I was booking tickets for a local blues man, Jim Byrnes, and his bio had an interesting quote "Who could take the Rolling Stones seriously after watching Howlin’ Wolf down on his knees singing Little Red Rooster?”, interesting point?

Got me thinkling although I love the rock, the roll, the ballads, R&B, jazz, and the country I have yet to be impressed with any Stones blues. Next to Streets of Love my least favorite live song is LRR, I actualy said to myself if I wanted to hear some blues I would go elseware, and mentaly sat the song out. Sorry I know it's a big favorite and historical. But in my gut I just don't think they get it. They love it, study it, and work good little blues licks into many tunes, but flat out blues tunes just miss the mark for me. And they seem to know it, from Keiths suggestions they sucked at it and his reverence playing with Buddy Guy.
However, I do enjoy the odd Stones stylized blues tunes (Time Is On My Side, etc.).

Caught Jonny Lang, backing the Stones on his 18th birthday, the review suggested that when he was old enough to have his heart broken he would be a hell of a blues man. You would think the Stones have had their share of insperation (lol).

Sorry, just one guys taste.

the thing about this band is that they are not masters of any of these genres that they dabble occasionally in - reggae, blues, country, funk, etc....if i'm in the mood to listen to something from these...the stones aren't where i'm going.

a lot of sixties rock bands were based in the blues, but very few of them were particularly great at it.

good point, des....

....bet ya can't imagine how much i spewed when heard Dylan's Roman King thing



ROCKMAN

Quote
Rockman
....bet ya can't imagine how much i spewed when heard Dylan's Roman King thing

this much? or THIS much?

THIS



ROCKMAN

for me: THIS

Okay ........THIS



ROCKMAN

Well, I think they've done the blues proud if nothing else but their version of Love in Vain. Other songs like "No Expectations" are kinds of bluesy and I just don't agree with you on this one...

Quote
Des
I was booking tickets for a local blues man, Jim Byrnes, and his bio had an interesting quote "Who could take the Rolling Stones seriously after watching Howlin’ Wolf down on his knees singing Little Red Rooster?”, interesting point?

Got me thinkling although I love the rock, the roll, the ballads, R&B, jazz, and the country I have yet to be impressed with any Stones blues. Next to Streets of Love my least favorite live song is LRR, I actualy said to myself if I wanted to hear some blues I would go elseware, and mentaly sat the song out. Sorry I know it's a big favorite and historical. But in my gut I just don't think they get it. They love it, study it, and work good little blues licks into many tunes, but flat out blues tunes just miss the mark for me. And they seem to know it, from Keiths suggestions they sucked at it and his reverence playing with Buddy Guy.
However, I do enjoy the odd Stones stylized blues tunes (Time Is On My Side, etc.).

Caught Jonny Lang, backing the Stones on his 18th birthday, the review suggested that when he was old enough to have his heart broken he would be a hell of a blues man. You would think the Stones have had their share of insperation (lol).

Sorry, just one guys taste.

I don't know what Stones you're talking about.

Mick Taylor did an excellent job when it comes to the blues.

Des, I completely agree with you. Blues isn't their genre. I think Brian Jones and Ian Stewart had intended them to be a genuine "blues act", it was all covering and posing, but without finding out who they were musically. It wasn't until Mick and Keith became a hit-writing team that they mattered musically at all - before then it was just giving spotty white British kids a watered-down version of what Black Americans were really doing, living and singing about.

It's PAINFULLY obviously that they're not qualified to be called blues anytime you watch clips of them or hear tracks with Muddy, Howlin' Wolf, Buddy Guy, Bo Diddley, Jimmy Rogers and even their own peers like Clapton and Robert Cray.

There's only one member of the Stones that I've ever considered to have bonafide genuine blues chops - Mick Taylor.

[thepowergoats.com]

well they were aware they weren't as good as the originals.

"Why anyone would listen to us doing I'm A King Bee when you could have Slim Harpo is unbelieveably stupid.."

_Mick Jagger

Quote
duke richardson
well they were aware they weren't as good as the originals.

"Why anyone would listen to us doing I'm A King Bee when you could have Slim Harpo is unbelieveably stupid.."

_Mick Jagger

mick knows....then again, we ain't slim around no mo'

I think the Stones would probably agree with this view point. There are more blues evangelists, spreading the gospel of the blues. When Keith or Mick sited theor influences in interviews, I would go check them out and was blown away by the real deal.

The Stones don't do blues well? WTF? I swear..this board is losing its marbles by the day. You all say this stuff now but how many of you actually listened to Muddy, Howlin and Slim Harpo BEFORE you even heard the Stones? I know I didn't. And for those who did: congrats, you win a medal.

Last time I checked, the Stones were listed under Pop/Rock. Not blues, not country, not folk or reggae. So I'm not sure why anyone's panties are in a twist when they never claimed to be pioneers in ANY of those genres. Throughout their career, they flirted with all these genres and they did them well. They were The Rolling Stones playing the blues. The Rolling Stones playing country. The music was forced out through their own filter.

I give the Stones complete credit for making me branch out to these other genres. I would never have explored country without "Dead Flowers' or "Torn and Frayed." I never would have looked into blues without hearing "The Spider and the Fly"(from Stripped) and "Mannish Boy." They were the direct bridge to those genres. Whether they are "as good" or could "replace" the original guys is irrelevant (not to mention stupid). If I'm in the mood for country...I'll put on some Hank or Merle. But if I want to hear the Stones do country...I'll put on "Dead Flowers." If I want to hear blues, I'll put on Junior Wells or Muddy, but if I want to hear The Stones do blues...I'm putting on "Fancy Man Blues." Thankyouvermuch.

The Stones aren't blues any more than Jack White is. And the fact that my generation has someone like Jack White "representing" blues for us today (thanks to the doc "It Might Get Loud" ) makes me terribly sad.

I shall await the next thread sure to pop up any moment now: "The Stones never really could play their instruments."

Quote
Justin
The Stones don't do blues well? WTF? I swear..this board is losing its marbles by the day. You all say this stuff now but how many of you actually listened to Muddy, Howlin and Slim Harpo BEFORE you even heard the Stones? I know I didn't. And for those who did: congrats, you win a medal.

i don't see what that has to do with the price of eggs.

the question is who on this board thinks the stones can hold a candle to those blues masters at their game?

I agree with Justin, until he got to the Jack White part. This generation is LUCKY there is even such a figure around, who has the real blues roots.

Sure, every genre they do is as filtered by the Rolling Stones. Including rock and roll. (Which is why I always hated the limiting 'Greatest Rock & Roll Band In The World' moniker.) But please, they did the blues proud, especially the early work with Brian Jones. His genius was to slight, just slightly, clean up the blues and take it uptown, without losing the feeling. Their version of Honest I Do is not Gerry & the f-ing Pacemakers do Jimmy Reed. They've had harrowing blues moments that capture the darkness, like the studio version of Midnight Rambler. I could go on but this is stupid. When they strolled into Chess Records in 1964 those old boys knew it. Their blues gospel went unheeded in America. But Britain, especially the Stones, reignited the whole deal. Stones can't play Blues. Please.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Justin
The Stones don't do blues well? WTF? I swear..this board is losing its marbles by the day. You all say this stuff now but how many of you actually listened to Muddy, Howlin and Slim Harpo BEFORE you even heard the Stones? I know I didn't. And for those who did: congrats, you win a medal.

i don't see what that has to do with the price of eggs.

the question is who on this board thinks the stones can hold a candle to those blues masters at their game?

It has a lot to do with it because if the Stones were able to get you curious enough about blues through their own interpretations of these tunes--then they were obviously doing something right--which then presents a flaw in everyone's logic that the Stones never did the blues justice.

The original post clearly dismisses all of the Stones' blues work as a whole-and that's what my post addresses.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-07 01:29 by Justin.

Quote
Justin

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Justin
The Stones don't do blues well? WTF? I swear..this board is losing its marbles by the day. You all say this stuff now but how many of you actually listened to Muddy, Howlin and Slim Harpo BEFORE you even heard the Stones? I know I didn't. And for those who did: congrats, you win a medal.

i don't see what that has to do with the price of eggs.

the question is who on this board thinks the stones can hold a candle to those blues masters at their game?

It has a lot to do with it because if the Stones were able to get you curious enough about blues through their own interpretations of these tunes--then they were obviously doing something right--which then presents a flaw in everyone's logic that the Stones never did the blues justice.

The original post clearly dismisses all of the Stones' blues work as a whole-and that's what my post addresses.

i see. well, i was already listening to the blues before i discovered the stones.

so, i'm with you, then - to hell with all these other people!

To balance what I said before, they were a FANTASTIC rock band, there's no arguments there. And yes, Justin's point is totally valid about how they did point many, many of their fans, including myself, to genuine blues.

I do believe that they all have a genuine love for the blues, please don't get me wrong there. To put it simply, The Rolling Stones were never a "blues band". They didn't need to be, they started to truly shine on their own, starting with Aftermath right up until the material that became Tattoo You. And me saying that they weren't really blues is not to take away at all the greatness of their original stuff.

[thepowergoats.com]

Have You Tried Listening To anything from 63-72...I cant Be Satisfyied, Little Red Rooster, Down Home Girl, Confessing The Blues, Heart Of Stone, What A Shame, Cry To Me, Look What You've Done, Good Times Bad Times, Pain In My Heart,No Expectations, Parachute Woman, I'm A King Bee, Love In Vain, Doncha Bother Me...

.I could go on...But

Not The Blues?

SOULSURVIVOR

Quote
Des
I was booking tickets for a local blues man, Jim Byrnes, and his bio had an interesting quote "Who could take the Rolling Stones seriously after watching Howlin’ Wolf down on his knees singing Little Red Rooster?”, interesting point?

Got me thinkling although I love the rock, the roll, the ballads, R&B, jazz, and the country I have yet to be impressed with any Stones blues. Next to Streets of Love my least favorite live song is LRR, I actualy said to myself if I wanted to hear some blues I would go elseware, and mentaly sat the song out. Sorry I know it's a big favorite and historical. But in my gut I just don't think they get it. They love it, study it, and work good little blues licks into many tunes, but flat out blues tunes just miss the mark for me. And they seem to know it, from Keiths suggestions they sucked at it and his reverence playing with Buddy Guy.
However, I do enjoy the odd Stones stylized blues tunes (Time Is On My Side, etc.).

Caught Jonny Lang, backing the Stones on his 18th birthday, the review suggested that when he was old enough to have his heart broken he would be a hell of a blues man. You would think the Stones have had their share of insperation (lol).

Sorry, just one guys taste.

Yeah, but The Muddy Waters Band didn't have the "wobble" of Wyman/Watts. Also, Chuck Berry songs sound better when played in keys for rock guitar, as opposed to piano keys (like B-flat or something). Also, gotta love that Yardbirds "rave-up". What do you think of Eric Clapton?

The Stones are a solid blues band. Some of the early songs are remarkable for a bunch of skinny white kids from England. They are in no way as good as the genuine article. Sure I'd rather hear Muddy Watees or Howlin' Wolf but as Keith said in Life the Stones greatest musical acheivment was to help America re-discover its blues past. Yes they quickly developed into a rock and roll band but they've never forgotten where they came from. Hell even on ABB Back of My Hand is a pretty genuine blues.

What a load. They're both good. Equally. That Elmo Lewis was a mad mo fo.

Whether it's Muddy:

[www.youtube.com]

Or the Rollin' Stones:

Quote
Justin
The Stones aren't blues any more than Jack White is. And the fact that my generation has someone like Jack White "representing" blues for us today (thanks to the doc "It Might Get Loud" ) makes me terribly sad.

Why? People who may not have heard of blues pioneers like Muddy Waters did so because of people like the Stones, Jack White and so on. Muddy Waters, B.B King and so on have said that bands like the Stones helped bring their music to a wider audience. As I mentioned in my earlier post, bands like the Stones were blues evangelists. You, I and many others became aware of the blues and sought out the original artists because of them. Is this a bad thing? Of course not!

Rolling stones roots are blues, rythmn'blues and rock'n'roll. After that they created their own style incorporating their roots. They are interesed in different kinds of music. I am calling that musicians loving music and not only ones. Most of blues bands or country bands will play only their style all along their life. And I don't talk about Jazz bands who consider their music as the only one in the world with condescension for the other ways to play music.

We had this discussion before many times.

And the answer is bullshit.

When the Stones play the blues (individually or as a band), they speak the same language of their great masters. Sure, they have their own style, so what? Blues is not about being in a blessed elite. Quite the opposite!

When we play the London sessions of Mr. Wolf, does anybody think "Ha, great singer, but that drummer just don't get it, and the bassman too doesn't have a clue"

The funny thing is that the old masters of the blues seem to respect the Stones more than most Stones' fans do.

C

The Rolling Stones are a blues band who play rock and roll.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-07 12:37 by 1962.

Justin: you nailed it. I agree 100 % with you.

Just listen to Fancy Man Blues...

Thanks to RS i discovered blues, country, soul, reggae,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Max Romeo, Gram Parsons, Otis reding, James Brown.................

The RS have their roots in American Music and by playing together with some of the great American Blues Musicians they showed them their respect and this was likewise.
Bo Diddley-Elmore James-Chuck Berry-Slim Harpo-Muddy Waters-Yardbirds-Alexis Corner-Animals-Jack Bruce-Jimmy Reed-Eddie Taylor-Rory Gallagher-Gary Moore-The Pretty Things-Eric Clapton-Johnny Winter-The Rolling Stones-Jimi Hendrix-John Mayal and the Bluesbrakers-Billie Holiday-Tina Turner-Janis Joplin-Peter Green..

thanks