Tell Me :
Talk
The big crap!
"Você foi...
O maior dos meus casos
De todos os abraços
O que eu nunca esqueci"
:-)
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-09 00:38 by carlostones10.
That's because its only July 2011, you idiot. And what kind of journalist (or even the moron who edits his articles) can't differentiate between the words 'sight' and 'site'?
His dismissal of Rahman proves that he simply shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a typewriter.
Agreed...although I can understand the journalists exasperation. I think most of us have had these same feelings at some point over the last two years.
It would be nice if they were able to bury the hatchet one last time, for a MUCH BETTER than mediocre album and tour.
ABSOLUTELY 100 % AGREED WITH YOUR POST 24FPS ... THE STONES GROOVE IS LONG GONE... BILL AND CHARLIE ... DO I MISS THEM TOGETHER.
I think that Esquire's article is total bullshit although it praises my favorite band. The writer is the type of @#$%& who at a rolling stones concert would probably throw bottles, cans and other shit at the opening act because the jerk doesn't like their music.
Rock and Roll,
Mops
he never would have spent the effort on the re issue of Exile if he didn't like it.
"It's just some friends of mine and they're busting down the door"
Not true about Exile. He just prefers a few other records.
If the Stones make a record, it means Mick and Keith having to work in close proximity for weeks or months at a time. Do people actually still believe that they (and especially Mick) find that prospect appealing?
At least on a tour (once the rehearsals are over) they can pretty much get away with avoiding being together apart from the hour and a half or so that they have to share a stage.
And it pays more.
I know it's bad, but is it really that bad?
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
paulm
()
Date: July 8, 2011 23:40
I second MJ's harsh vocal tone...that and his ever-increasing affectations are irritating on my ears.
Marley and Joss' banter is amusing and the groove is good! That's the most natural part of the thing.
Marley and Joss' banter is amusing and the groove is good! That's the most natural part of the thing.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
carlostones10
()
Date: July 9, 2011 00:37
Quote
mtaylorBrazilian crapQuote
carlostones10Quote
mtaylorBetter than the crap of Roberto Carlos.Quote
carlostones10
No no so bad how I thought.
hahahah... nothing is worst than Roberto Carlos.
The king is really the big crap.
The big crap!
"Você foi...
O maior dos meus casos
De todos os abraços
O que eu nunca esqueci"
:-)
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-09 00:38 by carlostones10.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
mtaylor
()
Date: July 9, 2011 00:59
Se deus quiser blah, blah, blah.....Quote
carlostones10Quote
mtaylorBrazilian crapQuote
carlostones10Quote
mtaylorBetter than the crap of Roberto Carlos.Quote
carlostones10
No no so bad how I thought.
hahahah... nothing is worst than Roberto Carlos.
The king is really the big crap.
The big crap!
"Você foi...
O maior dos meus casos
De todos os abraços
O que eu nunca esqueci"
:-)
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: July 9, 2011 02:30
Quote
proudmary
The Complaint: SuperHeavy Is Not the Rolling Stones
Of course it's not. But Mick Jagger's new "super group" begs the question: What ever happened to the biggest band in the world?
By Matt Sullivan
Out from under the Tiki-bar bullshit that is SuperHeavy's first single, "Miracle Worker" (listen at the 1:45:15 mark here), right after Damien Marley shouts Well that's your own opinion / You're entitled to it, emerges the growl that can wake up the world. It's Mick Jagger, of course, and he sounds about 67-going-on-35 — better than on his solo album a decade ago, maybe even better than why I saw him croon a medley of Damien's dad's stuff on the last Rolling Stones tour five years back. Which kind of makes you angry. Here we are, approaching the fiftieth anniversary of the Stones, and there is no anniversary tour in site, no summoning of energies for the kings of energy — just the band in exile, and Mick in something like a "super group," which, considering it includes Marley and a Eurythmic and the guy who wrote the music for Slumdog Millionaire, really isn't that super at all.
It says something when the head of the greatest group in the history of groups is struggling to assemble a super group.
Now you could blame everyone from Kurt Cobain and Sublime's Bradley Noel, who died and went to hell and left the door open for Britney Spears and the Backstreet Boys, to Lady Gaga and Justin Bieber, who are to rock-and-roll bands what Bruce Lee was to a circle of ninjas in every direction. But would the biggest band in the world please stand up? Do the Kings of Leon have to suffice, really? Do the Red Hot Chili Peppers, with a record coming out next month that, without their drug-riddled guitar player, is bound to be as bland as the last? And so, we are stuck either with Coldplay or U2 or, (much) better still, with Radiohead — who would just as soon be the smallest band in the world, though they could do none of the things they do without, in fact, being the most influential. Unless, of course, Mick picks up the gang and wakes up the next great rock act — the Black Keys, or whomever — to be suddenly, and energetically, bigger than themselves, and thus anyone.
Read more: [www.esquire.com]
That's because its only July 2011, you idiot. And what kind of journalist (or even the moron who edits his articles) can't differentiate between the words 'sight' and 'site'?
His dismissal of Rahman proves that he simply shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a typewriter.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
MingSubu
()
Date: July 9, 2011 03:15
Ok, a Stones/SuperHeavy question.
Which would you rather have. A kickass SuperHeavy album, or a mediocre Stones album?
Which would you rather have. A kickass SuperHeavy album, or a mediocre Stones album?
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: July 9, 2011 04:24
I'd like to hear a great album over a mediocre album regardless of who the artist is...the world wont stop revolving on it's axis in the absence of a new Stones record.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: July 9, 2011 04:30
Quote
Gazza
I'd like to hear a great album over a mediocre album regardless of who the artist is...the world wont stop revolving on it's axis in the absence of a new Stones record.
Agreed...although I can understand the journalists exasperation. I think most of us have had these same feelings at some point over the last two years.
It would be nice if they were able to bury the hatchet one last time, for a MUCH BETTER than mediocre album and tour.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
melillo
()
Date: July 9, 2011 04:47
I think alot of the looking forward to comments are much to do with the stones inactivity
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
Loudei
()
Date: July 9, 2011 05:03
I think Super Heavy is the answer on why the Stones have struggled creatively for so many years and just stuck with the touring money machine - the one thing they could do together. Super Heavy tells me how tough it must be for Mick and Keith to make an album together. It tells me how Mick just could not wait any longer to have a mainstream act or try to have one. I am sure this is difficult for Keith, and me... but I have to be real - Artists must like what they do... and yet I remind myself, Mick never liked Exile on Mainstreet.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: July 9, 2011 05:54
I think the Stones have simply reached the 'What Now?' stage. Voodoo Lounge and A Bigger Bang were mostly retread sounds, echoes of earlier triumphs. Bridges to Babylon was an attempt to modernize but Keith didn't seem into it. They may be facing the studio with dread. There's no 'new' for them to assimilate and still sound like the Stones. Artists need to be inspired. There's nothing inspiring about their last few albums. That's why those goosed up Exile outtakes were such a blessing. I know Bob Dylan has said they're a funk band without Bill Wyman, but man, they sure sounded funkier with him.
That's what I've missed on the last three albums, a good Stones groove.
That's what I've missed on the last three albums, a good Stones groove.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
Loudei
()
Date: July 9, 2011 07:30
Quote
24FPS
I think the Stones have simply reached the 'What Now?' stage. Voodoo Lounge and A Bigger Bang were mostly retread sounds, echoes of earlier triumphs. Bridges to Babylon was an attempt to modernize but Keith didn't seem into it. They may be facing the studio with dread. There's no 'new' for them to assimilate and still sound like the Stones. Artists need to be inspired. There's nothing inspiring about their last few albums. That's why those goosed up Exile outtakes were such a blessing. I know Bob Dylan has said they're a funk band without Bill Wyman, but man, they sure sounded funkier with him.
That's what I've missed on the last three albums, a good Stones groove.
ABSOLUTELY 100 % AGREED WITH YOUR POST 24FPS ... THE STONES GROOVE IS LONG GONE... BILL AND CHARLIE ... DO I MISS THEM TOGETHER.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: July 9, 2011 07:40
I'm getting into this song, and I like Mick's vocal as well.
Here is a free listen Rahman facebook page
[www.facebook.com]
Here is a free listen Rahman facebook page
[www.facebook.com]
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
Glam Descendant
()
Date: July 9, 2011 09:07
>Mick never liked Exile on Mainstreet.
That's a myth. On the RS Fan Club 7" issued in'83, Mick says his favorite Stones albums are EOMS & SF.
That's a myth. On the RS Fan Club 7" issued in'83, Mick says his favorite Stones albums are EOMS & SF.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
rollmops
()
Date: July 9, 2011 14:41
Quote
GazzaQuote
proudmary
The Complaint: SuperHeavy Is Not the Rolling Stones
Of course it's not. But Mick Jagger's new "super group" begs the question: What ever happened to the biggest band in the world?
By Matt Sullivan
Out from under the Tiki-bar bullshit that is SuperHeavy's first single, "Miracle Worker" (listen at the 1:45:15 mark here), right after Damien Marley shouts Well that's your own opinion / You're entitled to it, emerges the growl that can wake up the world. It's Mick Jagger, of course, and he sounds about 67-going-on-35 — better than on his solo album a decade ago, maybe even better than why I saw him croon a medley of Damien's dad's stuff on the last Rolling Stones tour five years back. Which kind of makes you angry. Here we are, approaching the fiftieth anniversary of the Stones, and there is no anniversary tour in site, no summoning of energies for the kings of energy — just the band in exile, and Mick in something like a "super group," which, considering it includes Marley and a Eurythmic and the guy who wrote the music for Slumdog Millionaire, really isn't that super at all.
It says something when the head of the greatest group in the history of groups is struggling to assemble a super group.
Now you could blame everyone from Kurt Cobain and Sublime's Bradley Noel, who died and went to hell and left the door open for Britney Spears and the Backstreet Boys, to Lady Gaga and Justin Bieber, who are to rock-and-roll bands what Bruce Lee was to a circle of ninjas in every direction. But would the biggest band in the world please stand up? Do the Kings of Leon have to suffice, really? Do the Red Hot Chili Peppers, with a record coming out next month that, without their drug-riddled guitar player, is bound to be as bland as the last? And so, we are stuck either with Coldplay or U2 or, (much) better still, with Radiohead — who would just as soon be the smallest band in the world, though they could do none of the things they do without, in fact, being the most influential. Unless, of course, Mick picks up the gang and wakes up the next great rock act — the Black Keys, or whomever — to be suddenly, and energetically, bigger than themselves, and thus anyone.
Read more: [www.esquire.com]
That's because its only July 2011, you idiot. And what kind of journalist (or even the moron who edits his articles) can't differentiate between the words 'sight' and 'site'?
His dismissal of Rahman proves that he simply shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a typewriter.
I think that Esquire's article is total bullshit although it praises my favorite band. The writer is the type of @#$%& who at a rolling stones concert would probably throw bottles, cans and other shit at the opening act because the jerk doesn't like their music.
Rock and Roll,
Mops
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
Rip This
()
Date: July 9, 2011 16:51
Quote
Glam Descendant
>Mick never liked Exile on Mainstreet.
That's a myth. On the RS Fan Club 7" issued in'83, Mick says his favorite Stones albums are EOMS & SF.
he never would have spent the effort on the re issue of Exile if he didn't like it.Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
paulm
()
Date: July 9, 2011 17:17
24FPS and Loudei nailed it above.
As much as we romanticize the Stones, and I used to be guilty of that, having seen them 5th row in '89, looking back, the music really hasn't stood up after Start Me Up. I was wondering why MJ's contemporary voice really wears on me, like on this recent recording, then I heard JJF and Sympathy on the radio yesterday. I did a close listen and I realized that his "golden era" voice was really enjoyable; heck we love it. But why?
For me, because it's GENUINE. I hear relevancy there, a message to get across. It's the real dude. Like Keith says in his book, fame got to MJ's head. He became a cultivated caricature of himself, actually a pretty good one, but that relevancy is gone. Too much affectation and predictability. Probably a protection/survival thing. Fame would probably make most of us weird. That, and let's be honest, KR really hasn't evolved as a musician.
Since the 90's I have been hoping that the Stones would produce something new, relevant and real. Hasn't happened. We often expect way too much from our heroes, but they're only human.
And KR sure didn't help things along with his MJ dick blasts in his book. A counselor might say KR is subconsciously sabotaging that relationship. I'm guessing for some kind of hurt, real or perceived. Anyway...
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-09 17:30 by paulm.
As much as we romanticize the Stones, and I used to be guilty of that, having seen them 5th row in '89, looking back, the music really hasn't stood up after Start Me Up. I was wondering why MJ's contemporary voice really wears on me, like on this recent recording, then I heard JJF and Sympathy on the radio yesterday. I did a close listen and I realized that his "golden era" voice was really enjoyable; heck we love it. But why?
For me, because it's GENUINE. I hear relevancy there, a message to get across. It's the real dude. Like Keith says in his book, fame got to MJ's head. He became a cultivated caricature of himself, actually a pretty good one, but that relevancy is gone. Too much affectation and predictability. Probably a protection/survival thing. Fame would probably make most of us weird. That, and let's be honest, KR really hasn't evolved as a musician.
Since the 90's I have been hoping that the Stones would produce something new, relevant and real. Hasn't happened. We often expect way too much from our heroes, but they're only human.
And KR sure didn't help things along with his MJ dick blasts in his book. A counselor might say KR is subconsciously sabotaging that relationship. I'm guessing for some kind of hurt, real or perceived. Anyway...
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-09 17:30 by paulm.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: July 9, 2011 21:50
You wonder if Keith and Mick didn't have to be in contact over the Stones, how close they would be? George and John hardly spoke at all the last few years of John's life. Mick doesn't have to explain who he is, or how he lives, to anyone. He is not the Mick Jagger of 1968. Have any of you,who were living at the time, changed since 1968? Keith attacking Mick is like blowing spitwads at an elephant. Mick is way too big a superstar, and is still desired on his own. See the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame performance with U2. He's fantastic. He was great on the Grammys. Mick has done the work to stay in shape, to be relevant. Keith is the one whose become a caricature of himself. He seems to have settled into old age and things ain't going to change, by gum.
And all of it is fine. My god, what that group has given to all of us for so long. That won't be duplicated. And, I must admit, it's kind of funny to see Keith be a whiny, spoiled, insecure 'star' in his book. But I'll bet you if Mick was in trouble, he'd tear across the world to help. So far it's been Mick that's always had to stand behind Keith. And this is the thanks he got.
And all of it is fine. My god, what that group has given to all of us for so long. That won't be duplicated. And, I must admit, it's kind of funny to see Keith be a whiny, spoiled, insecure 'star' in his book. But I'll bet you if Mick was in trouble, he'd tear across the world to help. So far it's been Mick that's always had to stand behind Keith. And this is the thanks he got.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
paulm
()
Date: July 9, 2011 22:46
Well that's an interesting take, but I think KR's words affect MJ more than the spitball metaphor. It has crossed my mind that MJ's lifestyle has kept him more vital, whereas KR is aging quicker, and maybe feels he's falling behind, and MJ doesn't want to get dragged down. Who knows? Life is ephemeral. One thing's for sure; they're all enjoying life big time: wives, grandkids, luxury, legacy, horses, radio show awards...
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
sweetcharmedlife
()
Date: July 10, 2011 01:19
How would we know what a kick ass SuperHeavy album is when they've never put one out?Quote
MingSubu
Ok, a Stones/SuperHeavy question.
Which would you rather have. A kickass SuperHeavy album, or a mediocre Stones album?
"It's just some friends of mine and they're busting down the door"
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: July 10, 2011 01:32
Quote
Loudei
I think Super Heavy is the answer on why the Stones have struggled creatively for so many years and just stuck with the touring money machine - the one thing they could do together. Super Heavy tells me how tough it must be for Mick and Keith to make an album together. It tells me how Mick just could not wait any longer to have a mainstream act or try to have one. I am sure this is difficult for Keith, and me... but I have to be real - Artists must like what they do... and yet I remind myself, Mick never liked Exile on Mainstreet.
Not true about Exile. He just prefers a few other records.
If the Stones make a record, it means Mick and Keith having to work in close proximity for weeks or months at a time. Do people actually still believe that they (and especially Mick) find that prospect appealing?
At least on a tour (once the rehearsals are over) they can pretty much get away with avoiding being together apart from the hour and a half or so that they have to share a stage.
And it pays more.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: July 10, 2011 02:52
Quote
Gazza
At least on a tour (once the rehearsals are over) they can pretty much get away with avoiding being together apart from the hour and a half or so that they have to share a stage.
I know it's bad, but is it really that bad?
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: July 10, 2011 02:58
'Mick hasnt been to my dressing room in 20 years' - Keith.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
paulm
()
Date: July 10, 2011 04:35
Seems it is that bad, and that multi-million dollar paydays buy a degree of tolerance.Quote
Gazza
'Mick hasnt been to my dressing room in 20 years' - Keith.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: July 10, 2011 18:47
Put me down as one that loves this track! And once again, Mick's singing is great!!
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
proudmary
()
Date: July 10, 2011 19:23
“my loving laser will regenerate your heart/ no need for anesthetics, I’ll go check your charts/ I will reshape you, recast you from the mold/ a brand new beautiful woman will blossom from the old”
he's almost 70 and still he sings about his loving laser
I like it
he's almost 70 and still he sings about his loving laser
I like it
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
proudmary
()
Date: July 11, 2011 14:12
The sneak peak at the recording of the track Newborn Baby from the SuperHeavy team of A.R. Rahman, Mick Jagger, Dave Stewart, Joss Stone and Damian Marley.
SuperHeavy Exclusive: Recording of 'Newborn Baby'
[www.facebook.com]
Says Rahman, “It took me back to my high school days when I played with a rock band, but this was a real one.” ‘Miracle Worker…’ is the first of seven singles in the untitled album, which is slated for a September-end release.“Miracle Worker” is coming out on [July] 7th, and in India we also want to release one more song, called “Satyameva Jayate,” that the band, all of us, have done together. And I’m very excited about it, too.
SuperHeavy Exclusive: Recording of 'Newborn Baby'
[www.facebook.com]
Says Rahman, “It took me back to my high school days when I played with a rock band, but this was a real one.” ‘Miracle Worker…’ is the first of seven singles in the untitled album, which is slated for a September-end release.“Miracle Worker” is coming out on [July] 7th, and in India we also want to release one more song, called “Satyameva Jayate,” that the band, all of us, have done together. And I’m very excited about it, too.
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
maumau
()
Date: July 11, 2011 15:30
have to admit that the clip of the recording of newborn baby is fascinating
Re: Super Heavy with Mick Jagger
Posted by:
maumau
()
Date: July 11, 2011 16:26
i didn't notice this before: "seven singles..."
WHAT!
7seven7?
WHAT!
7seven7?
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
AJDuffer , jason8903 , keefmick , MichaelLassen , monkeymantoo , NedKellyBandit , quarkie , sandandglue , spunky , TooTight , TW2019 , waterrats
Guests:
2112
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10