There were already some positive remarks about Mick's singing at the O2 shows in posts of several threads. But I thought it would be interesting to collect them in an extra thread and a little more in detail, especially as he has often been criticized by fans for bad vocal efforts in recent years. Personally I liked many of Mick's vocal performances or single passages of a song from the London shows (based on videos). He was much better than in many videos I know from the Bigger Bang Tour (was on no concert) or in much from the movie Shine a Light. When I listen to live recordings from the 60s and 70s he generally moves me with his singing. He didn't manage to do that often in later years, I can't really say since when, maybe 1989? Worst thing was the growing nasality. Now I have the feeling, Mick is really trying to avoid that with mostly success and started to put more feeling and interpretation in his voice and is also using 'real singing' (instead of tunelessly talking his way through a song) again. I'm just missing a bit more of the old growling (is this the right English word?) from the 70s, which he did only rarely in the London concerts (maybe to protect his voice).

What are your favourite Mick vocal moments (complete songs, certain passages) from the anniversary concerts? Please post video examples if you have any.

I start with Lady Jane, which is done so beautifully and unaffectedly throughout. I like the warm sound in Mick's voice, especially in the low notes and the feeling. He allows it to be a little bit sentimental (in a positive way, like on the record) without being cheesy and doesn't make a parody of it by unnecessary vocal affectations. The balancing irony shows mostly in the stage performance with his 'courtly' moves and the lyrics, while his singing is done seriously with only this perfect little, little underlying irony in tone:




Lady Jane from November 29, 2012

Another video of the same performance, with better sound: video: [www.youtube.com]

P.S.: With touching/moving I don't mean just the 'soft' moments like in Lady Jane, but his singing effort in general. All examples from the concerts are welcome.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-04 01:35 by StrawberriesBlueberries.

So hard to answer my baby.

I don't know why but I do...

Cheers so much.

It never gets any respect, but the song Too Much Blood showcases mick's range back in the first reagan administration something fierce. I love that tune. In that song, Mick was screaming better than Robert Plant could at the time.

Quote
arthritis
It never gets any respect, but the song Too Much Blood showcases mick's range back in the first reagan administration something fierce. I love that tune. In that song, Mick was screaming better than Robert Plant could at the time.

You've heard this version?

Never stopped moving me! So there is no 'again' for me! O2 shows? You can't always...Colorful!!!

I thought he made a real effort to get back to basics and none of the nasal over enunicated nonsense.

Splendid effort from everyone.

Quote
arthritis
It never gets any respect, but the song Too Much Blood showcases mick's range back in the first reagan administration something fierce. I love that tune. In that song, Mick was screaming better than Robert Plant could at the time.

Sure, but I thought only of performances from the recent anniversary concerts...

I think I'm going to cry.

Quote
Kirk
Never stopped moving me! So there is no 'again' for me! O2 shows? You can't always...Colorful!!!

True, couldn't agree more. Very good, I think. Many interesting nuances in his singing. I especially love the part starting at 3:15 and everything after that - the way he leads the crowd through their singing along from 5:25 onwards ("uh huh, uh huh, hmm" ), the great moment at at 6:21 and basically all the fantastic rest to the end. The song flows (because of all ingredients of course, not just Mick - the choir, the whole band). Mick is so loose and apparantly spontaneous there. Just perfect!







Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-03 22:05 by StrawberriesBlueberries.

Quote
stonesrule
I think I'm going to cry.

Tears of envy?

Quote
StrawberriesBlueberries

Quote
stonesrule
I think I'm going to cry.

Tears of envy?

No trust me, it's tears of joy...

This is how it went (probably):

Mick: We are not doing it unless you play properly.

Keith: We are not doing it unless you sing properly.

Quote
steel driving hammer

Quote
StrawberriesBlueberries

Quote
stonesrule
I think I'm going to cry.

Tears of envy?

No trust me, it's tears of joy...

Okay, I trust you here, as I assume you must know stonesrule's emotions better than me after all these years on board.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-03 22:32 by StrawberriesBlueberries.

Quote
StrawberriesBlueberries

Quote
steel driving hammer

Quote
StrawberriesBlueberries

Quote
stonesrule
I think I'm going to cry.

Tears of envy?

No trust me, it's tears of joy...

Okay, I trust you here, as I assume you must know stonesrule's emotions better than me after all these years on board.

Not really, I just think it was a good guess of mine...

Stones.

Quote
GravityBoy
This is how it went (probably):

Mick: We are not doing it unless you play properly.

Keith: We are not doing it unless you sing properly.

Sounds like a good deal.

Quote
StrawberriesBlueberries

Quote
GravityBoy
This is how it went (probably):

Mick: We are not doing it unless you play properly.

Keith: We are not doing it unless you sing properly.

Sounds like a good deal.

and neither were going to do it unless they were obscenely paid.

strawberries etc. lovely name but you're a naughty girl!

Steel Driving Hammer got it right. I don't believe in envy but I do believe in joy.

Yours was a lovely way to start off this thread my dear Miss Strawberries.

Quote
stonesrule
strawberries etc. lovely name but you're a naughty girl!

Steel Driving Hammer got it right. I don't believe in envy but I do believe in joy.

Yours was a lovely way to start off this thread my dear Miss Strawberries.

Thanks Mr. Stonesrule! I just felt like you were making a little fun of me, I can be quite nice...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-03 23:33 by StrawberriesBlueberries.

Now I'm pissed off at you again Strawberries.
I'm a chick.

Quote
stonesrule
Now I'm pissed off at you again Strawberries.
I'm a chick.

LOL, what's up with you today ms. stonesrule?

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
stonesrule
Now I'm pissed off at you again Strawberries.
I'm a chick.

LOL, what's up with you today ms. stonesrule?

Oh, I'm truely sorry Stonesrule!!! Really, I thought you were male. I imagined you were a man making a slightly sarcastic remark on a supposedly touchy-feely woman who fell in love with the Lady Jane performance. Oh, the internet sometimes can't transport messages right. I beg your pardon!

It's OK. I admired that you loved this performance. As I mentioned somewhere how great I saw it performed back in the day it's kinda fabulous to know that all these years later they'd finally do the song again and that it would warrant your orignal post!

No Use in Crying

mick is the best vocalist ever,hands down.

Lady Jane again





very nice sound on this video

and Wild horses

Quote
StrawberriesBlueberries
There were already some positive remarks about Mick's singing at the O2 shows in posts of several threads. But I thought it would be interesting to collect them in an extra thread and a little more in detail, especially as he has often been criticized by fans for bad vocal efforts in recent years. Personally I liked many of Mick's vocal performances or single passages of a song from the London shows (based on videos). He was much better than in many videos I know from the Bigger Bang Tour (was on no concert) or in much from the movie Shine a Light. When I listen to live recordings from the 60s and 70s he generally moves me with his singing. He didn't manage to do that often in later years, I can't really say since when, maybe 1989? Worst thing was the growing nasality. Now I have the feeling, Mick is really trying to avoid that with mostly success and started to put more feeling and interpretation in his voice and is also using 'real singing' (instead of tunelessly talking his way through a song) again. I'm just missing a bit more of the old growling (is this the right English word?) from the 70s, which he did only rarely in the London concerts (maybe to protect his voice).

What are your favourite Mick vocal moments (complete songs, certain passages) from the anniversary concerts? Please post video examples if you have any.

I start with Lady Jane, which is done so beautifully and unaffectedly throughout. I like the warm sound in Mick's voice, especially in the low notes and the feeling. He allows it to be a little bit sentimental (in a positive way, like on the record) without being cheesy and doesn't make a parody of it by unnecessary vocal affectations. The balancing irony shows mostly in the stage performance with his 'courtly' moves and the lyrics, while his singing is done seriously with only this perfect little, little underlying irony in tone:




Lady Jane from November 29, 2012

Another video of the same performance, with better sound: video: [www.youtube.com]

P.S.: With touching/moving I don't mean just the 'soft' moments like in Lady Jane, but his singing effort in general. All examples from the concerts are welcome.

Yes, i would agree Jagger is singing much better, definitely more conscientiously. 'Lady Jane' did really surprise me, because i had imagined him to be singing it all thin and nasal, but there's really little difference from his interpretation from back in the sixties. 'Wild Horses' again is good compared with the versions Jagger has done, say, in the last two decades, yet i still wish he would sing the lyrics more sensitively in places. There's still the 'childhood livvain' line instead of 'childhood living' etc. which sort of spoils the song somewhat. The rockers seem a little more precise too, where Jagger makes a positive attempt to connect a little more, instead of just tossing the lyrics off. 'I Wanna Be Your Man' starts well, and is pretty good for the first two verses, but then Jagger veers off badly, and his voice begins to sound irritating again. Yes, the growl, and the thicker voice, i think is much missed from the seventies. As a rock 'n' roll voice Jagger just doesn't stand up to his younger self in the seventies, where he really did used to tear into those songs with raw vitality, yet there is definitely a feeling he's trying a lot harder here to at least remain focused.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-04 09:14 by Edward Twining.

Quote
Edward Twining

Quote
StrawberriesBlueberries
There were already some positive remarks about Mick's singing at the O2 shows in posts of several threads. But I thought it would be interesting to collect them in an extra thread and a little more in detail, especially as he has often been criticized by fans for bad vocal efforts in recent years. Personally I liked many of Mick's vocal performances or single passages of a song from the London shows (based on videos). He was much better than in many videos I know from the Bigger Bang Tour (was on no concert) or in much from the movie Shine a Light. When I listen to live recordings from the 60s and 70s he generally moves me with his singing. He didn't manage to do that often in later years, I can't really say since when, maybe 1989? Worst thing was the growing nasality. Now I have the feeling, Mick is really trying to avoid that with mostly success and started to put more feeling and interpretation in his voice and is also using 'real singing' (instead of tunelessly talking his way through a song) again. I'm just missing a bit more of the old growling (is this the right English word?) from the 70s, which he did only rarely in the London concerts (maybe to protect his voice).

What are your favourite Mick vocal moments (complete songs, certain passages) from the anniversary concerts? Please post video examples if you have any.

I start with Lady Jane, which is done so beautifully and unaffectedly throughout. I like the warm sound in Mick's voice, especially in the low notes and the feeling. He allows it to be a little bit sentimental (in a positive way, like on the record) without being cheesy and doesn't make a parody of it by unnecessary vocal affectations. The balancing irony shows mostly in the stage performance with his 'courtly' moves and the lyrics, while his singing is done seriously with only this perfect little, little underlying irony in tone:




Lady Jane from November 29, 2012

Another video of the same performance, with better sound: video: [www.youtube.com]

P.S.: With touching/moving I don't mean just the 'soft' moments like in Lady Jane, but his singing effort in general. All examples from the concerts are welcome.

Yes, i would agree Jagger is singing much better, definitely more conscientiously. 'Lady Jane' did really surprise me, because i had imagined him to be singing it all thin and nasal, but there's really little difference from his interpretation from back in the sixties. 'Wild Horses' again is good compared with the versions Jagger has done, say, in the last two decades, yet i still wish he would sing the lyrics more sensitively in places. There's still the 'childhood livvain' line instead of 'childhood living' etc. which sort of spoils the song somewhat. The rockers seem a little more precise too, where Jagger makes a positive attempt to connect a little more, instead of just tossing the lyrics off. 'I Wanna Be Your Man' starts well, and is pretty good for the first two verses, but then Jagger veers off badly, and his voice begins to sound irritating again. Yes, the growl, and the thicker voice, i think is much missed from the seventies. As a rock 'n' roll voice Jagger just doesn't stand up to his younger self in the seventies, where he really did used to tear into those songs with raw vitality, yet there is definitely a feeling he's trying a lot harder here to at least remain focused.

You say many things here, I thought and would have said myself too!

"'Lady Jane' did really surprise me, because i had imagined him to be singing it all thin and nasal, but there's really little difference from his interpretation from back in the sixties." Yes, I was even kind of afraid of how it would sound, when I first time pressed the video "play"-button. Would he ruin the song - especially the higher chorus! - with a nasal voice? That is why I was so relieved and it almost gave me goosebumps, when I heard his first words and it all sounded so surprisingly beautifully, even the chorus. Close to the recording (I'm not saying they should aim for copying a recording note to note though!). Proves to me that he is still capabale of a captivating interpretation and just often uses his voice the 'wrong' way. It could be a a bad habit in the use of his breath, which might have started because of the need to cope with his running around on a bigger stage more and more over the years (it spares breath and strength, is less exhausting to sing nasal, I suppose).

"'Wild Horses' again is good compared with the versions Jagger has done, say, in the last two decades, yet i still wish he would sing the lyrics more sensitively in places. There's still the 'childhood livvain' line instead of 'childhood living' etc. which sort of spoils the song somewhat."
Yes, I agree! I don't like the nasal "childhood livvain" (but he did it much worse, more nasal than here), that harms the beginning a little bit. But he then begins to manage it better. He sings slightly inconsistently in parts, but well enough to make me listen to him without feeling uncomfortable. The best, most consistent part is maybe "I watched you suffer... treat you unkind" with the following chorus. Yes, it was better sung than often before. A nice surprise. Wild Horses is one of the songs I remember particularly having heard being ruined with nasality and affectations. But all together I thought the song, the playing of the whole band, stagnated a little bit, don't know why.

"I Wanna Be Your Man' starts well, and is pretty good for the first two verses, but then Jagger veers off badly, and his voice begins to sound irritating again."
Which one do you mean? So far they did play it two times. I don't know the version from November 29 yet, but I wasn't that convinced by the one from the first show. He seemed to be still stressed and a little bit stiff and forced in his whole performance. I often got the feeling he needs about 1 1/2 or 2 songs to loosen up in concerts. So I found he started to get better within the second half of Get Off of My Cloud in this case of the first show.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-04 18:14 by StrawberriesBlueberries.

I was referring to the version of 'I Wanna Be Your Man' from the 25th, StrawberriesBlueberries. I do agree the song did sound a bit forced, but i thought it was ok when Jagger sang the original vocal melody line, but when he deviated and started to improvise a little more as the song progressed, i found myself feeling irritated by his voice.





I don't think, however much Jagger has become more disciplined vocally etc. there are many of his vocals that truly stand up well to repeated listens. Yes, there's a certain novelty, and an appreciation, to hearing the Stones playing occasional rarities, and even songs like 'It's All Over Now' and 'Get Off Of My Cloud' which are played a little more than rarely, are always pleasing to hear live. The biggest kick i got out of the shows was the Stones performances of 'Lady Jane' and 'Midnight Rambler', the latter of which i thought benefitted no end from the addition of Mick Taylor playing with the band. But even Taylor aside, the band generally, and especially Keith, seem so much more focused and sharp, you can really feel the energy and excitement coming from their instruments. I give Jagger his due - he did sound like he was making a commitment vocally for the most part, but unfortunately the freshness and vitality of his younger voice will never return. That said, 'Lady Jane' was vocally very impressive, and Jagger did compliment Taylor's reappearance with an energetic rendition on 'Midnight Rambler' on both nights. I even heard a little of the old growl in places!

Quote
Edward Twining
I was referring to the version of 'I Wanna Be Your Man' from the 25th, StrawberriesBlueberries. I do agree the song did sound a bit forced, but i thought it was ok when Jagger sang the original vocal melody line, but when he deviated and started to improvise a little more as the song progressed, i found myself feeling irritated by his voice.

I suppose with the improvised parts you mean the ones after 2:36 and 3:52? I think he tries to approximate the version they did in the 60s. There is also a slot with this variation of melody. But in the 60s video I know (www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-G6tc1w_7g), it is brilliantly done, with a rocking voice, here it is thin, almost breathless screaming and I understand what you mean with being "irritated". Nevertheless, in this sense he 'irritates' me in the whole song and performance, it sounds nasal and forced (also looks so) during the whole song to me. He tries hectically to pump more energy into the song than is there or even good for it (compare it to the 60s version, which is less pumped up, but so much more effective) - the only thing that really moves me is Ronnie's guitar solo. It's probably not a good opening song for Jagger. Maybe he realised that himself and that's why they changed it for the second concert. I still have to listen to that version, maybe I will like it better.

But I wanted to collect fine Mick moments, not moan too much. I will look for more I liked...

Wild Horses from the 1st London show is just awesome, and sung with more feeling than any version from the 1995 tour for instance

[doctorstonesblog.blogspot.com]