Tell Me :
Talk
2 1 2 0
Is Mick better than Magic Dick?? No, he isn't.
But, Jagger's remarks are true, aren't they? It wasn't only Jones being interested in the music of Morocco, and it wasn't only Jones experimenting.
Concerning Jones being overrated: the fact that he is still talked about 42 years after his death shows how important he was I think. And listening to his input to the music of the Stones, he truly was important. I do think though that some people have a habit of embellishing everything about Jones. Statements of how he was a fantastic multi-instrumentalist, superb slide player, gifted singer and single handedly forming the Stones just aren’t the truth –without taking anything away from him.
Mathijs
Well, the first two are true, even if the last two aren't.
Well, he was an effective multi-instrumentalist. He wasn't really good on any of the more exotic instruments, but he knew how to use them very effectively.
Mathijs
Surely we can say the same about all other past & present Stones (with the possible exception of Mick Taylor), in that none of them are virtuosos but they more than make up for this in feel...& I wouldn't want them any other way!
Ha, you'd wish
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
That's simply not true...
He was part of the Nanker-Phelge song writing credit and he wrote many song defining instrument parts(The Last Time guitar hook being one), some of which for all we know may even have inspired songs in the first place.
He also wrote a film soundtrack.
I think that is clearly true. Even though he is over-estimated by some hardcore Stones fans he is much wider clearly under-estimated by many other hardcore Stones fans (i.e. IORR contributors). But what is funny that outside the devoted Stones fans Brian Jones and his era is much more appreciated by 'general public'. Hardly no one knows Mick Taylor or cares about Ron Wood, or what The Stones have done musically for the last 30 years or something. But the significance of the Jones era - the time when the Stones really were relevant - remains quite glorified and eternal. I can only imagine how much it bothers Jagger that he cannot control the most legendary material that made him and them legendary and famous. No "Satisfaction", no "Paint It Black", no "Jumpin' Jack Flash", no "Gimme Sheler", no "Ruby Tuesday", no "Street Fighting Man",no "Sympathy For The devil", AFTERMATH, BEGGARS, LET IT BLEED, etc. All those historical, epoch making songs and albums they compete with the legendary Beatles.... What he has to trade is a couple of hits ("Brown Sugar", "Angie", "Miss you" "Start Me Up") and few albums (STICKY, EXILE, SOME GIRLS and TATTOO YOU) with which he tries to sell the legacy. For the infamous 'Kleinien' reasons The Stones legacy seems to live as a double existence. I think for that very reason The Stones are not either so willing to appreciate the Kleinian controlled era. It is not just neglecting Brian Jones - it the whole goddamn 'lost' era that it is a hard case for them.
Funny - I visited Dressmann clothing's store the other day where they are selling the new HOT STUFF collection CD (covering the post 1971 era). I heard some people discussing buying of it but one said "but where all the famous hits - you know those great songs?".
- Doxa
But that vehicle was created to give Oldham a share of the royalties, and not specially for Brian, Watts or Wyman.
Mathijs
He was still part of it.
Yes, but he was not a 'Song Writer'. He was a genius on various instruments. That alone does not make him The Rolling Stones. Then you could say Watts was also a composer on his drums. Jones was an instrumentalist, not a songwriter. Please note that I'm a big fan of Jones.
He was technically ahead of Jagger by quite a bit.
Brian was vital to the arrangement side of things, inorder to make interesting music you need lots of creativity, ability and originality. It is a creative form in itself, it can and does inspire changes to main vocal melodies etc.
A basic chord and lyric can sound great or completely crap depending on the arrangement or lack of. Yes Charlie would have had input to the arrangements, but this is a thread about Brian.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-04-27 19:50 by His Majesty.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
DiscoVolante
()
Date: April 27, 2011 09:05
Tss, after Sugar Blue, Mick Jagger is probably the best harp-player there is.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: April 27, 2011 09:30
Quote
DiscoVolante
Tss, after Sugar Blue, Mick Jagger is probably the best harp-player there is.
2 1 2 0
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 27, 2011 10:28
Quote
DiscoVolante
Tss, after Sugar Blue, Mick Jagger is probably the best harp-player there is.
Is Mick better than Magic Dick?? No, he isn't.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: April 27, 2011 11:49
Quote
neptune
But when pressed by the host about Brian's importance to the band, Mick just wouldn't bite. "Brian was really into the music of Morocco . . . but so were we." Mick was perhaps candid with this comment, but he at the same time discredits Brian by saying that he wasn't solely responsible for the Stones' experimental sound. So, then, is Continental Drift a true dedication to Brian?
But, Jagger's remarks are true, aren't they? It wasn't only Jones being interested in the music of Morocco, and it wasn't only Jones experimenting.
Concerning Jones being overrated: the fact that he is still talked about 42 years after his death shows how important he was I think. And listening to his input to the music of the Stones, he truly was important. I do think though that some people have a habit of embellishing everything about Jones. Statements of how he was a fantastic multi-instrumentalist, superb slide player, gifted singer and single handedly forming the Stones just aren’t the truth –without taking anything away from him.
Mathijs
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Sleepy City
()
Date: April 27, 2011 11:54
Quote
Mathijs
Statements of how he was a fantastic multi-instrumentalist, superb slide player, gifted singer and single handedly forming the Stones just aren’t the truth –without taking anything away from him.
Well, the first two are true, even if the last two aren't.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: April 27, 2011 11:57
I guess he were Stones musical leader till suddenly one day 'Satisfaction' had sold gold...then it started to slipper...it's like on every place people work at..one day you will be passed...
2 1 2 0
2 1 2 0
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
rooster
()
Date: April 27, 2011 11:58
how could one say such nasty things...shame shameQuote
DiscoVolanteDidn't Ron Wood play a sitar guitar live on some numbers? Anyway, it's just a matter of taste. The Open G-straight forward rock n roll-guitar weaving sound is the Stones sound I love and that sound has been working for the past 40 years. And except from Under My Thumb, all those tracks belongs to the psychedelic era. Yuck, I'd rather listen to Dirty Work than that Satanic Majesties crap...Quote
Sleepy City
I have an even harder time picturing Mick Taylor (or Ronnie Wood) playing a sitar on Paint It Black / a recorder on Ruby Tuesday / marimbas on Under My Thumb / mellotron on 2000 Light Years From Home / oboe on Dandelion...
Wouldn't y'all agree?
The guy was a musical genius, & the only person with the onstage charisma to rival Jagger.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: April 27, 2011 14:41
Brian was a naturally talented and gifted fellow who was an important part of The Rolling Stones.
Nothing more needs to be said really.
Nothing more needs to be said really.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: April 27, 2011 15:09
Quote
Sleepy CityQuote
Mathijs
Statements of how he was a fantastic multi-instrumentalist, superb slide player, gifted singer and single handedly forming the Stones just aren’t the truth –without taking anything away from him.
Well, the first two are true, even if the last two aren't.
Well, he was an effective multi-instrumentalist. He wasn't really good on any of the more exotic instruments, but he knew how to use them very effectively.
Mathijs
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Sleepy City
()
Date: April 27, 2011 15:20
Quote
MathijsQuote
Sleepy CityQuote
Mathijs
Statements of how he was a fantastic multi-instrumentalist, superb slide player, gifted singer and single handedly forming the Stones just aren’t the truth –without taking anything away from him.
Well, the first two are true, even if the last two aren't.
Well, he was an effective multi-instrumentalist. He wasn't really good on any of the more exotic instruments, but he knew how to use them very effectively.
Mathijs
Surely we can say the same about all other past & present Stones (with the possible exception of Mick Taylor), in that none of them are virtuosos but they more than make up for this in feel...& I wouldn't want them any other way!
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Rolling Hansie
()
Date: April 27, 2011 15:24
Quote
His Majesty
Nothing more needs to be said really.
Ha, you'd wish
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: April 27, 2011 15:30
Quote
Rolling HansieQuote
His Majesty
Nothing more needs to be said really.
Ha, you'd wish
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Green Lady
()
Date: April 27, 2011 15:37
Interesting to compare this thread with the "Coldplay/Muse/Who's gonna carry on?" thread - in both cases you have people who just don't hear what's any good about music from a different era - whether that's an older era in DiscoVolante's case or a newer era in the case of some contributors to the Coldplay/Muse thread. I'm sorry for both of them.
As one of those famous 13-year-old girls from the 60s, well, I wouldn't say Brian was overrated, would I? Actually, I might - a little, by some people. The Stones were his idea - thank you, Brian - but I think he did run out of enthusiasm once things started to feel too much like hard work. He was a musician of many talents, a jack-of-many-trades and a master of some of them - but not a genius. And of course the so-called "glamour" of his untimely death makes people overestimate him - how could it not? But above all he was the right person in the right place for those crucial first few years, musically, personally and in his sense of style and fashion. What the Stones were at that time was unique and irreplaceable, and Brian was an essential part of it. He was never replaced - what he left missing in the Stones is in some ways still missing: they just became a different band. What came later was great, but I can't hear the Jones-era Stones as anything other than different-but-equal to the later band - that's how my ears are made.
Oh, by the way, my 13-year-old self didn't fancy Brian. I was rather taken with Bill at the time (probably just as well I never got the chance to meet him!)
As one of those famous 13-year-old girls from the 60s, well, I wouldn't say Brian was overrated, would I? Actually, I might - a little, by some people. The Stones were his idea - thank you, Brian - but I think he did run out of enthusiasm once things started to feel too much like hard work. He was a musician of many talents, a jack-of-many-trades and a master of some of them - but not a genius. And of course the so-called "glamour" of his untimely death makes people overestimate him - how could it not? But above all he was the right person in the right place for those crucial first few years, musically, personally and in his sense of style and fashion. What the Stones were at that time was unique and irreplaceable, and Brian was an essential part of it. He was never replaced - what he left missing in the Stones is in some ways still missing: they just became a different band. What came later was great, but I can't hear the Jones-era Stones as anything other than different-but-equal to the later band - that's how my ears are made.
Oh, by the way, my 13-year-old self didn't fancy Brian. I was rather taken with Bill at the time (probably just as well I never got the chance to meet him!)
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Blueranger
()
Date: April 27, 2011 15:51
In one way Brian Jones is overrated:
Some people think he IS The Rolling Stones, and that nothing after him are worth to bother with. Some think that every song The Stones recorded in the 60's, are because of him. That's not exactly the truth, and I don't agree with that opinion. However, the colour he added to the songs and the fact he was the bands founder, makes him a VERY important member indeed. -But he didn't write any material, which is first and foremost the foundation you need as a band to be original.
Some people think he IS The Rolling Stones, and that nothing after him are worth to bother with. Some think that every song The Stones recorded in the 60's, are because of him. That's not exactly the truth, and I don't agree with that opinion. However, the colour he added to the songs and the fact he was the bands founder, makes him a VERY important member indeed. -But he didn't write any material, which is first and foremost the foundation you need as a band to be original.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 27, 2011 17:58
Overrated? Well, maybe he is by some Rolling Stones fans. But then again, in terms of what one did and achieved the band and into what degree, I think Keith Richards is overrated (by the expanse of the others or judging his own musical skills) by clearly bigger crowd of Rolling Stones fans these days. Just my observation. It is very relative in the end.
- Doxa
- Doxa
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
tedg
()
Date: April 27, 2011 18:17
Listen to the live version of Ruby Tuesday from April '67 on the boots.....Jones sure kicked it live on the flute on this one....
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Sleepy City
()
Date: April 27, 2011 18:27
The only over-rated RS as far as I'm concerned is Mick Taylor, particularly on here. Sure, he was / is an amazing player, but I think I agree with Bill Wyman in that he never really fit in. But Brian is vastly under-appreciated by most RS fans.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: April 27, 2011 18:28
Quote
Blueranger
he didn't write any material
That's simply not true...
He was part of the Nanker-Phelge song writing credit and he wrote many song defining instrument parts(The Last Time guitar hook being one), some of which for all we know may even have inspired songs in the first place.
He also wrote a film soundtrack.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 27, 2011 18:57
Quote
Sleepy City
The only over-rated RS as far as I'm concerned is Mick Taylor, particularly on here. Sure, he was / is an amazing player, but I think I agree with Bill Wyman in that he never really fit in. But Brian is vastly under-appreciated by most RS fans.
I think that is clearly true. Even though he is over-estimated by some hardcore Stones fans he is much wider clearly under-estimated by many other hardcore Stones fans (i.e. IORR contributors). But what is funny that outside the devoted Stones fans Brian Jones and his era is much more appreciated by 'general public'. Hardly no one knows Mick Taylor or cares about Ron Wood, or what The Stones have done musically for the last 30 years or something. But the significance of the Jones era - the time when the Stones really were relevant - remains quite glorified and eternal. I can only imagine how much it bothers Jagger that he cannot control the most legendary material that made him and them legendary and famous. No "Satisfaction", no "Paint It Black", no "Jumpin' Jack Flash", no "Gimme Sheler", no "Ruby Tuesday", no "Street Fighting Man",no "Sympathy For The devil", AFTERMATH, BEGGARS, LET IT BLEED, etc. All those historical, epoch making songs and albums they compete with the legendary Beatles.... What he has to trade is a couple of hits ("Brown Sugar", "Angie", "Miss you" "Start Me Up") and few albums (STICKY, EXILE, SOME GIRLS and TATTOO YOU) with which he tries to sell the legacy. For the infamous 'Kleinien' reasons The Stones legacy seems to live as a double existence. I think for that very reason The Stones are not either so willing to appreciate the Kleinian controlled era. It is not just neglecting Brian Jones - it the whole goddamn 'lost' era that it is a hard case for them.
Funny - I visited Dressmann clothing's store the other day where they are selling the new HOT STUFF collection CD (covering the post 1971 era). I heard some people discussing buying of it but one said "but where all the famous hits - you know those great songs?".
- Doxa
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: April 27, 2011 19:04
Quote
His Majesty
He was part of the Nanker-Phelge song writing credit
But that vehicle was created to give Oldham a share of the royalties, and not specially for Brian, Watts or Wyman.
Mathijs
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: April 27, 2011 19:07
Quote
MathijsQuote
His Majesty
He was part of the Nanker-Phelge song writing credit
But that vehicle was created to give Oldham a share of the royalties, and not specially for Brian, Watts or Wyman.
Mathijs
He was still part of it.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: April 27, 2011 19:19
John Lennon said Brian Jones wasn't a genius either. I disagree. I think that's what sets Brian apart. There was just a grain of genius in what he did. The way he was ahead of his time, the slide lead on 'I Wanna Be Your Man'. I find him emotionally devastating on Ruby Tuesday and No Expectations. And I don't even have words for his mellotron on '2000 Light Years From Home'.
Brian died before people discovered him individually and asked him his thoughts on what he'd created. Or to find out what was going through his mind during his tenure in the Stones. This was an intelligent guy with a lot of problems, most of them self created. But he was an original, and crucial to the early Stones.
Brian died before people discovered him individually and asked him his thoughts on what he'd created. Or to find out what was going through his mind during his tenure in the Stones. This was an intelligent guy with a lot of problems, most of them self created. But he was an original, and crucial to the early Stones.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Wry Cooter
()
Date: April 27, 2011 19:26
My comment that Jones was an adequate to pretty good harmonica player (and that I felt Jagger was better -- I should have added "ultimately" better ---- all just my opinion) was (shockingly!)pulled out of context. My point was that Jones' talent was, as so many others have stated here, as an overall musician. He may have been a somewhat better harmonica player than sitar or marimba player, but not by that much. He was not a fantastic harmonica player -- any more than Jagger is. Magic Dick is a fantastic harmonica player. Jones was arguably a fantastic musician though. His harmonica playing added to the song.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Blueranger
()
Date: April 27, 2011 19:27
Quote
His MajestyQuote
MathijsQuote
His Majesty
He was part of the Nanker-Phelge song writing credit
But that vehicle was created to give Oldham a share of the royalties, and not specially for Brian, Watts or Wyman.
Mathijs
He was still part of it.
Yes, but he was not a 'Song Writer'. He was a genius on various instruments. That alone does not make him The Rolling Stones. Then you could say Watts was also a composer on his drums. Jones was an instrumentalist, not a songwriter. Please note that I'm a big fan of Jones.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: April 27, 2011 19:28
Quote
Wry Cooter
He was not a fantastic harmonica player -- any more than Jagger is.
He was technically ahead of Jagger by quite a bit.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: April 27, 2011 19:29
He was great just as he was for what he contributed, particularly the unusual instruments in the period from '65-'67. He didn't need to be a virtuoso on any of those instruments, his talent was finding just the right sound a song needed and getting that down...The only time he is "overrated" are by those people who project all kinds of qualities on him that he didn't have (songwriter for one) and believe in a certain kind of conspiracy theory about his band being "stolen" from him, etc.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: April 27, 2011 19:38
Quote
Blueranger
Yes, but he was not a 'Song Writer'. He was a genius on various instruments. That alone does not make him The Rolling Stones. Then you could say Watts was also a composer on his drums. Jones was an instrumentalist, not a songwriter. Please note that I'm a big fan of Jones.
Brian was vital to the arrangement side of things, inorder to make interesting music you need lots of creativity, ability and originality. It is a creative form in itself, it can and does inspire changes to main vocal melodies etc.
A basic chord and lyric can sound great or completely crap depending on the arrangement or lack of. Yes Charlie would have had input to the arrangements, but this is a thread about Brian.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-04-27 19:50 by His Majesty.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
organicjoe
()
Date: April 27, 2011 21:58
I always felt sad for Jones, sure the early stuff was great, but why didn’t he understand that Beggar’s Banquet was going to catapult them into The Greatest Rock And Roll Band. Jimmy Miller said that he didn’t record Jones. Which brings me to this: Where would the Stones be if it wasn’t for Miller? Maybe that question is for another thread.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
crawdaddy
()
Date: April 27, 2011 22:06
Brian Jones. Overrated?
No.
No.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
1812
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10