Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Vocalion

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Eirik
Nice songs. Rock'n Roll, Blues, Country. I like the b-side version of So Young from Love Is Strong better, though. I don't know why you guys think the vocals on Don't Be A Stranger are so horrible ????? But the cd is so loud. Again...

Don't Be A Stranger is great and there are lots of good words about the song on the board. But people who hate all modern Jagger-related obviously hate Don't Be A Stranger too.
The irony is the fact that they can hardly distinguish the difference between 77 and 2011 vocals, say, on I Love You Too Much when they thought it's 2011's Jagger it was awful, then it was turned out to be 77 - and ok.
Both songs are very good and I love how Mick sings no matter what year

Nobody in this thread claims any such things....

Well that's a nonsense statement (proudmary's I mean). 2 people - or was it one - thought the 1977 vocals came from 2011; and several of us replied immediately that it wasn't the case. Did it have to take 200 "No that's not the case"-posts to satisfy proudmary?

There is thread in which people (many rather than one or two) discuss the vocals on I Love You Too Much and 2011 vocal is determined only by the new lyrics.
may be from your point of view it's silly that I like Don't Be A Stranger or other songs or Mick Jagger's voice and vocal style in general - I'm sorry for that, man

Again, this is absurd - only 2 people thought the 1977 vocals were the 2011 vocals, on Love You Too Much. And you're truely wrong if you think that the reason for people not liking Jagger's vocals on "Don't Be A Stranger" is "because it's new vocals" - it's because his singing style is real different now, than it was back then.

If you can't hear Mick's different approach to singing in 2011 compared to 1977, then I'm sorry for that, man. Because you obviously don't hear it, since you think us others only "diss it because it's new, and not because what the singing is actually like". We enjoy it or dislike it; depending on we like what we hear. If you like it; then good for you.

Sure there is the difference but not as striking as some represent it - for my taste at least. My point is that I really dig it
P.S. There were more than two people, much more. You can check it, man))

"with ssoul", I got a reply from Bravado today, they say it comes with both discs.

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Vocalion

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Eirik
Nice songs. Rock'n Roll, Blues, Country. I like the b-side version of So Young from Love Is Strong better, though. I don't know why you guys think the vocals on Don't Be A Stranger are so horrible ????? But the cd is so loud. Again...

Don't Be A Stranger is great and there are lots of good words about the song on the board. But people who hate all modern Jagger-related obviously hate Don't Be A Stranger too.
The irony is the fact that they can hardly distinguish the difference between 77 and 2011 vocals, say, on I Love You Too Much when they thought it's 2011's Jagger it was awful, then it was turned out to be 77 - and ok.
Both songs are very good and I love how Mick sings no matter what year

Nobody in this thread claims any such things....

Well that's a nonsense statement (proudmary's I mean). 2 people - or was it one - thought the 1977 vocals came from 2011; and several of us replied immediately that it wasn't the case. Did it have to take 200 "No that's not the case"-posts to satisfy proudmary?

There is thread in which people (many rather than one or two) discuss the vocals on I Love You Too Much and 2011 vocal is determined only by the new lyrics.
may be from your point of view it's silly that I like Don't Be A Stranger or other songs or Mick Jagger's voice and vocal style in general - I'm sorry for that, man

Again, this is absurd - only 2 people thought the 1977 vocals were the 2011 vocals, on Love You Too Much. And you're truely wrong if you think that the reason for people not liking Jagger's vocals on "Don't Be A Stranger" is "because it's new vocals" - it's because his singing style is real different now, than it was back then.

If you can't hear Mick's different approach to singing in 2011 compared to 1977, then I'm sorry for that, man. Because you obviously don't hear it, since you think us others only "diss it because it's new, and not because what the singing is actually like". We enjoy it or dislike it; depending on we like what we hear. If you like it; then good for you.

Sure there is the difference but not as striking as some represent it - for my taste at least. My point is that I really dig it
P.S. There were more than two people, much more. You can check it, man))

This is exactly what I mean. My point wasn't if you hear the difference in his voice or not. Of course he sings different 30-40 years on. What I mean is that his 2011 approach to this song is far from horrible, which was the word used I belive. Same discussions after the exile deluxe release, some people are so critical. These overdubs were after all decided to be done. We're supposed to be fans aren't we? Come on guys, 22/23 "new" great Stones album tracks from the seventies in just a year or so. What a treat!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-20 21:30 by Eirik.

Quote
Eirik
This is exactly what I mean. My point wasn't if you hear the difference in his voice or not. Of course he sings different 30-40 years on. What I mean is that his 2011 approach to this song is far from horrible, which was the word used I belive. Same discussions after the exile deluxe release, some people are so critical. These overdubs were after all decided to be done. We're supposed to be fans aren't we? Come on guys, 22/23 "new" great Stones album tracks from the seventies in just a year or so. What a treat!

Now what is exactly your point, out of the quoted posts there? Because that was an absurd dission as proudmary point earlier up was not "whether one likes it or not", but that "a lot of people just chose to dislike it just because the vocals are old". Her "point" was completely different in her last post there.

*I* find "Don't Be A Stranger" to be horrible - because of Jagger's singing. That's my opinion. I can't force myself to love the song, just because I'm a fan of Rolling Stones. That's ridicilous. If so, I chose to not be a fan then

Jagger's 2011 vocals on "Do You Think I Really Care", on the other hand, is really excellent (IMO) - so he's definately capable of doing a great job at the age of 70....which is really great.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-20 21:42 by Erik_Snow.

Quote
Eirik

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Vocalion

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Eirik
Nice songs. Rock'n Roll, Blues, Country. I like the b-side version of So Young from Love Is Strong better, though. I don't know why you guys think the vocals on Don't Be A Stranger are so horrible ????? But the cd is so loud. Again...

Don't Be A Stranger is great and there are lots of good words about the song on the board. But people who hate all modern Jagger-related obviously hate Don't Be A Stranger too.
The irony is the fact that they can hardly distinguish the difference between 77 and 2011 vocals, say, on I Love You Too Much when they thought it's 2011's Jagger it was awful, then it was turned out to be 77 - and ok.
Both songs are very good and I love how Mick sings no matter what year

Nobody in this thread claims any such things....

Well that's a nonsense statement (proudmary's I mean). 2 people - or was it one - thought the 1977 vocals came from 2011; and several of us replied immediately that it wasn't the case. Did it have to take 200 "No that's not the case"-posts to satisfy proudmary?

There is thread in which people (many rather than one or two) discuss the vocals on I Love You Too Much and 2011 vocal is determined only by the new lyrics.
may be from your point of view it's silly that I like Don't Be A Stranger or other songs or Mick Jagger's voice and vocal style in general - I'm sorry for that, man

Again, this is absurd - only 2 people thought the 1977 vocals were the 2011 vocals, on Love You Too Much. And you're truely wrong if you think that the reason for people not liking Jagger's vocals on "Don't Be A Stranger" is "because it's new vocals" - it's because his singing style is real different now, than it was back then.

If you can't hear Mick's different approach to singing in 2011 compared to 1977, then I'm sorry for that, man. Because you obviously don't hear it, since you think us others only "diss it because it's new, and not because what the singing is actually like". We enjoy it or dislike it; depending on we like what we hear. If you like it; then good for you.

Sure there is the difference but not as striking as some represent it - for my taste at least. My point is that I really dig it
P.S. There were more than two people, much more. You can check it, man))

This is exactly what I mean. My point wasn't if you hear the difference in his voice or not. Of course he sings different 30-40 years on. What I mean is that his 2011 approach to this song is far from horrible, which was the word used I belive. Same discussions after the exile deluxe release, some people are so critical. These overdubs were after all decided to be done. We're supposed to be fans aren't we? Come on guys, 22/23 "new" great Stones album tracks from the seventies in just a year or so. What a treat!

Agree with you, Eirik. I guess we can enjoy what we like without paying attention to other people preferences.Each to his own - I personally can't stand Richards singing and always skip songs with him on lead vocal but it doesn't bother me that some fans seem to love it

Erik, initially I'm the one who's quoted here, making my point of course that there's nothing horrible about the vocals on either this song or any of the other ones. It's one thing to prefer a bootleg version which you probably have of this song, but to call this horrible I just don't understand. I'm just happy with all these new wonderful tracks, and not focusing on the slight difference in Mick's voice. And yes, I notice it too. I'm not trying to force my opinion on anybody.

Yes, like you say we've all got different prefereces. But that's a good thing. This board would be boring if we all agreed with each other.

Quote
Eirik
Erik, initially I'm the one who's quoted here, making my point of course that there's nothing horrible about the vocals on either this song or any of the other ones. It's one thing to prefer a bootleg version which you probably have of this song, but to call this horrible I just don't understand. I'm just happy with all these new wonderful tracks, and not focusing on the slight difference in Mick's voice. And yes, I notice it too. I'm not trying to force my opinion on anybody.

You find it great - and some us finds it horrible, and that's called taste; which is a subjective thing.

And no, neither me; nor would I guess any people here dislike it just because they notice a "slight difference" between the old version and the new. For instance I find Following The River to be absolutely horrible; and I find Laugh I Nearly Died to be a pain to listen to.....because of the vocals. Doesn't have anything to do with "comparing", as I can't compare those songs with any "older versions".

But obviously the word "comparing" will be used in discussions about re-done material.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-20 22:42 by Erik_Snow.

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Eirik
Erik, initially I'm the one who's quoted here, making my point of course that there's nothing horrible about the vocals on either this song or any of the other ones. It's one thing to prefer a bootleg version which you probably have of this song, but to call this horrible I just don't understand. I'm just happy with all these new wonderful tracks, and not focusing on the slight difference in Mick's voice. And yes, I notice it too. I'm not trying to force my opinion on anybody.

It shouldn't be hard to understand that some people find the song to be horrible. The reason is: we have different taste; which is a subjective thing.

And no, neither me; nor would I guess any people here dislike it just because they notice a "slight difference" between the old version and the new. For instance I find Following The River to be absolutely horrible; and I find Laugh I Nearly Died to be a pain to listen to.....because of the vocals. Doesn't have anything to do with "comparing".

But obviously the word "comparing" will be used in discussions about re-done material.

obviously it shouldn't be hard to understand that you can't use the word horrible while disscusing taste preferences. One should say I don't like it giving his reasons other than try to impose his opinion. it's the basics of good manners.
You have absolutely no right to value your taste higher than somebody else's

Quote
proudmary
You have absolutely no right to value your taste higher than somebody else's

But I never do. I wrote "I find". So much for that "point" of yours.

You on the other hand, claims to know "the reason" for others disliking or liking something; which is taking water way above your head; or anybody's head.

<<you can't use the word horrible while disscusing taste preferences>>

Again, what you write is absurd. You say I should use the word "like" or "dislike" and that I can't <<use the word horrible while disscusing taste preferences>>.

This makes no sense. Saying that I "like" or "dislike" a song is of course OK.
But when I say "that I find Following the River TO BE horrible" - then it's a completely different thing. It's a way of describing what one feels about a certain song; more detailed than whether one "like it or not"
This whole accusation of yours is ridicilous; and a discussion with you can't possibly go on any further, from my side.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-20 23:16 by Erik_Snow.

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
proudmary
You have absolutely no right to value your taste higher than somebody else's

But I never do. I wrote "I find". So much for that "point" of yours.

You on the other hand, claims to know "the reason" for others disliking or liking something; which is taking water way above your head; or anybody's head.

Nope, I said "the irony" is that some people coudn't differ 2011 and 77 vocals. Nothing about "reasons". I am too lazy to look for that thread but you can check it yourself - since you started this argument with me that goes on and on.
And by the way, I like Following The River very much. Listen to it (along with other songs from Exile re-issue) almost every day

Quote
proudmary
You have absolutely no right to value your taste higher than somebody else's

Everyone has. Thats the whole point of having 'taste' to begin with.

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary
You have absolutely no right to value your taste higher than somebody else's

Everyone has. Thats the whole point of having 'taste' to begin with.

I know you must be kidding. In any case I'm not going to argue with you.

I'm not. Why should you be expected to give my taste the same credibility as your own? If you have a mind of your own, you dont need to put someone else's taste on the same level.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-20 23:39 by Gazza.

MKC pops in to see what happenenen...... eeeeek.... slowly backs back out

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary
You have absolutely no right to value your taste higher than somebody else's

Everyone has. Thats the whole point of having 'taste' to begin with.

I know you must be kidding. In any case I'm not going to argue with you.

I'm not. Why should you be expected to give my taste the same credibility as your own? If you have a mind of your own, you dont need to put someone else's taste on the same level.

I suppose it's cultural differences. I was brought up differently

But if you didn't think your taste is better then it's hardly your taste, if you get what I'm saying.

You can still respect others' taste and the fact that theirs' is different from yours while still valuing your own taste more. In fact, that's how the majority of people would consider it I believe.

ROCKMAN

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary
You have absolutely no right to value your taste higher than somebody else's

Everyone has. Thats the whole point of having 'taste' to begin with.

You know Gazza, that's the opposite of what I wrote above, even though we mean the same thing. Because I was thinking of "value your taste" from a different angle than you do. "For me....." is the words that justify any opinion I might have. But when seeing tastes from an outsider points of view....no taste is better than others - to a certain extent; that is!

Quote
SoulPlunderer

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary
You have absolutely no right to value your taste higher than somebody else's

Everyone has. Thats the whole point of having 'taste' to begin with.

I know you must be kidding. In any case I'm not going to argue with you.

I'm not. Why should you be expected to give my taste the same credibility as your own? If you have a mind of your own, you dont need to put someone else's taste on the same level.

I suppose it's cultural differences. I was brought up differently

But if you didn't think your taste is better then it's hardly your taste, if you get what I'm saying.

You can still respect others' taste and the fact that theirs' is different from yours while still valuing your own taste more. In fact, that's how the majority of people would consider it I believe.

Thats exactly it. Why she's taking this as personal baffles me.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
SoulPlunderer

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary
You have absolutely no right to value your taste higher than somebody else's

Everyone has. Thats the whole point of having 'taste' to begin with.

I know you must be kidding. In any case I'm not going to argue with you.

I'm not. Why should you be expected to give my taste the same credibility as your own? If you have a mind of your own, you dont need to put someone else's taste on the same level.

I suppose it's cultural differences. I was brought up differently

But if you didn't think your taste is better then it's hardly your taste, if you get what I'm saying.

You can still respect others' taste and the fact that theirs' is different from yours while still valuing your own taste more. In fact, that's how the majority of people would consider it I believe.

Thats exactly it. Why she's taking this as personal baffles me.

Brought up differently?

new voice, old voice...who cares...the Some Girls deluxe is 100 times better than the Exile out takes...these all feel alive....the sound is vibrant

Quote
SoulPlunderer

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary
You have absolutely no right to value your taste higher than somebody else's

Everyone has. Thats the whole point of having 'taste' to begin with.

I know you must be kidding. In any case I'm not going to argue with you.

I'm not. Why should you be expected to give my taste the same credibility as your own? If you have a mind of your own, you dont need to put someone else's taste on the same level.

I suppose it's cultural differences. I was brought up differently

But if you didn't think your taste is better then it's hardly your taste, if you get what I'm saying.

You can still respect others' taste and the fact that theirs' is different from yours while still valuing your own taste more. In fact, that's how the majority of people would consider it I believe.

Unfortunately my English is not enough for such a philosophical discussion. I have my own preferences and opinions but that's not the reason to think I am the most intelligent and can teach others. This is really a question of upbringing and education

Its not, Mary. If you read my post, my point is that I'm actually respecting your right to have your own taste.

Your confusing the word 'intelligence' with 'taste'. One can be factually proven, The other is personal opinion.

the only base point of 'taste' is your own opinion. No one else's.

And please do us a favour and stop making sneering posts about how your upbringing and education are better than people you dont even know.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-21 00:09 by Gazza.

We shouldn't comment on other people's posts as nonsense and absurd.

In fact we shouldn't comment about anything at all, or share our opinions on anything either.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-21 00:26 by Erik_Snow.

Wow!!!
All that just because I said that I like Don't Be A Stranger

Quote
Erik_Snow
In fact we shouldn't comment about anything at all, or share our opinions on anything either.

Haha, yes we should. But you seem to to be quite offending sometimes when people disagree with you, Erik. At least you have too agree on that one

Quote
proudmary
Wow!!!
All that just because I said that I like Don't Be A Stranger

Not at all. All of that because of what followed.

Quote
Eirik

Quote
Erik_Snow
In fact we shouldn't comment about anything at all, or share our opinions on anything either.

Haha, yes we should. But you seem to to be quite offending sometimes when people disagree with you, Erik. At least you have too agree on that one

What an absurd thing to say.

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Eirik

Quote
Erik_Snow
In fact we shouldn't comment about anything at all, or share our opinions on anything either.

Haha, yes we should. But you seem to to be quite offending sometimes when people disagree with you, Erik. At least you have too agree on that one

What an absurd thing to say.

I do not really know are you joking or serious?