Tell Me :
Talk
Lem - What Keith says in plain English is really really hard to comprehend even for native English speakers. It must be interpreted to suit our own "beliefs". No matter what the "facts" are, we must always restate over and over again to confirm that Keith = raw and authentic and Jagger = fake and produced.
It's a matter of taste - don't like Keith's songs anymore, neither onstage / live.
To me his live songs is my peeing time / buying new beer. Sorry to say. His singing to the ABB tour was somehow a joke.
Keith only went in with three songs according to the pre-release ABB interviews he made. I know the quote is on timeisonourside.com, but I remember well that he said: "The songs I laid on Mick were Rough Justice, This Place Is Empty and Infamy".
From what I can hear the songs Mick brought in (Songs that sound like little or no input from Keith) would be Let Me Down Slow, Rain Fall Down, Streets Of Love and Biggest Mistake. The rest sound like collaborations in one form or another. Laugh I Nearly Died sounds like a Jagger tune, but the choir ("Been travellin' far and wide, wondrin' who's gonna be my guide") sounds like a Keith idea to me. Come to think of it Let Me Down Slow could also be a collaboration. It's kindda Jaggeresque, but there's also something very Keith about it.
JumpingKentFlash
Obviously you don't even though you are denying it.
You're weird.
JumpingKentFlash
My suggestion is somewhat close;
remove all songs save for She Saw Me Coming,
add Under The Radar, We Don't Wanna Go Home plus a live version of Back Of My Hand -
and you'll get a great little EP
sometimes i think you and i were separated at birth, erik, except for the minor difference in age and height...and hair color....and maybe something else....
i'm fine with you respectfully disagreeing with me - but i failed to see a coherent argument here that demonstrates the flaw in my argument that it boils down to material - the stones write their own material - a producer doesn't and technology doesn't. a producer can't MAKE songwriters write better songs. period. jimmy miller didn't; andrew oldham didn't. maybe they wouldn't accept subpar material as easily, but they have no ability to improve what's written. please explain how that opinion is flawed if you like....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-25 17:19 by StonesTod.
Very simple. There is no "flaw" in your argument. There is no "flaw" in mine. If you read what I wrote you will note that I simply disagree with your opinion that the material sucks. I think the material - presented as I reconstituted it and in the spirit which I elaborate - would have made for a fantastically fun, tough, loud Stones album at a time that they really needed desperately to regain their ragged Rock and Roll mojo and get away from the Vegas/Victory Lap Tour/overproduced album every X years rut that they were (are) in.
I think the argument I present is quite coherent. I genuinely like the songs I have in my ABB version - you think they are sub-par. I think if the Stones had presented the album in the way I elucidate many, many fans would have agreed with me and the album and the tour would have been far better. Some, like you, would not have agreed. No one is right. No one is wrong. This is no zero-sum argument, just a discussion about dirty rock and roll.
Hmm, apart your present Texan accent, maybe not much else, Tod
and the cowboy boots and ten gallon hat, which is only half-full again, cos i keep getting thirsty....
But do you think the material sucks then?
JumpingKentFlash
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
wanderingspirit66
()
Date: February 24, 2011 18:36
Quote
lem motlow
do you guys have trouble understanding english? you got the original stuff,there was no "jagger polish in the studio"that was keiths entire point,that they DIDNT GO INTO A PROPER STUDIO.
i'm reading how the "gloss and sheen" is jaggers and there are probably rawer versions.he just told you,they used the stuff recorded on pro-tools at micks house.
do you just read something and no matter what follow the "keith likes the raw stuff and jagger likes the over-produced stuff"line.its like talking to robots.
Lem - What Keith says in plain English is really really hard to comprehend even for native English speakers. It must be interpreted to suit our own "beliefs". No matter what the "facts" are, we must always restate over and over again to confirm that Keith = raw and authentic and Jagger = fake and produced.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
wanderingspirit66
()
Date: February 24, 2011 18:43
Quote
lem motlowQuote
stoned in washington dc
agree with turd's lineup
that would have been a good album
i might even seriously consider taking one more song out.. all you need is 40-42 minutes.. just make it have impact...
i think the problem is don was.. the guy doesn't have a clue anymore... he really sucks.. i mean they need someone they trust to tell them how it is but clearly they don't have such a person...don was is not it...he's too much of a fanboy...
they don't need a friend to produce them.. they need a producer.
sad but true-as i mentioned above,read rockmans post.the paragraph from life is unbelievably telling.jagger basically wanted to use what they recorded on pro-tools for demo's.
keith says"don was and i looked at each other"
they talk mick out of going into an actual studio and finishing the record.
Lem - this level of accuracy does not suit this board.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
mtaylor
()
Date: February 24, 2011 18:52
Track 1. Rough Justice
Track 2. Under The Radar
Track 3. Dangerous Beauty
Track 4. It Won't Take Long
Track 5. Back Of My Hand
Track 6. Oh No, Not You Again
Track 7. Driving Too Fast
Track 8. Rain Fall Down
Track 9. Let Me Down Slow
Track 10. Laugh, I Nearly Died
Track 11. Look What The Cat Dragged In
Would have been a great CD.
Rough Justice a Single - the video is great.
Track 2. Under The Radar
Track 3. Dangerous Beauty
Track 4. It Won't Take Long
Track 5. Back Of My Hand
Track 6. Oh No, Not You Again
Track 7. Driving Too Fast
Track 8. Rain Fall Down
Track 9. Let Me Down Slow
Track 10. Laugh, I Nearly Died
Track 11. Look What The Cat Dragged In
Would have been a great CD.
Rough Justice a Single - the video is great.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: February 24, 2011 19:07
Nobody builds his own ABB from Keith's songs? That seems strange to me since they're FAR better than the Jagger songs, right?
"Look What The Cat Dragged In" is Jagger-penned subpar dancefloor fodder. That's the very 1st track I would trash...
"Look What The Cat Dragged In" is Jagger-penned subpar dancefloor fodder. That's the very 1st track I would trash...
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
mtaylor
()
Date: February 24, 2011 19:14
Quote
dcba
Nobody builds his own ABB from Keith's songs? That seems strange to me since they're FAR better than the Jagger songs, right?
"Look What The Cat Dragged In" is Jagger-penned subpar dancefloor fodder. That's the very 1st track I would trash...
It's a matter of taste - don't like Keith's songs anymore, neither onstage / live.
To me his live songs is my peeing time / buying new beer. Sorry to say. His singing to the ABB tour was somehow a joke.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
JJackFl
()
Date: February 24, 2011 19:25
More from LIFE
Despite that, or maybe because of its relaxing effect on Mick, the following year, 2004, was the best year I'd spent with him in God knows how long. He'd become a lot looser, I don't know why. Maybe it's just growing up and realizing this is really what you've got. I think a lot of it was to do with what happened with Charlie. I'd gone to Mick's house in France in 2004 to start writing together for a new record--the first in eight years--which would become A Bigger Bang. Mick and I were sitting together the first or second day I got there, with acoustic guitars, just trying to start some songs. And Mick said, oh dear, Charlie's got cancer. There was a pregnant pause, like, what do we do? It was as big a shock to me as any, because he was saying, do we put this on hold and wait for Charlie and see what happens? And I thought for a minute and said, no, let's start. We're starting to write songs, so we don't need Charlie right now. And Charlie would be very pissed if we stopped just because he was incapacitated for the moment. It wouldn't be good for Charlie and, shit, we've got some songs to write. Let's write a few, send Charlie the tapes so he can have a listen to where we're at. That's the way we did it.
Mick's chateau is very nice, the Loire about three miles away, with beautiful vineyards above it, with caves beneath it that were made to store the wine at forty-five degrees, year in year out. A real Captain Haddock chateau, very Herge. We were tight together, got some good stuff working. There was less of the moodiness. When you've got a sense of really wanting to work together, rather than, OK, how do we pin this, it's totally different. I mean, shit, if you work with a guy for forty-odd years, it's not all going to be plain sailing, is it? You've got to go through the bullshit; it's like a marriage.
=============================
Despite that, or maybe because of its relaxing effect on Mick, the following year, 2004, was the best year I'd spent with him in God knows how long. He'd become a lot looser, I don't know why. Maybe it's just growing up and realizing this is really what you've got. I think a lot of it was to do with what happened with Charlie. I'd gone to Mick's house in France in 2004 to start writing together for a new record--the first in eight years--which would become A Bigger Bang. Mick and I were sitting together the first or second day I got there, with acoustic guitars, just trying to start some songs. And Mick said, oh dear, Charlie's got cancer. There was a pregnant pause, like, what do we do? It was as big a shock to me as any, because he was saying, do we put this on hold and wait for Charlie and see what happens? And I thought for a minute and said, no, let's start. We're starting to write songs, so we don't need Charlie right now. And Charlie would be very pissed if we stopped just because he was incapacitated for the moment. It wouldn't be good for Charlie and, shit, we've got some songs to write. Let's write a few, send Charlie the tapes so he can have a listen to where we're at. That's the way we did it.
Mick's chateau is very nice, the Loire about three miles away, with beautiful vineyards above it, with caves beneath it that were made to store the wine at forty-five degrees, year in year out. A real Captain Haddock chateau, very Herge. We were tight together, got some good stuff working. There was less of the moodiness. When you've got a sense of really wanting to work together, rather than, OK, how do we pin this, it's totally different. I mean, shit, if you work with a guy for forty-odd years, it's not all going to be plain sailing, is it? You've got to go through the bullshit; it's like a marriage.
=============================
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
JumpingKentFlash
()
Date: February 24, 2011 19:47
Quote
dcba
Nobody builds his own ABB from Keith's songs? That seems strange to me since they're FAR better than the Jagger songs, right?
Keith only went in with three songs according to the pre-release ABB interviews he made. I know the quote is on timeisonourside.com, but I remember well that he said: "The songs I laid on Mick were Rough Justice, This Place Is Empty and Infamy".
From what I can hear the songs Mick brought in (Songs that sound like little or no input from Keith) would be Let Me Down Slow, Rain Fall Down, Streets Of Love and Biggest Mistake. The rest sound like collaborations in one form or another. Laugh I Nearly Died sounds like a Jagger tune, but the choir ("Been travellin' far and wide, wondrin' who's gonna be my guide") sounds like a Keith idea to me. Come to think of it Let Me Down Slow could also be a collaboration. It's kindda Jaggeresque, but there's also something very Keith about it.
JumpingKentFlash
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
stoned in washington dc
()
Date: February 24, 2011 19:52
will never understand why mick didn't tell lenny to let him use god give me everything i got or whatever that song is called on a bigger bang. its the best song mick has done in like 20 years and it could have been a smash for the stones..
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
smashmark
()
Date: February 24, 2011 20:02
question:
which deluxe Bigger Bang did you get these tracks from?
the one with the DVD doesnt have all of those tracks?
thanx!
which deluxe Bigger Bang did you get these tracks from?
the one with the DVD doesnt have all of those tracks?
thanx!
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: February 24, 2011 20:14
As much as there is a wish for Jack White to produce this band, I suspect the results if it happened would be very close to A BIGGER BANG. To me, that's what the album was - the Stones trying hard to be a garage band and do a minimalist record without the gloss, without horns and back-up singers.
I actually prefer the production sheen of BRIDGES TO BABYLON. I also thought the songwriting was notably weaker on A BIGGER BANG. I don't fault Don Was for anything. These guys are not interested in a producer who will tell them to try harder. A guy like that wouldn't get the job or wouldn't keep it. You either get the Jagger-Richards magic or you get a soured compromise. The only change to that formula in the last 10 years is the advent of the 10-minute toss-off.
Some of the songwriting is excellent. Some songs are a mix of good lines with lines that make you wince. Mick emphasized how much humor was in the lyrics for this album. I'm guessing that's the stuff I dislike.
While I have been outspoken that they chose the wrong first single and argued that there were too many weaker numbers first, I really couldn't re-sequence the album and feel that it would somehow work better. I could pick a different opening song but that's it.
I doon't like the 40 minute LP rule since I hunt down B-sides anyway. My A BIGGER BANG has the 3 bonus tracks not on the physical CD. There are probably too many rockers and too many songs that sound alike and too many references to puking and Thursday nights, but I wouldn't pare it down, I would just wish they would do better.
I actually prefer the production sheen of BRIDGES TO BABYLON. I also thought the songwriting was notably weaker on A BIGGER BANG. I don't fault Don Was for anything. These guys are not interested in a producer who will tell them to try harder. A guy like that wouldn't get the job or wouldn't keep it. You either get the Jagger-Richards magic or you get a soured compromise. The only change to that formula in the last 10 years is the advent of the 10-minute toss-off.
Some of the songwriting is excellent. Some songs are a mix of good lines with lines that make you wince. Mick emphasized how much humor was in the lyrics for this album. I'm guessing that's the stuff I dislike.
While I have been outspoken that they chose the wrong first single and argued that there were too many weaker numbers first, I really couldn't re-sequence the album and feel that it would somehow work better. I could pick a different opening song but that's it.
I doon't like the 40 minute LP rule since I hunt down B-sides anyway. My A BIGGER BANG has the 3 bonus tracks not on the physical CD. There are probably too many rockers and too many songs that sound alike and too many references to puking and Thursday nights, but I wouldn't pare it down, I would just wish they would do better.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
JumpingKentFlash
()
Date: February 24, 2011 20:19
3 bonus tracks Rocky? What's the third one? I haven't heard it. I know only of Under The Radar and We Don't Wanna Go Home as bonus tracks. Are you referring to the will.I.am remix of Rain Fall Down? >
<
JumpingKentFlash
<JumpingKentFlash
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: February 24, 2011 20:29
No, "Hurricane." I know it was cut in 2002, but it came out in 2005 so I throw it in with the other two. Makes a nice coda to the album.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: February 24, 2011 20:33
Good point about "God Gave Me Everything" - not that I wish it was on the album or even like the song much, but it has the same garage band recorded too loud sound of tracks like "Rough Justice" and much of A BIGGER BANG. I think of it as The Stones trying to be The White Stripes, but it is as much Lenny Kravitz's sound and production style.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: February 24, 2011 20:39
Koen, the early mixes are available to download for free over on the HOT STUFF page here at IORR. To me, they are not significantly different - just a bit longer. Some people swear that rough mixes are nearly always better than the final product. All just a matter of taste.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
skipstone
()
Date: February 25, 2011 01:36
Quote
JumpingKentFlash
Streets Of Love. (I know many people think it's bad, but they have no taste in great pop)
Obviously you don't even though you are denying it.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
ohnonotyouagain
()
Date: February 25, 2011 06:37
Nearly everyone agrees that A Bigger Bang was too long and would have benefited if some songs had been left out, but opinions differ on which ones should have been included and in which order. My own personal A Bigger Bang edit goes like this:
1. Rough Justice
2. Back Of My Hand
3. Oh No Not You Again
4. It Won't Take Long
5. Under the Radar
6. Laugh, I Nearly Died
7. She Saw Me Coming
8. Look What the Cat Dragged In
9. Rain Fall Down
10. This Place Is Empty
11. Dangerous Beauty
12. We Don't Wanna Go Home
Now that is a great album, in my humble opinion, and would have been their best since Tattoo You. I still listen to this mix pretty regularly.
1. Rough Justice
2. Back Of My Hand
3. Oh No Not You Again
4. It Won't Take Long
5. Under the Radar
6. Laugh, I Nearly Died
7. She Saw Me Coming
8. Look What the Cat Dragged In
9. Rain Fall Down
10. This Place Is Empty
11. Dangerous Beauty
12. We Don't Wanna Go Home
Now that is a great album, in my humble opinion, and would have been their best since Tattoo You. I still listen to this mix pretty regularly.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
JumpingKentFlash
()
Date: February 25, 2011 11:27
Quote
skipstoneQuote
JumpingKentFlash
Streets Of Love. (I know many people think it's bad, but they have no taste in great pop)
Obviously you don't even though you are denying it.
You're weird.
JumpingKentFlash
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
Jimmie
()
Date: February 25, 2011 12:07
is it possible to get a download on this version of the album?
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
KeithNacho
()
Date: February 25, 2011 13:21
I love this album. Maybe it shoul be better if there were less songs, 10 songs. It could be a special edition double album with extra songs for hard fans
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
Tantekäthe
()
Date: February 25, 2011 14:32
The only way to get a decent album out of "A Bigger Bang" (o.k., o.k.: imho):
edit all 16 (18) tracks.
This gives space for, well, whatever you like to listen to.
edit all 16 (18) tracks.
This gives space for, well, whatever you like to listen to.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: February 25, 2011 15:37
Quote
Tantekäthe
The only way to get a decent album out of "A Bigger Bang" (o.k., o.k.: imho):
edit all 16 (18) tracks.
This gives space for, well, whatever you like to listen to.
My suggestion is somewhat close;
remove all songs save for She Saw Me Coming,
add Under The Radar, We Don't Wanna Go Home plus a live version of Back Of My Hand -
and you'll get a great little EP
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
Turd On The Run
()
Date: February 25, 2011 17:08
Doxa: there is no way to make even a decent album by Stones standards out of it.
StonesTod: you can blame producers or technology or whatever - it all boils down to subpar material, which no producer or technology is going to enhance.
Rocky Dijon: I really couldn't re-sequence the album and feel that it would somehow work better.
I respectfully disagree with these opinions. One must remember the context of the album's release. 2005. World tour coming. The Stones last release was eight (!) years prior, and that was the slick, multiple-personality-disorder product Bridges to Babylon - a chimerical creature that sounded like mashed-up bits of solo albums by Jagger and Richards and a few cuts done with the Stones as a unit, with different producers thrown into the mix. There were high points, and low points, but certainly no unifying principle or interconnected sound dynamic (like all their albums used to have). Since then there had been numerous victory lap tours, and a gratuitous greatest hits package with 4 meager new cuts that would rank at or near the bottom of any fan's ranking of Stones material. A serious re-energizing was necessary.
A Bigger Bang - as I present it in my reconstituted version - would have been the tough, pugnacious, jumpy release that would have worked as a late-career representation of the Stones as a tight, hard-boiled unit just smashing around the basement and producing something somewhat off-the-cuff, rough-edged and utterly lacking the calculated and conceptually overwrought dynamic of their previous recent work - and also avoiding the bloat that (in my opinion) also marred Voodoo Lounge. The rock and roll attitude is back. There is no attempt at a monster hit single, no epochal song that defines a generation - this ABB is just a tight 11 song collection of hard-bitten rockers that seem to fly off the speakers and have a freshness and immediacy that the Stones hadn't displayed in years. There are no GREAT cuts, to be sure (though in my estimation Dangerous Beauty and the set closer Laugh, I Nearly Died come close), but this ABB would have been the ultimate late-career feel album for the Stones...there was no knockout punch, but the effect of jagged rocker after jagged rocker would have been cumulative......that there is no 'greatest hit' is part of the charm...the feel of the album would have been slightly tossed-off and loud and FUN...the sound of a band rediscovering their sense of playfulness and not taking itself and its place in history so seriously. And what is wrong with that? A lot of the songs would lend themselves to being played live on stage and sprinkling 3 or 4 every night throughout their set would have added freshness and verve to the setlist. This is the Stones knocking out a fast one with a devil-may-care attitude and the wind at their back. This album would have felt just right (to me) at the time of its release.
The little Frankestein sounds great to me now. Best and most unifyied thing I've heard from them in a while. Much better than the flabby and bloated original release.
Lem Moltow (?) mentioned that the Stones need someone who is not a fanboy as producer. Bingo! They need someone who has the nuts to tell them where to cut the fat and where to add something more. Like Jimmy Miller used to. Where the hell is this next guy? If the Stones ever record again they will need him.
@Koen: Regarding that outtakes, here is what is written on the info: "...substantial edits in several of the songs ranging from a whopping minute extra of 'Don't Wanna Go Home', 47 seconds from 'Biggest Mistake, 37 seconds from 'Under the radar', 33 seconds from 'Driving Too Fast', 27 seconds from 'Dangerous Beauty', 18 seconds from 'It Wont take long', 10 from 'she saw me coming' down to a couple of seconds (or less) from some others." They generally sound rawer and more immediate than the end product, which I like.
StonesTod: you can blame producers or technology or whatever - it all boils down to subpar material, which no producer or technology is going to enhance.
Rocky Dijon: I really couldn't re-sequence the album and feel that it would somehow work better.
I respectfully disagree with these opinions. One must remember the context of the album's release. 2005. World tour coming. The Stones last release was eight (!) years prior, and that was the slick, multiple-personality-disorder product Bridges to Babylon - a chimerical creature that sounded like mashed-up bits of solo albums by Jagger and Richards and a few cuts done with the Stones as a unit, with different producers thrown into the mix. There were high points, and low points, but certainly no unifying principle or interconnected sound dynamic (like all their albums used to have). Since then there had been numerous victory lap tours, and a gratuitous greatest hits package with 4 meager new cuts that would rank at or near the bottom of any fan's ranking of Stones material. A serious re-energizing was necessary.
A Bigger Bang - as I present it in my reconstituted version - would have been the tough, pugnacious, jumpy release that would have worked as a late-career representation of the Stones as a tight, hard-boiled unit just smashing around the basement and producing something somewhat off-the-cuff, rough-edged and utterly lacking the calculated and conceptually overwrought dynamic of their previous recent work - and also avoiding the bloat that (in my opinion) also marred Voodoo Lounge. The rock and roll attitude is back. There is no attempt at a monster hit single, no epochal song that defines a generation - this ABB is just a tight 11 song collection of hard-bitten rockers that seem to fly off the speakers and have a freshness and immediacy that the Stones hadn't displayed in years. There are no GREAT cuts, to be sure (though in my estimation Dangerous Beauty and the set closer Laugh, I Nearly Died come close), but this ABB would have been the ultimate late-career feel album for the Stones...there was no knockout punch, but the effect of jagged rocker after jagged rocker would have been cumulative......that there is no 'greatest hit' is part of the charm...the feel of the album would have been slightly tossed-off and loud and FUN...the sound of a band rediscovering their sense of playfulness and not taking itself and its place in history so seriously. And what is wrong with that? A lot of the songs would lend themselves to being played live on stage and sprinkling 3 or 4 every night throughout their set would have added freshness and verve to the setlist. This is the Stones knocking out a fast one with a devil-may-care attitude and the wind at their back. This album would have felt just right (to me) at the time of its release.
The little Frankestein sounds great to me now. Best and most unifyied thing I've heard from them in a while. Much better than the flabby and bloated original release.
Lem Moltow (?) mentioned that the Stones need someone who is not a fanboy as producer. Bingo! They need someone who has the nuts to tell them where to cut the fat and where to add something more. Like Jimmy Miller used to. Where the hell is this next guy? If the Stones ever record again they will need him.
@Koen: Regarding that outtakes, here is what is written on the info: "...substantial edits in several of the songs ranging from a whopping minute extra of 'Don't Wanna Go Home', 47 seconds from 'Biggest Mistake, 37 seconds from 'Under the radar', 33 seconds from 'Driving Too Fast', 27 seconds from 'Dangerous Beauty', 18 seconds from 'It Wont take long', 10 from 'she saw me coming' down to a couple of seconds (or less) from some others." They generally sound rawer and more immediate than the end product, which I like.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: February 25, 2011 17:14
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
Tantekäthe
The only way to get a decent album out of "A Bigger Bang" (o.k., o.k.: imho):
edit all 16 (18) tracks.
This gives space for, well, whatever you like to listen to.
My suggestion is somewhat close;
remove all songs save for She Saw Me Coming,
add Under The Radar, We Don't Wanna Go Home plus a live version of Back Of My Hand -
and you'll get a great little EP
sometimes i think you and i were separated at birth, erik, except for the minor difference in age and height...and hair color....and maybe something else....
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: February 25, 2011 17:19
Quote
Turd On The Run
Doxa: there is no way to make even a decent album by Stones standards out of it.
StonesTod: you can blame producers or technology or whatever - it all boils down to subpar material, which no producer or technology is going to enhance.
Rocky Dijon: I really couldn't re-sequence the album and feel that it would somehow work better.
I respectfully disagree with these opinions. One must remember the context of the album's release. 2005. World tour coming. The Stones last release was eight (!) years prior, and that was the slick, multiple-personality-disorder product Bridges to Babylon - a chimerical creature that sounded like mashed-up bits of solo albums by Jagger and Richards and a few cuts done with the Stones as a unit, with different producers thrown into the mix. There were high points, and low points, but certainly no unifying principle or interconnected sound dynamic (like all their albums used to have). Since then there had been numerous victory lap tours, and a gratuitous greatest hits package with 4 meager new cuts that would rank at or near the bottom of any fan's ranking of Stones material. A serious re-energizing was necessary.
A Bigger Bang - as I present it in my reconstituted version - would have been the tough, pugnacious, jumpy release that would have worked as a late-career representation of the Stones as a tight, hard-boiled unit just smashing around the basement and producing something somewhat off-the-cuff, rough-edged and utterly lacking the calculated and conceptually overwrought dynamic of their previous recent work - and also avoiding the bloat that (in my opinion) also marred Voodoo Lounge. The rock and roll attitude is back. There is no attempt at a monster hit single, no epochal song that defines a generation - this ABB is just a tight 11 song collection of hard-bitten rockers that seem to fly off the speakers and have a freshness and immediacy that the Stones hadn't displayed in years. There are no GREAT cuts, to be sure (though in my estimation Dangerous Beauty and the set closer Laugh, I Nearly Died come close), but this ABB would have been the ultimate late-career feel album for the Stones...there was no knockout punch, but the effect of jagged rocker after jagged rocker would have been cumulative......that there is no 'greatest hit' is part of the charm...the feel of the album would have been slightly tossed-off and loud and FUN...the sound of a band rediscovering their sense of playfulness and not taking itself and its place in history so seriously. And what is wrong with that? A lot of the songs would lend themselves to being played live on stage and sprinkling 3 or 4 every night throughout their set would have added freshness and verve to the setlist. This is the Stones knocking out a fast one with a devil-may-care attitude and the wind at their back. This album would have felt just right (to me) at the time of its release.
The little Frankestein sounds great to me now. Best and most unifyied thing I've heard from them in a while. Much better than the flabby and bloated original release.
Lem Moltow (?) mentioned that the Stones need someone who is not a fanboy as producer. Bingo! They need someone who has the nuts to tell them where to cut the fat and where to add something more. Like Jimmy Miller used to. Where the hell is this next guy? If the Stones ever record again they will need him.
@Koen: Regarding that outtakes, here is what is written on the info: "...substantial edits in several of the songs ranging from a whopping minute extra of 'Don't Wanna Go Home', 47 seconds from 'Biggest Mistake, 37 seconds from 'Under the radar', 33 seconds from 'Driving Too Fast', 27 seconds from 'Dangerous Beauty', 18 seconds from 'It Wont take long', 10 from 'she saw me coming' down to a couple of seconds (or less) from some others." They generally sound rawer and more immediate than the end product, which I like.
i'm fine with you respectfully disagreeing with me - but i failed to see a coherent argument here that demonstrates the flaw in my argument that it boils down to material - the stones write their own material - a producer doesn't and technology doesn't. a producer can't MAKE songwriters write better songs. period. jimmy miller didn't; andrew oldham didn't. maybe they wouldn't accept subpar material as easily, but they have no ability to improve what's written. please explain how that opinion is flawed if you like....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-25 17:19 by StonesTod.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
Turd On The Run
()
Date: February 25, 2011 17:40
Quote
StonesTodQuote
Turd On The Run
Doxa: there is no way to make even a decent album by Stones standards out of it.
StonesTod: you can blame producers or technology or whatever - it all boils down to subpar material, which no producer or technology is going to enhance.
Rocky Dijon: I really couldn't re-sequence the album and feel that it would somehow work better.
I respectfully disagree with these opinions. One must remember the context of the album's release. 2005. World tour coming. The Stones last release was eight (!) years prior, and that was the slick, multiple-personality-disorder product Bridges to Babylon - a chimerical creature that sounded like mashed-up bits of solo albums by Jagger and Richards and a few cuts done with the Stones as a unit, with different producers thrown into the mix. There were high points, and low points, but certainly no unifying principle or interconnected sound dynamic (like all their albums used to have). Since then there had been numerous victory lap tours, and a gratuitous greatest hits package with 4 meager new cuts that would rank at or near the bottom of any fan's ranking of Stones material. A serious re-energizing was necessary.
A Bigger Bang - as I present it in my reconstituted version - would have been the tough, pugnacious, jumpy release that would have worked as a late-career representation of the Stones as a tight, hard-boiled unit just smashing around the basement and producing something somewhat off-the-cuff, rough-edged and utterly lacking the calculated and conceptually overwrought dynamic of their previous recent work - and also avoiding the bloat that (in my opinion) also marred Voodoo Lounge. The rock and roll attitude is back. There is no attempt at a monster hit single, no epochal song that defines a generation - this ABB is just a tight 11 song collection of hard-bitten rockers that seem to fly off the speakers and have a freshness and immediacy that the Stones hadn't displayed in years. There are no GREAT cuts, to be sure (though in my estimation Dangerous Beauty and the set closer Laugh, I Nearly Died come close), but this ABB would have been the ultimate late-career feel album for the Stones...there was no knockout punch, but the effect of jagged rocker after jagged rocker would have been cumulative......that there is no 'greatest hit' is part of the charm...the feel of the album would have been slightly tossed-off and loud and FUN...the sound of a band rediscovering their sense of playfulness and not taking itself and its place in history so seriously. And what is wrong with that? A lot of the songs would lend themselves to being played live on stage and sprinkling 3 or 4 every night throughout their set would have added freshness and verve to the setlist. This is the Stones knocking out a fast one with a devil-may-care attitude and the wind at their back. This album would have felt just right (to me) at the time of its release.
The little Frankestein sounds great to me now. Best and most unifyied thing I've heard from them in a while. Much better than the flabby and bloated original release.
Lem Moltow (?) mentioned that the Stones need someone who is not a fanboy as producer. Bingo! They need someone who has the nuts to tell them where to cut the fat and where to add something more. Like Jimmy Miller used to. Where the hell is this next guy? If the Stones ever record again they will need him.
@Koen: Regarding that outtakes, here is what is written on the info: "...substantial edits in several of the songs ranging from a whopping minute extra of 'Don't Wanna Go Home', 47 seconds from 'Biggest Mistake, 37 seconds from 'Under the radar', 33 seconds from 'Driving Too Fast', 27 seconds from 'Dangerous Beauty', 18 seconds from 'It Wont take long', 10 from 'she saw me coming' down to a couple of seconds (or less) from some others." They generally sound rawer and more immediate than the end product, which I like.
i'm fine with you respectfully disagreeing with me - but i failed to see a coherent argument here that demonstrates the flaw in my argument that it boils down to material - the stones write their own material - a producer doesn't and technology doesn't. a producer can't MAKE songwriters write better songs. period. jimmy miller didn't; andrew oldham didn't. maybe they wouldn't accept subpar material as easily, but they have no ability to improve what's written. please explain how that opinion is flawed if you like....
Very simple. There is no "flaw" in your argument. There is no "flaw" in mine. If you read what I wrote you will note that I simply disagree with your opinion that the material sucks. I think the material - presented as I reconstituted it and in the spirit which I elaborate - would have made for a fantastically fun, tough, loud Stones album at a time that they really needed desperately to regain their ragged Rock and Roll mojo and get away from the Vegas/Victory Lap Tour/overproduced album every X years rut that they were (are) in.
I think the argument I present is quite coherent. I genuinely like the songs I have in my ABB version - you think they are sub-par. I think if the Stones had presented the album in the way I elucidate many, many fans would have agreed with me and the album and the tour would have been far better. Some, like you, would not have agreed. No one is right. No one is wrong. This is no zero-sum argument, just a discussion about dirty rock and roll.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: February 25, 2011 17:43
i never actually said the material sucks - i was making an argument on the value-prop of a producer or technology.
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: February 25, 2011 19:04
Quote
StonesTodQuote
Erik_SnowQuote
Tantekäthe
The only way to get a decent album out of "A Bigger Bang" (o.k., o.k.: imho):
edit all 16 (18) tracks.
This gives space for, well, whatever you like to listen to.
My suggestion is somewhat close;
remove all songs save for She Saw Me Coming,
add Under The Radar, We Don't Wanna Go Home plus a live version of Back Of My Hand -
and you'll get a great little EP
sometimes i think you and i were separated at birth, erik, except for the minor difference in age and height...and hair color....and maybe something else....
Hmm, apart your present Texan accent, maybe not much else, Tod
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: February 25, 2011 19:21
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
StonesTodQuote
Erik_SnowQuote
Tantekäthe
The only way to get a decent album out of "A Bigger Bang" (o.k., o.k.: imho):
edit all 16 (18) tracks.
This gives space for, well, whatever you like to listen to.
My suggestion is somewhat close;
remove all songs save for She Saw Me Coming,
add Under The Radar, We Don't Wanna Go Home plus a live version of Back Of My Hand -
and you'll get a great little EP
sometimes i think you and i were separated at birth, erik, except for the minor difference in age and height...and hair color....and maybe something else....
Hmm, apart your present Texan accent, maybe not much else, Tod
and the cowboy boots and ten gallon hat, which is only half-full again, cos i keep getting thirsty....
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
JumpingKentFlash
()
Date: February 25, 2011 19:23
Quote
StonesTod
i never actually said the material sucks - i was making an argument on the value-prop of a producer or technology.
But do you think the material sucks then?
JumpingKentFlash
Re: A Bigger Bang - What It Should Have Been
Posted by:
Pietro
()
Date: February 25, 2011 19:28
What "Bigger Bang" lacked was a good producer like Jimmy Miller to give the album another musical dimension. It could've used some saxes and backup vocals, for example. Or imagine someone like Ry Cooder adding a little color to the songs?
I liked the looseness of the album -- in that regard it is a bit like "Main Street." But all the good Stones albums were helped along by players like Billy Preston and Bobby Keyes. A little more work, and a few more musicians, and could've been a great album.
I liked the looseness of the album -- in that regard it is a bit like "Main Street." But all the good Stones albums were helped along by players like Billy Preston and Bobby Keyes. A little more work, and a few more musicians, and could've been a great album.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
a bigger nut , crholmstrom , jigsaw69 , joguema , jp.M , jrdavrainville , leteyer , stoneskid , straycatuk , TooTight , TumblinDice76 , TW2019
Guests:
1885
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10