Tell Me :
Talk
Well...serious respect for your objectivity....The '78 Detroit When the Whip Comes Down is just amazing. 1981, and Hampton, as you note, is GREAT in a way they've not been since. But '78 Detroit, on this song, was great in a way that they almost didn't achieve even with the mighty MT. That's supremely debatable, even to myself, and Yes, that's saying a lot...but they punked it out, and @#$%&' delivered, and so did RW in particular, in a major-Faces-sort-of-way, on that Masonic Hall night in '78. In fact, for that one number, I'll say that Mick, Ronnie, Keith, and the the amps/sound system/guitar mix/ and ATTITUDE came together in a way that's almost impossible to beat.
And you know, I REALLY want to know who was responsible for editing the complete take of the Detroit '78 When the Whip Comes Down to the slightly shorter Sucking in the 70's version, as the version that appears on Sucking in the 70's is actually stronger because of that short edit. Good job, unnamed prole, for that edit. You created almost the perfect live soundbite of raw, powerful, rocky/punk/timeless live Stones.
Actually Keith wasnt off H in 1978, he tried to kick it before the tour though. I like 1981 but it realluy depends on song and show. I would not call it the prototype, 1989- is something different all together. But I see your point, Ron is in the back and he stayed there. He wasnt in 1978.
Sure?
I laughed when I watched the 81' vid. Looks like a scene from Pee Wee Herman.
Yes in 89 they became the greatest band in the world again. I guess every band reaches a low point but they came out of it in 89.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-08-11 16:33 by More Hot Rocks.
Well, to me his singing in the 81 clip sounds tire and hoarse. No upper register in his growl.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
rocker1
()
Date: August 11, 2011 06:33
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Nothing can blow the version of Whip from Detroit 1978 away. But the rest of the versions from 1978 weren't better than the one from Hampton 1981, imo.
Well...serious respect for your objectivity....The '78 Detroit When the Whip Comes Down is just amazing. 1981, and Hampton, as you note, is GREAT in a way they've not been since. But '78 Detroit, on this song, was great in a way that they almost didn't achieve even with the mighty MT. That's supremely debatable, even to myself, and Yes, that's saying a lot...but they punked it out, and @#$%&' delivered, and so did RW in particular, in a major-Faces-sort-of-way, on that Masonic Hall night in '78. In fact, for that one number, I'll say that Mick, Ronnie, Keith, and the the amps/sound system/guitar mix/ and ATTITUDE came together in a way that's almost impossible to beat.
And you know, I REALLY want to know who was responsible for editing the complete take of the Detroit '78 When the Whip Comes Down to the slightly shorter Sucking in the 70's version, as the version that appears on Sucking in the 70's is actually stronger because of that short edit. Good job, unnamed prole, for that edit. You created almost the perfect live soundbite of raw, powerful, rocky/punk/timeless live Stones.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: August 11, 2011 09:06
Quote
paulmQuote
More Hot RocksQuote
whitem8
well i guess 81 was good if you don't mind bright pastels, football warm up pants, and barking vocals with a perma coke cold...
'78, while the sets were short, was wonderful. Full on guitar onslaught, and tons of great new material to wow the audiences. And listening to Handsome Girls Jagger sang great!
don't forget the cherry picker
Ya see, that's what I'm talkin' about: '78 saw the Stones off Some Girls with its country, disco and rock sound, Keith off H, and Charlie was kicking the h3ll out of the bass drum. Interesting time, different from the past. Live, I'm going on Passaic and Youtube mostly.
Although Start Me Up kicks butt, '81 Live by comparison is vacuous, and forgive me RW apologists, but the whole ciggy between the picking hand fingers, hanging in the background looking sheepishly at his Jack Daniel'ed bud does nothing for me. Keith seems extra loaded on the '81 shows. He totally carries the guitar, and I really miss someone like MT watching these vids. Although I enjoy watching for comparison and commentary, '81 misses any kind of "edge" or novel groove for me. YMMV.
What '81 does deliver is the prototype for the next 30 years.
Actually Keith wasnt off H in 1978, he tried to kick it before the tour though. I like 1981 but it realluy depends on song and show. I would not call it the prototype, 1989- is something different all together. But I see your point, Ron is in the back and he stayed there. He wasnt in 1978.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
Edward Twining
()
Date: August 11, 2011 09:27
78 was just so much better. Jagger is hardly singing at all in 81.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: August 11, 2011 10:16
Quote
rocker1Quote
DandelionPowderman
Nothing can blow the version of Whip from Detroit 1978 away. But the rest of the versions from 1978 weren't better than the one from Hampton 1981, imo.
Well...serious respect for your objectivity....The '78 Detroit When the Whip Comes Down is just amazing. 1981, and Hampton, as you note, is GREAT in a way they've not been since. But '78 Detroit, on this song, was great in a way that they almost didn't achieve even with the mighty MT. That's supremely debatable, even to myself, and Yes, that's saying a lot...but they punked it out, and @#$%&' delivered, and so did RW in particular, in a major-Faces-sort-of-way, on that Masonic Hall night in '78. In fact, for that one number, I'll say that Mick, Ronnie, Keith, and the the amps/sound system/guitar mix/ and ATTITUDE came together in a way that's almost impossible to beat.
And you know, I REALLY want to know who was responsible for editing the complete take of the Detroit '78 When the Whip Comes Down to the slightly shorter Sucking in the 70's version, as the version that appears on Sucking in the 70's is actually stronger because of that short edit. Good job, unnamed prole, for that edit. You created almost the perfect live soundbite of raw, powerful, rocky/punk/timeless live Stones.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: August 11, 2011 13:53
"and now from England the Rolling @#$%& Stones!" What a way to open a concert, and how different they would look in three years. Gone is the punk attitude, the stripped down approach, and the raw edge. Replaced by bright pastels, a members only jacket (ultimate preppy!), and the beginning of corporate sponsors.
The '78 tour was a fast and furious statement behind one of their strongest albums ever. Loud, raucous, and raw. Jagger is singing wonderful, listening to Handsome Girls as I type. He is actually SINGING! Not barking and he is full on raunch. Wonderful. And the guitars. GLORIOUS. Charlie is way up in the mix and on fire. This was the tour that revitalized their rep as the bad boys of rock.
In contrast the '81 tour was the beginning of the big cash in. Huge stadiums and posters with their corporate sponsor's logo... and then there is the music. A shambles of disarray. Moments of beauty to be sure, but mostly a mess. And Jagger during the American leg of the tour sounds hoarse and with his vocal chords drowning in coke sputum. He sounds congested and wounded.
The '78 tour was a fast and furious statement behind one of their strongest albums ever. Loud, raucous, and raw. Jagger is singing wonderful, listening to Handsome Girls as I type. He is actually SINGING! Not barking and he is full on raunch. Wonderful. And the guitars. GLORIOUS. Charlie is way up in the mix and on fire. This was the tour that revitalized their rep as the bad boys of rock.
In contrast the '81 tour was the beginning of the big cash in. Huge stadiums and posters with their corporate sponsor's logo... and then there is the music. A shambles of disarray. Moments of beauty to be sure, but mostly a mess. And Jagger during the American leg of the tour sounds hoarse and with his vocal chords drowning in coke sputum. He sounds congested and wounded.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: August 11, 2011 14:04
Quote
whitem8
"and now from England the Rolling @#$%& Stones!" What a way to open a concert, and how different they would look in three years. Gone is the punk attitude, the stripped down approach, and the raw edge. Replaced by bright pastels, a members only jacket (ultimate preppy!), and the beginning of corporate sponsors.
The '78 tour was a fast and furious statement behind one of their strongest albums ever. Loud, raucous, and raw. Jagger is singing wonderful, listening to Handsome Girls as I type. He is actually SINGING! Not barking and he is full on raunch. Wonderful. And the guitars. GLORIOUS. Charlie is way up in the mix and on fire. This was the tour that revitalized their rep as the bad boys of rock.
In contrast the '81 tour was the beginning of the big cash in. Huge stadiums and posters with their corporate sponsor's logo... and then there is the music. A shambles of disarray. Moments of beauty to be sure, but mostly a mess. And Jagger during the American leg of the tour sounds hoarse and with his vocal chords drowning in coke sputum. He sounds congested and wounded.
Sure?
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: August 11, 2011 14:09
Um yeah. Your two videos show that clearly. Boy that 78 version is miles ahead of the 81 version you posted.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: August 11, 2011 14:16
I was talking about the singing. Both are filled with growl, spitting, barking and singing - just the way I want Jagger to sing. Brilliant!
Of course 78 is the best overall.
Of course 78 is the best overall.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
More Hot Rocks
()
Date: August 11, 2011 14:42
Quote
whitem8
Um yeah. Your two videos show that clearly. Boy that 78 version is miles ahead of the 81 version you posted.
I laughed when I watched the 81' vid. Looks like a scene from Pee Wee Herman.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
paulm
()
Date: August 11, 2011 15:35
right on whitem8, +1, good critical content. guess we both see '81 as the beginning of the "machine." I think the machine got more polished after '81. I saw them in '89 and it was a highly lubed machine. In retrospect, not terribly novel, but man what a machine.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
More Hot Rocks
()
Date: August 11, 2011 15:40
Quote
paulm
right on whitem8, +1, good critical content. guess we both see '81 as the beginning of the "machine." I think the machine got more polished after '81. I saw them in '89 and it was a highly lubed machine. In retrospect, not terribly novel, but man what a machine.
Yes in 89 they became the greatest band in the world again. I guess every band reaches a low point but they came out of it in 89.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-08-11 16:33 by More Hot Rocks.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: August 11, 2011 15:59
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I was talking about the singing. Both are filled with growl, spitting, barking and singing - just the way I want Jagger to sing. Brilliant!
Of course 78 is the best overall.
Well, to me his singing in the 81 clip sounds tire and hoarse. No upper register in his growl.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
paulm
()
Date: August 11, 2011 16:18
At the risk of more baby crying vids and other non sequiturs, judging by this thread's critical content (whitem8, ed twining, morehot et al) can we deduce that '81 was the beginning of the "cash in" or "machine", and the end of notable artistic merit? I for one will say yes.
Not that the 60s and 70s weren't a machine, but the art was king. From '81 on, for me, the machine became the thing. Again, the machine isn't bad: in the Stones' case it became sublime. But the machine is different than novel artistry, which the band exhibited up through '78. And the jewel of '81, Start Me Up, was a leftover from the 70s.
Not that the 60s and 70s weren't a machine, but the art was king. From '81 on, for me, the machine became the thing. Again, the machine isn't bad: in the Stones' case it became sublime. But the machine is different than novel artistry, which the band exhibited up through '78. And the jewel of '81, Start Me Up, was a leftover from the 70s.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
Elmo Lewis
()
Date: August 11, 2011 17:03
Handsome Girls is my favorite Stones live album.
Re: '78 vs. '81 Live: Yikes!
Posted by:
paulm
()
Date: August 11, 2011 17:09
Cool, I've got a cassette marked Memphis '78 and was unaware that's H.G. Do you have Passaic? Rocks. Also watching Ft. Worth on youtube. Great stuff.
Dandelion, good vid comparison. '78 hands down for me: Ron Wood is playing much better in '78, and there's an edge, excitement that just turns stale for me in the neon '81 performances. I do believe it is also related to the material: Some Girls was unique in so many ways. That energy carries over in the performances.
Also, as huge a MT fan as I am, when I listen to and see these '78 performances, I'm reminded of Ron Wood's contributions. Some Girls and even Emo. Rescue brought out some signature Strat bends from RW, playful over the context of the rock songs. Definitely Keith and Ron's "golden age" together.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2011-08-11 17:39 by paulm.
Dandelion, good vid comparison. '78 hands down for me: Ron Wood is playing much better in '78, and there's an edge, excitement that just turns stale for me in the neon '81 performances. I do believe it is also related to the material: Some Girls was unique in so many ways. That energy carries over in the performances.
Also, as huge a MT fan as I am, when I listen to and see these '78 performances, I'm reminded of Ron Wood's contributions. Some Girls and even Emo. Rescue brought out some signature Strat bends from RW, playful over the context of the rock songs. Definitely Keith and Ron's "golden age" together.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2011-08-11 17:39 by paulm.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
1StonesRecluse , BeastyBurdeny , fanch , gaizoku , lamemodem2 , mariano , mgmiller , Papo , Quique-stone , rbarnes00 , Rokyfan , snoopy2 , tinnitus , TW2019
Guests:
1590
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10