For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
JohnnySnappsQuote
john lomax
I hate it. Had to turn it off midway. That drumbeat is imbecilic and totally ruins the feel and soul of the song. Sounds like the sort of crap my 12 year old plays on his keyboard.
I'm with you on this one. Overall, Scarlet hasn't really impressed me. It's a good jam, but there's no signature riff really. For me, Charlie's drums do a lot for the feel of the song. Take them away and the song just falls flat. Many, many years ago, I used to have a Casiotone keyboard for basic drum rhythms on my home recordings. These drums reminded me of that...
I'm a life long Stones fan, and I really dig a lot of their remixes, but, imho, this one............kinda sucks.
Quote
DoxaQuote
NeddieFlanders
Two different The War On Drugs Remixes - not it gets confusing:
[www.youtube.com]
[www.youtube.com]
N
Yeah, at least edited differently. The second one has an outro that has vocals mixed much lower in the mix and doesn't fade away, but ends up with a drum track.
But why confusing? Nice to have variants. I find it interesting.
- Doxa
Quote
NeddieFlanders
How do you know which one is which, which one do you get when purchasing on Qobuz or elsewhere?
Quote
john lomax
I hate it. Had to turn it off midway. That drumbeat is imbecilic and totally ruins the feel and soul of the song. Sounds like the sort of crap my 12 year old plays on his keyboard.
It IS confusing. The longer one's got much louder drums too. They sound cheap indeedQuote
NeddieFlandersQuote
DoxaQuote
NeddieFlanders
Two different The War On Drugs Remixes - not it gets confusing:
[www.youtube.com]
[www.youtube.com]
N
Yeah, at least edited differently. The second one has an outro that has vocals mixed much lower in the mix and doesn't fade away, but ends up with a drum track.
But why confusing? Nice to have variants. I find it interesting.
- Doxa
Why confusing? Because they both come with the same title. How do you know which one is which, which one do you get when purchasing on Qobuz or elsewhere?
N
Quote
HairballQuote
john lomax
I hate it. Had to turn it off midway. That drumbeat is imbecilic and totally ruins the feel and soul of the song. Sounds like the sort of crap my 12 year old plays on his keyboard.
Yes it's ridiculous.
If anything, they should have slowed it down and turned it in to a country-esque ballad which would have lent itself well to a Stonesy sound c.'74.
Instead, it's been turned in to a cartoon-esque Micky Mouse polka that really does sound like something ANY 12 year old would come up with on a pre-programmed keyboard.
Hit the fast polka beat, shred it all to hell, and there you have the lamest remix of them all courtesy of the very weak War on Drugs band. Both Keith and Page must be rolling their eyes with disgust.
Maybe the next remix will retain a proper vibe, but better yet maybe they'll put it to rest (and put us out of misery) and move on to a better song? Maybe something brand NEW?
Quote
retired_dogQuote
HairballQuote
john lomax
I hate it. Had to turn it off midway. That drumbeat is imbecilic and totally ruins the feel and soul of the song. Sounds like the sort of crap my 12 year old plays on his keyboard.
Yes it's ridiculous.
If anything, they should have slowed it down and turned it in to a country-esque ballad which would have lent itself well to a Stonesy sound c.'74.
Instead, it's been turned in to a cartoon-esque Micky Mouse polka that really does sound like something ANY 12 year old would come up with on a pre-programmed keyboard.
Hit the fast polka beat, shred it all to hell, and there you have the lamest remix of them all courtesy of the very weak War on Drugs band. Both Keith and Page must be rolling their eyes with disgust.
Maybe the next remix will retain a proper vibe, but better yet maybe they'll put it to rest (and put us out of misery) and move on to a better song? Maybe something brand NEW?
No, Keith agreed. Isn't he a member of the band anymore?
And Pagey - well, I think he does not care a shit what the Stones do with something he added some licks to 46 years ago.
Quote
deardoctorQuote
JohnnySnappsQuote
john lomax
I hate it. Had to turn it off midway. That drumbeat is imbecilic and totally ruins the feel and soul of the song. Sounds like the sort of crap my 12 year old plays on his keyboard.
I'm with you on this one. Overall, Scarlet hasn't really impressed me. It's a good jam, but there's no signature riff really. For me, Charlie's drums do a lot for the feel of the song. Take them away and the song just falls flat. Many, many years ago, I used to have a Casiotone keyboard for basic drum rhythms on my home recordings. These drums reminded me of that...
I'm a life long Stones fan, and I really dig a lot of their remixes, but, imho, this one............kinda sucks.
I was not very happy with the confused drums of that session guy.
If you would remove Bills bass and Charlies drums, I would go with you.
But in this case nothing is destroyed.
The bass-guy constantly playing like a lead guitar sucked as well.
Now it's cleaned and as always a matter of taste.
I like it.
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
deardoctorQuote
JohnnySnappsQuote
john lomax
I hate it. Had to turn it off midway. That drumbeat is imbecilic and totally ruins the feel and soul of the song. Sounds like the sort of crap my 12 year old plays on his keyboard.
I'm with you on this one. Overall, Scarlet hasn't really impressed me. It's a good jam, but there's no signature riff really. For me, Charlie's drums do a lot for the feel of the song. Take them away and the song just falls flat. Many, many years ago, I used to have a Casiotone keyboard for basic drum rhythms on my home recordings. These drums reminded me of that...
I'm a life long Stones fan, and I really dig a lot of their remixes, but, imho, this one............kinda sucks.
I was not very happy with the confused drums of that session guy.
If you would remove Bills bass and Charlies drums, I would go with you.
But in this case nothing is destroyed.
The bass-guy constantly playing like a lead guitar sucked as well.
Now it's cleaned and as always a matter of taste.
I like it.
How can Bill and Charlie be removed from a song they're not on?
Quote
deardoctorQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
deardoctorQuote
JohnnySnappsQuote
john lomax
I hate it. Had to turn it off midway. That drumbeat is imbecilic and totally ruins the feel and soul of the song. Sounds like the sort of crap my 12 year old plays on his keyboard.
I'm with you on this one. Overall, Scarlet hasn't really impressed me. It's a good jam, but there's no signature riff really. For me, Charlie's drums do a lot for the feel of the song. Take them away and the song just falls flat. Many, many years ago, I used to have a Casiotone keyboard for basic drum rhythms on my home recordings. These drums reminded me of that...
I'm a life long Stones fan, and I really dig a lot of their remixes, but, imho, this one............kinda sucks.
I was not very happy with the confused drums of that session guy.
If you would remove Bills bass and Charlies drums, I would go with you.
But in this case nothing is destroyed.
The bass-guy constantly playing like a lead guitar sucked as well.
Now it's cleaned and as always a matter of taste.
I like it.
How can Bill and Charlie be removed from a song they're not on?
Guess, you did not read my post too exactly, Mr. GasLightStreet?
Quote
retired_dogQuote
HairballQuote
john lomax
I hate it. Had to turn it off midway. That drumbeat is imbecilic and totally ruins the feel and soul of the song. Sounds like the sort of crap my 12 year old plays on his keyboard.
Yes it's ridiculous.
If anything, they should have slowed it down and turned it in to a country-esque ballad which would have lent itself well to a Stonesy sound c.'74.
Instead, it's been turned in to a cartoon-esque Micky Mouse polka that really does sound like something ANY 12 year old would come up with on a pre-programmed keyboard.
Hit the fast polka beat, shred it all to hell, and there you have the lamest remix of them all courtesy of the very weak War on Drugs band. Both Keith and Page must be rolling their eyes with disgust.
Maybe the next remix will retain a proper vibe, but better yet maybe they'll put it to rest (and put us out of misery) and move on to a better song? Maybe something brand NEW?
No, Keith agreed. Isn't he a member of the band anymore?
And Pagey - well, I think he does not care a shit what the Stones do with something he added some licks to 46 years ago.
Quote
rollmops
A remix of a song is a tricky thing. Why messing up with the original tune? But if the owners decide to do it just let's have fun with it.
The Elvis Presley' estate allowed a remix of "A little less conversation" on #1 hits that is really good.
Rockandroll,
Mops
Quote
Doxa
The childish behavior by certain folks here amazes me.
Like a kindergarten this place is sometimes. People behaving like spoiled kids.
- Doxa
Quote
Doxa
The campaign for "Scarlet", a rejected out-take from the past with no any hit potential in today's streaming business, is not just a campaign to make the song known or people to get ready to open up their wallets for GOATS HEAD SOUP deluxe version, but a campaign for the Stones. What is novel here is the variance by which it comes.
The first it was released as the conservative old rock generation in mind, being as authentic as possible, the video especially empahasing the authentic vaults feel of it - something both Jagger and Page were promoting in their interviews. It was like with EXILE, SOME GIRLS and STICKY FINGERS deluxe campaigns - pure nostalgy is enough.
But then they did something different: they released a video with a fresh actor that totally contradicted with the nostalgia. Like they already had done with "Criss Cross". It was clear that they had a totally different target audience in their mind in doing so.
And that was not enough. They came up and released a re-mix version of the song that neither was based on nostalgia or 'historical authenticity' but just done by the leading idea: let it sound as good as it can be not by the standards of 70's but today's rock world, but as any new rock song one could hear in a radio. To hear its goodness one didn't need the glasses of professor of 70's rock music in anthropology, but just dig as it is, with no explanations.
- Doxa
Quote
Doxa
Talking about ridiculousness... I played the new re-mix to my old lady, and she really liked it (unlike the 'original'). She especially liked the long intro. Then I took her to see what Rolling Stones hardcore fans are here at IORR talking about it, and she couldn't believe her eyes. Not that of people not liking it, but the over-the-top way people bash it by whatever nasty words they were able to come up with (there is a difference there in those two things). She couldn't beleive those actually are any Rolling Stones fans but trolls. Well, I claimed they are true fans, but 'isn't that ridiculous behavior, honey?' I asked. She said absulutely yes, to extent that it is absurd.
Inspired by this, I wrote the long post above. But then she saw me doing and posting that, she said "Doxa my dear, do you know who really is ridiculous?"...
- Doxa
Quote
harlem shuffle
Many of the posters here has never be Stonesfans,just Keithfans.It is always Jagger to blame/hate.10-15 last years it,s always antijaggers posting all the time.
Quote
Chris Fountain
From a post above:
"Hairball's stuff is especially not just childish but pathetic,"
No offense, but I would have to disagree with this assessment. Actually, his posts are entertaining and the sense of humor is enjoyable. Also he is polite.
Instead of citing folk's names wouldn't it be better just to respond to their posts? Wouldn't that be fair?
Just asking -
Quote
Chris Fountain
From a post above:
"Hairball's stuff is especially not just childish but pathetic,"
No offense, but I would have to disagree with this assessment. Actually, his posts are entertaining and the sense of humor is enjoyable. Also he is polite.
Instead of citing folk's names wouldn't it be better just to respond to their posts? Wouldn't that be fair?
Just asking -