolling and never stops, it's aggressive, bold, punchy and punk.The guitars sound fabulous and are in my opinion true examples of 'weaving'. Jagger's vocals are fantastic too -low, mature, loud and strong.

As the the rest of the Hampton show: the Stones just do not get better than this.

Mathijs

This version is embarrassing. Crap guitars, those horrible backing singers. Urgh!

I kind of agree; it is a good version. I like the Stones on Gibsons.
well on the hampton version keith is playing a fender tele and so is ronnie .i like the twang of the fender guitars .i think it works well on stones songs .

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: kovach ()
Date: March 30, 2010 21:46

Love hearing it live when I'm there...but otherwise the studio version is tops.

Re: SHatterED live or studio
Posted by: microvibe ()
Date: March 30, 2010 22:50

studio.shattered live is horrible!

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1421
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