Tell Me :
Talk
I couldn't disagree more. For me, their last classics were Laugh I Nearly Died, Dangerous Beauty, and Under the Radar. Unless you count Keep Up Blues.
Drew
Excellent points, Winning Ugly VXII! People develop strong emotional ties with the stuff that was on the radio when they were young and carefree and getting laid for the first time, getting high for the first time, before mortgages and making a living and paying the mortgage became the mundane realities of existence. As people's lives become more mundane, they look back at the music of their youth with more fondness because it takes them back to the days when life was more exciting. The error is when they then assume the music was better back then.
To add to this, we have a huge contingent of Baby Boomers on this board (I know I'm setting myself up for some attacks by saying this), and the Boomers' youthful years were in the late 1960's / early 1970's. Which is a big reason why the consensus here (and in the media) is that best output from the Stones (and Dylan and Elton John and countless more) was their stuff from that era. Yes, those artists may have had more consistently great songs back then, but their significance was magnified through the lense of youth.
Drew
Ha ha - an awful statement. THAT got the attention but meanwhile Dangerous Beauty, a song about the same "war" but a gazillion times better, got no attention at all. If Mick had titled it Dangerous Christian then it would have gotten attention.
Just goes to show that the media actually did not listen to the album, they just read the lyrics.
The imitating themselves is more of a across the board poke. Live especially. Aside from Undercover, I get that Bridges To Babylon is the one album that they confusedly made a creative album, one that is much better than Voodoo or A Bigger Bang and frankly better than Steel Wheels or Dirty Work.
It's amazing that the same band that did Undercover did Dirty Work. In name only, true, but such a short amount of time to go from good to awful. At least Steel Wheels was the band, it's just the production that ruins that album.
Great tunes...but labelling them as 'classics' is a stretch
You would be in the silent minority in that case.
I suppose it comes down to how one defines the word 'classic'. To me, a 'classic' has a very personal definition. It is any song that I can listen to over and over and over, and each time I marvel at its beauty and magic. It has nothing to do with how popular it was or how many records it sold or how famous it is. It is a song that stands the test of time. It is a song that I will be listening to in 20 years, and 40 years, and will still be marveling at it then.
So to me, "Laugh I Nearly Died" is every bit as much of 'classic' as, say "Gimme Shelter".
Drew
I feel very sorry for you. Really.
Drew
You're right, it is definitely how you define it. While I'll agree with your def'n, the only additional thing I would add is that the opinion is shared with a wide group of enthusiasts. The biggest Stones enthusiasts in the world are undoubtedly on this board, and if we can't get anything even close to agreement amongst the die-hards, I would be hard pressed to conclude they are true classics.
But for you they are classic, and for me they are great songs...but LIND is no Gimme Shelter IMHO.
Fair enough. And in hindsight, maybe "fukkin awesome song" is a better term for what I'm trying to say than "classic". Anyway, cheers Treaclefingers!
Drew
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-11 21:18 by drewmaster.
you're barely even trying
YES, let's share a christmas toast!
I have a cold, so I'm trying to decide whether it will be a fifth straight night of neo citran, or whether I'm going throw in the towel and crack open a new bottle of Jameson!
Totally agreed. B2B is entertaining because of the chances they took. It doesn't always come off but it's a very refreshing listen and some great songs on there.
How Can I Stop is just brilliant IMO. Whenever I get home at about 3am after a big night, I always grab my headphones and listen to Thief in the Night/How Can I Stop together. Very relaxing and soothing.
Too Tight is another favourite of mine. Vintage rocker with some pissed-off agression.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-12 07:17 by OneHit.
No one's opinion is incorrect because opinion relates to the individual. If, In your opinion vegetables taste better than steak, I have no right to say your opinion is incorrect because it's valid for you personally. Likewise, none of us have the right to say that each other's opinions about music are "incorrect." It would be more proper to say,"I disagree with your opinion." If how I feel about liking much of the Stones latter day music is valid to me, that's my opinion and is 100% correct for me. Just as your disagreement is valid because it's real to you. I wouldn't retort that your opinion is incorrect. I simply disagree with you, respectfully.
Interesting point of view, Drew. My feelings are, if the Stones are ever mildly successful in more recent years, it is generally with songs that are a little less Stones like in terms of their more typical riff based rockers - songs perhaps like 'Thru and Thru', 'You Don't Have To Mean It', and 'Already Over Me' for example. Perhaps the reasons they are a little better is because they are rather less inclined to represent the Stones going through the motions, and feeling the need to betray their ages etc. with stupid posturing. These songs carry a little more weight, and in 'You Don't Have To Mean It', a level of charm, also. 'Laugh I Nearly Died' is another example and finds the Stones attempting something a little different, and to a point it works. However, i'm not keen on Jagger's vocals, especially as the song gathers steam, because i find them rather heavy handed, and quite unbearable in places. Jagger, in his younger days may have done this song more justice. As far as being a classic Stones song is concerned, i think it all depends in the context in which it appears. On A BIGGER BANG the song may appear quite impressive, yet in the bigger scheme of things, and especially if it had appeared on an album like BLACK AND BLUE, it would have been a pretty decent, but perhaps ultimately unremarkable track. 'Laugh I Nearly Died' does have some pleasing elements, mind, and if it wasn't for Jagger's voice i would have rated it rather more highly.
A BIGGER BANG was a Stones album i had rather mixed feelings for, before actually hearing it, because the Stones previous new songs on the FORTY LICKS compilation were really amongst the most underwhelming of their career in my opinion. I love the earlier Stones dearly, but i'd rather them not record any new material, if the standard was to be so poor. However, on a first listen to A BIGGER BANG, i was mildly surprised because the album sounded much better than i anticipated, because the songs did seem a lot sharper than those new ones on FORTY LICKS. However, it only maybe took me a couple of further listens for the illusion to wear off, and for me to conclude there's really nothing at all behind what you hear. These songs exist on the surface, yet there's so very depth to them. Again, it's just the Stones going through the motions, and recycling riffs etc. and cranking out enough sounds to fill an album (or maybe even a double - it goes on for so long!). A BIGGER BANG is ultimately a very lazy album, which the Stones could have recorded with their eyes closed through much of it. 'Rough Justice', 'Oh No Not You Again' and 'Sweet Neo Con' are really songs not worthy of their name, musically or lyrically, and for the most part those songs, and many of the others too, actually make me cringe. Jagger is just so utterly juvenile too in his lyrics at times.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-12 18:05 by Edward Twining.
I think the key is to issue as much credit as possible, which would have the effect of inflating today's releases and creating a deflationary effect on the previous releases, making whatever they put out today BETTER than anything they have ever done.
You have to give me credit for that idea!
Oh I've come across some opinions that were definitely wrong.
This concept that the Stones haven't produced anything great since the late seventies is ludicrous. Saint Of Me, Out Of Control, Already Over Me, and Like A Thief in The Night are as good as anything they have ever done. The four new tracks on Forty Licks were all good. ABB was well received. The women just love Streets Of Love. Black And Blue is one of my all time favorites. I think it is a great album. The latest Some girls outtakes were fabulous. The Exile outtakes were damn good. The new album is going to be a classic.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-13 07:47 by thewatchman.
Excellent points, James Kirk.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
rollmops
()
Date: December 11, 2011 13:36
Are we better when we are younger? I supposed a majority of persons would think yes. The rolling stones toughest competition is themselves at a younger age and it's impossible for them to beat that. Yes the latter day albums deserve more credit.
Rock and roll,
Mops
Rock and roll,
Mops
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
drewmaster
()
Date: December 11, 2011 14:25
Quote
dcba
"the problem with 'latter day' albums is that none of them contains a song that one, starting from Jagger to the most silent contributor here at IORR, could honestly claim to be "classic"their last classic was SMU... 30 years ago.
I couldn't disagree more. For me, their last classics were Laugh I Nearly Died, Dangerous Beauty, and Under the Radar. Unless you count Keep Up Blues.
Drew
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
MJG196
()
Date: December 11, 2011 15:20
Your opinion is incorrect.
Quote
stonesdan60
This is just my opinion, but there's so much talk about the Stones last good album being Exile, or possibly Some Girls. Even their often-called "low point," Black and Blue is full of gems (I think the low point would be Satanic Majesties), as are GHS & IORR. While their later output is not as groundbreaking as their creative peak of Banquet thru Exile, it's still damn good. The worst thing about Emotional Rescue is the title track, a flaccid attempt to score another Miss You. But while no earth-shattering new ground is broken, there's still kick-ass tunes I love, like Summer Romance, Let Me Go, She's so Cold, Send it to Me. These are among some of my favorite tunes. Tattoo You is full of great tunes even if they did trick us at the time by mining the vaults. And then:
Undercover:
Tie You Up, She Was Hot, All The Way Down; all personal faves.
Dirty Work: Not ashamed to say I love this album because it's so Keith driven and includes more faves:
One Hit To The Body, Fight, Hold Back, Too Rude
Steel Wheels: Mixed Emotions, Sad Sad Sad, Almost Hear You Sigh
Voodoo Lounge: Out of Tears (an all time favorite slow one), I Go Wild, Sparks Will Fly
Bridges To Babylon: Low Down, Might As Well Get Juiced, Already Over Me (another favorite slow one), Gunface, Saint of Me, Out of Control, & Keith's two closing tunes
A Bigger Bang: I love everything on this but not too crazy about Streets of Love. I think it's easily their best since Some Girls.
I don't think it's fair to compare these albums to what they created between 1968 - 1972. During that period they truly BECAME the Stones and everything they've done since has been compared to that. (Hell, I have an older brother who thinks Aftermath is the standard by which all later output is negatively judged. To each their own.) Sure, if they had stopped recording after Exile or Some Girls, they would still have a definitive body of work. But if their later albums could judged on their own merit as if the Big Four albums didn't exist, it would be clear that they are great rock and roll albums. As for complaints that they try to copy themselves with post seventies albums, well - duh...they're not copying anything. They sound like the Stones because they ARE the Stones. They're just doing what they do and it's great stuff. I think it's amazing that they've continued to come up with so much great music for so many years. Do their post-Some Girls albums add much radically new to their legacy? Maybe not too much, but to me it's still damn good, thoroughly enjoyable rock and roll...especially compared to what else is out there. Who else out there comes close to the essence of true rock and roll than the Stones? Maybe they did it best in earlier days, but in my opinion, to this day still, nobody does it better. But why be so serious? It's Only Rock and Roll.....and I LIKE it! A final thought..I'm younger than many fans, so maybe it's all what you grow up with. GHS was the first album I ever bought. I didn't go back and discover their earlier work until later so maybe my Stones experience is ass-backwards, lol. I know younger people who think they started with Miss You or Start Me Up and compare everything to that, so I guess a lot of it is relative and subjective. Sorry if I bored you all to death with my treatise....
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
drewmaster
()
Date: December 11, 2011 15:26
Quote
Winning Ugly VXII
I couldn't agree more. Latter day Stones albums deserve more credit. There are a # of factors which contribute to the reason why they don't get the credit they deserve from most people but,I don't believe that the actual quality of the music is really one of them. Individual tastes are also involved among the people who have actually listened to these albums. Many detractors have not actually listened to the albums. It's also more difficult for new or more current material to appeal to a generally older fan base who are so attached to the old music. There are other factors as well.
Excellent points, Winning Ugly VXII! People develop strong emotional ties with the stuff that was on the radio when they were young and carefree and getting laid for the first time, getting high for the first time, before mortgages and making a living and paying the mortgage became the mundane realities of existence. As people's lives become more mundane, they look back at the music of their youth with more fondness because it takes them back to the days when life was more exciting. The error is when they then assume the music was better back then.
To add to this, we have a huge contingent of Baby Boomers on this board (I know I'm setting myself up for some attacks by saying this), and the Boomers' youthful years were in the late 1960's / early 1970's. Which is a big reason why the consensus here (and in the media) is that best output from the Stones (and Dylan and Elton John and countless more) was their stuff from that era. Yes, those artists may have had more consistently great songs back then, but their significance was magnified through the lense of youth.
Drew
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
flilflam
()
Date: December 11, 2011 16:36
I started a thread about this very topic about a year ago, called Killer Latter Day Keith Riffs. Many people seemed to agree with me. To dismiss all Stones songs as subpar, that were produced after EOMS, is not giving the Stones sufficient credit.
[www.iorr.org]
Listen to Low Down. Excellent.
[www.iorr.org]
Listen to Low Down. Excellent.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
Witness
()
Date: December 11, 2011 17:21
A highly interesting thread for me as only an occasional reader of IORR. So many contrasting thoughts, provoking a varying mixture of agreement and disagreement on my part. To comment on all of it would take too much time.
Only one isolated point:
For there to be one registered, I am one with the contrary view that, measured against the standards set by the band themselves, (that is, as I experience these standards), there are few good tracks on Tattoo You, apart from the amazingly good Waiting on a Friend. And I have got a serious problem with the album as a whole, even more than with its individual tracks.
Only one isolated point:
Quote
BroomWagon
.....................................................
Tattoo You as a whole is very grand, not a weak song on there, okay, I've heard a few people say they don't like one or two songs in particular and that's their prerogative.
...........................................
For there to be one registered, I am one with the contrary view that, measured against the standards set by the band themselves, (that is, as I experience these standards), there are few good tracks on Tattoo You, apart from the amazingly good Waiting on a Friend. And I have got a serious problem with the album as a whole, even more than with its individual tracks.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
DiamondDog7
()
Date: December 11, 2011 17:48
"Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit "
My answer: NO !
My answer: NO !
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: December 11, 2011 17:50
Quote
Winning Ugly VXII
I really don't believe that they're imitating themselves. They ARE themselves!! Maybe you could contend that they are trying to imitate themselves in parts of the Voodoo Lounge album but,after that (and before that) their work is very consistent with the way that they had been for ages (with the exception of some experiments). Sure,the "golden era" of '68 to the mid-late '70's will always cast a shadow over anything they have done or will ever do since then. It's not realistic to hold them responsible to maintain such a standard. How many,if any,other quality bands have ever even reached that level ??
NeoCon was probably released because they (or Jagger anyway) wanted to make a statement.
Ha ha - an awful statement. THAT got the attention but meanwhile Dangerous Beauty, a song about the same "war" but a gazillion times better, got no attention at all. If Mick had titled it Dangerous Christian then it would have gotten attention.
Just goes to show that the media actually did not listen to the album, they just read the lyrics.
The imitating themselves is more of a across the board poke. Live especially. Aside from Undercover, I get that Bridges To Babylon is the one album that they confusedly made a creative album, one that is much better than Voodoo or A Bigger Bang and frankly better than Steel Wheels or Dirty Work.
It's amazing that the same band that did Undercover did Dirty Work. In name only, true, but such a short amount of time to go from good to awful. At least Steel Wheels was the band, it's just the production that ruins that album.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: December 11, 2011 18:23
Quote
drewmasterQuote
dcba
"the problem with 'latter day' albums is that none of them contains a song that one, starting from Jagger to the most silent contributor here at IORR, could honestly claim to be "classic"
I couldn't disagree more. For me, their last classics were Laugh I Nearly Died, Dangerous Beauty, and Under the Radar. Unless you count Keep Up Blues.
Drew
Great tunes...but labelling them as 'classics' is a stretch
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: December 11, 2011 18:26
Quote
Witness
A highly interesting thread for me as only an occasional reader of IORR. So many contrasting thoughts, provoking a varying mixture of agreement and disagreement on my part. To comment on all of it would take too much time.
Only one isolated point:Quote
BroomWagon
.....................................................
Tattoo You as a whole is very grand, not a weak song on there, okay, I've heard a few people say they don't like one or two songs in particular and that's their prerogative.
...........................................
For there to be one registered, I am one with the contrary view that, measured against the standards set by the band themselves, (that is, as I experience these standards), there are few good tracks on Tattoo You, apart from the amazingly good Waiting on a Friend. And I have got a serious problem with the album as a whole, even more than with its individual tracks.
You would be in the silent minority in that case.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
slew
()
Date: December 11, 2011 18:53
The latter day albusm do deserve more credit.
Dirty Work - This one DOES NOT deserve more credit. One Hit is a good song and the Stones take on Harlem Shuffle is excellent. The rest of it is teriible. I can not believe some people like Fight and Hold Back!
Steel Wheels - A little over produced but overall a good effort. nothing earth shattering but it proved they still had something in the tank.
Voodoo Lounge - Has a great sound and vibe it is my favorite amongst the "latter day" albums Voodoo Brew and Voodoo Stew are awesome bootlegs!
Bridges To Babylon - How Can I Stop is one of the finest pieces of music the Rolling Stones have ever produced. They attempted to do something different here anyways and its a good album.
The 4 on Forty Licks - I like Don't Stop and Losing My Touch the other two songs were not very good as I recall.
A Bigger Bang - Again I'm probably in the minority but I also like this album though STreets of Love is among the worst songs in theri history as is Sweet Neo Con.
These guys have such a great past and it is inevitable that these albums get compared to their earlier work but to not listen you are cheating yourself out of some good Stines music.
Dirty Work - This one DOES NOT deserve more credit. One Hit is a good song and the Stones take on Harlem Shuffle is excellent. The rest of it is teriible. I can not believe some people like Fight and Hold Back!
Steel Wheels - A little over produced but overall a good effort. nothing earth shattering but it proved they still had something in the tank.
Voodoo Lounge - Has a great sound and vibe it is my favorite amongst the "latter day" albums Voodoo Brew and Voodoo Stew are awesome bootlegs!
Bridges To Babylon - How Can I Stop is one of the finest pieces of music the Rolling Stones have ever produced. They attempted to do something different here anyways and its a good album.
The 4 on Forty Licks - I like Don't Stop and Losing My Touch the other two songs were not very good as I recall.
A Bigger Bang - Again I'm probably in the minority but I also like this album though STreets of Love is among the worst songs in theri history as is Sweet Neo Con.
These guys have such a great past and it is inevitable that these albums get compared to their earlier work but to not listen you are cheating yourself out of some good Stines music.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
drewmaster
()
Date: December 11, 2011 19:26
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
drewmasterQuote
dcba
"the problem with 'latter day' albums is that none of them contains a song that one, starting from Jagger to the most silent contributor here at IORR, could honestly claim to be "classic"
I couldn't disagree more. For me, their last classics were Laugh I Nearly Died, Dangerous Beauty, and Under the Radar. Unless you count Keep Up Blues.
Drew
Great tunes...but labelling them as 'classics' is a stretch
I suppose it comes down to how one defines the word 'classic'. To me, a 'classic' has a very personal definition. It is any song that I can listen to over and over and over, and each time I marvel at its beauty and magic. It has nothing to do with how popular it was or how many records it sold or how famous it is. It is a song that stands the test of time. It is a song that I will be listening to in 20 years, and 40 years, and will still be marveling at it then.
So to me, "Laugh I Nearly Died" is every bit as much of 'classic' as, say "Gimme Shelter".
Drew
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
Slick
()
Date: December 11, 2011 19:41
been wandering far and wide, wonder who's gonna be my guide... classic lmao!
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
drewmaster
()
Date: December 11, 2011 19:46
Quote
Slick
been wandering far and wide, wonder who's gonna be my guide... classic lmao!
I feel very sorry for you. Really.
Drew
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: December 11, 2011 20:39
Quote
drewmasterQuote
treaclefingersQuote
drewmasterQuote
dcba
"the problem with 'latter day' albums is that none of them contains a song that one, starting from Jagger to the most silent contributor here at IORR, could honestly claim to be "classic"
I couldn't disagree more. For me, their last classics were Laugh I Nearly Died, Dangerous Beauty, and Under the Radar. Unless you count Keep Up Blues.
Drew
Great tunes...but labelling them as 'classics' is a stretch
I suppose it comes down to how one defines the word 'classic'. To me, a 'classic' has a very personal definition. It is any song that I can listen to over and over and over, and each time I marvel at its beauty and magic. It has nothing to do with how popular it was or how many records it sold or how famous it is. It is a song that stands the test of time. It is a song that I will be listening to in 20 years, and 40 years, and will still be marveling at it then.
So to me, "Laugh I Nearly Died" is every bit as much of 'classic' as, say "Gimme Shelter".
Drew
You're right, it is definitely how you define it. While I'll agree with your def'n, the only additional thing I would add is that the opinion is shared with a wide group of enthusiasts. The biggest Stones enthusiasts in the world are undoubtedly on this board, and if we can't get anything even close to agreement amongst the die-hards, I would be hard pressed to conclude they are true classics.
But for you they are classic, and for me they are great songs...but LIND is no Gimme Shelter IMHO.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
drewmaster
()
Date: December 11, 2011 20:53
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
drewmasterQuote
treaclefingersQuote
drewmasterQuote
dcba
"the problem with 'latter day' albums is that none of them contains a song that one, starting from Jagger to the most silent contributor here at IORR, could honestly claim to be "classic"
I couldn't disagree more. For me, their last classics were Laugh I Nearly Died, Dangerous Beauty, and Under the Radar. Unless you count Keep Up Blues.
Drew
Great tunes...but labelling them as 'classics' is a stretch
I suppose it comes down to how one defines the word 'classic'. To me, a 'classic' has a very personal definition. It is any song that I can listen to over and over and over, and each time I marvel at its beauty and magic. It has nothing to do with how popular it was or how many records it sold or how famous it is. It is a song that stands the test of time. It is a song that I will be listening to in 20 years, and 40 years, and will still be marveling at it then.
So to me, "Laugh I Nearly Died" is every bit as much of 'classic' as, say "Gimme Shelter".
Drew
You're right, it is definitely how you define it. While I'll agree with your def'n, the only additional thing I would add is that the opinion is shared with a wide group of enthusiasts. The biggest Stones enthusiasts in the world are undoubtedly on this board, and if we can't get anything even close to agreement amongst the die-hards, I would be hard pressed to conclude they are true classics.
But for you they are classic, and for me they are great songs...but LIND is no Gimme Shelter IMHO.
Fair enough. And in hindsight, maybe "fukkin awesome song" is a better term for what I'm trying to say than "classic". Anyway, cheers Treaclefingers!
Drew
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-11 21:18 by drewmaster.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 12, 2011 00:25
Quote
drewmasterQuote
dcba
"the problem with 'latter day' albums is that none of them contains a song that one, starting from Jagger to the most silent contributor here at IORR, could honestly claim to be "classic"
I couldn't disagree more.
you're barely even trying
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: December 12, 2011 04:47
Quote
drewmasterQuote
treaclefingersQuote
drewmasterQuote
treaclefingersQuote
drewmasterQuote
dcba
"the problem with 'latter day' albums is that none of them contains a song that one, starting from Jagger to the most silent contributor here at IORR, could honestly claim to be "classic"
I couldn't disagree more. For me, their last classics were Laugh I Nearly Died, Dangerous Beauty, and Under the Radar. Unless you count Keep Up Blues.
Drew
Great tunes...but labelling them as 'classics' is a stretch
I suppose it comes down to how one defines the word 'classic'. To me, a 'classic' has a very personal definition. It is any song that I can listen to over and over and over, and each time I marvel at its beauty and magic. It has nothing to do with how popular it was or how many records it sold or how famous it is. It is a song that stands the test of time. It is a song that I will be listening to in 20 years, and 40 years, and will still be marveling at it then.
So to me, "Laugh I Nearly Died" is every bit as much of 'classic' as, say "Gimme Shelter".
Drew
You're right, it is definitely how you define it. While I'll agree with your def'n, the only additional thing I would add is that the opinion is shared with a wide group of enthusiasts. The biggest Stones enthusiasts in the world are undoubtedly on this board, and if we can't get anything even close to agreement amongst the die-hards, I would be hard pressed to conclude they are true classics.
But for you they are classic, and for me they are great songs...but LIND is no Gimme Shelter IMHO.
Fair enough. And in hindsight, maybe "fukkin awesome song" is a better term for what I'm trying to say than "classic". Anyway, cheers Treaclefingers!
Drew
YES, let's share a christmas toast!
I have a cold, so I'm trying to decide whether it will be a fifth straight night of neo citran, or whether I'm going throw in the towel and crack open a new bottle of Jameson!
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
OneHit
()
Date: December 12, 2011 07:16
Quote
slew
Bridges To Babylon - How Can I Stop is one of the finest pieces of music the Rolling Stones have ever produced. They attempted to do something different here anyways and its a good album.
Totally agreed. B2B is entertaining because of the chances they took. It doesn't always come off but it's a very refreshing listen and some great songs on there.
How Can I Stop is just brilliant IMO. Whenever I get home at about 3am after a big night, I always grab my headphones and listen to Thief in the Night/How Can I Stop together. Very relaxing and soothing.
Too Tight is another favourite of mine. Vintage rocker with some pissed-off agression.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-12 07:17 by OneHit.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
stonesdan60
()
Date: December 12, 2011 10:44
Quote
MJG196
Your opinion is incorrect.Quote
stonesdan60
This is just my opinion, but there's so much talk about the Stones last good album being Exile, or possibly Some Girls. Even their often-called "low point," Black and Blue is full of gems (I think the low point would be Satanic Majesties), as are GHS & IORR. While their later output is not as groundbreaking as their creative peak of Banquet thru Exile, it's still damn good. The worst thing about Emotional Rescue is the title track, a flaccid attempt to score another Miss You. But while no earth-shattering new ground is broken, there's still kick-ass tunes I love, like Summer Romance, Let Me Go, She's so Cold, Send it to Me. These are among some of my favorite tunes. Tattoo You is full of great tunes even if they did trick us at the time by mining the vaults. And then:
Undercover:
Tie You Up, She Was Hot, All The Way Down; all personal faves.
Dirty Work: Not ashamed to say I love this album because it's so Keith driven and includes more faves:
One Hit To The Body, Fight, Hold Back, Too Rude
Steel Wheels: Mixed Emotions, Sad Sad Sad, Almost Hear You Sigh
Voodoo Lounge: Out of Tears (an all time favorite slow one), I Go Wild, Sparks Will Fly
Bridges To Babylon: Low Down, Might As Well Get Juiced, Already Over Me (another favorite slow one), Gunface, Saint of Me, Out of Control, & Keith's two closing tunes
A Bigger Bang: I love everything on this but not too crazy about Streets of Love. I think it's easily their best since Some Girls.
I don't think it's fair to compare these albums to what they created between 1968 - 1972. During that period they truly BECAME the Stones and everything they've done since has been compared to that. (Hell, I have an older brother who thinks Aftermath is the standard by which all later output is negatively judged. To each their own.) Sure, if they had stopped recording after Exile or Some Girls, they would still have a definitive body of work. But if their later albums could judged on their own merit as if the Big Four albums didn't exist, it would be clear that they are great rock and roll albums. As for complaints that they try to copy themselves with post seventies albums, well - duh...they're not copying anything. They sound like the Stones because they ARE the Stones. They're just doing what they do and it's great stuff. I think it's amazing that they've continued to come up with so much great music for so many years. Do their post-Some Girls albums add much radically new to their legacy? Maybe not too much, but to me it's still damn good, thoroughly enjoyable rock and roll...especially compared to what else is out there. Who else out there comes close to the essence of true rock and roll than the Stones? Maybe they did it best in earlier days, but in my opinion, to this day still, nobody does it better. But why be so serious? It's Only Rock and Roll.....and I LIKE it! A final thought..I'm younger than many fans, so maybe it's all what you grow up with. GHS was the first album I ever bought. I didn't go back and discover their earlier work until later so maybe my Stones experience is ass-backwards, lol. I know younger people who think they started with Miss You or Start Me Up and compare everything to that, so I guess a lot of it is relative and subjective. Sorry if I bored you all to death with my treatise....
No one's opinion is incorrect because opinion relates to the individual. If, In your opinion vegetables taste better than steak, I have no right to say your opinion is incorrect because it's valid for you personally. Likewise, none of us have the right to say that each other's opinions about music are "incorrect." It would be more proper to say,"I disagree with your opinion." If how I feel about liking much of the Stones latter day music is valid to me, that's my opinion and is 100% correct for me. Just as your disagreement is valid because it's real to you. I wouldn't retort that your opinion is incorrect. I simply disagree with you, respectfully.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
Edward Twining
()
Date: December 12, 2011 18:00
Quote
drewmaster
So to me, "Laugh I Nearly Died" is every bit as much of 'classic' as, say "Gimme Shelter".
Drew
Interesting point of view, Drew. My feelings are, if the Stones are ever mildly successful in more recent years, it is generally with songs that are a little less Stones like in terms of their more typical riff based rockers - songs perhaps like 'Thru and Thru', 'You Don't Have To Mean It', and 'Already Over Me' for example. Perhaps the reasons they are a little better is because they are rather less inclined to represent the Stones going through the motions, and feeling the need to betray their ages etc. with stupid posturing. These songs carry a little more weight, and in 'You Don't Have To Mean It', a level of charm, also. 'Laugh I Nearly Died' is another example and finds the Stones attempting something a little different, and to a point it works. However, i'm not keen on Jagger's vocals, especially as the song gathers steam, because i find them rather heavy handed, and quite unbearable in places. Jagger, in his younger days may have done this song more justice. As far as being a classic Stones song is concerned, i think it all depends in the context in which it appears. On A BIGGER BANG the song may appear quite impressive, yet in the bigger scheme of things, and especially if it had appeared on an album like BLACK AND BLUE, it would have been a pretty decent, but perhaps ultimately unremarkable track. 'Laugh I Nearly Died' does have some pleasing elements, mind, and if it wasn't for Jagger's voice i would have rated it rather more highly.
A BIGGER BANG was a Stones album i had rather mixed feelings for, before actually hearing it, because the Stones previous new songs on the FORTY LICKS compilation were really amongst the most underwhelming of their career in my opinion. I love the earlier Stones dearly, but i'd rather them not record any new material, if the standard was to be so poor. However, on a first listen to A BIGGER BANG, i was mildly surprised because the album sounded much better than i anticipated, because the songs did seem a lot sharper than those new ones on FORTY LICKS. However, it only maybe took me a couple of further listens for the illusion to wear off, and for me to conclude there's really nothing at all behind what you hear. These songs exist on the surface, yet there's so very depth to them. Again, it's just the Stones going through the motions, and recycling riffs etc. and cranking out enough sounds to fill an album (or maybe even a double - it goes on for so long!). A BIGGER BANG is ultimately a very lazy album, which the Stones could have recorded with their eyes closed through much of it. 'Rough Justice', 'Oh No Not You Again' and 'Sweet Neo Con' are really songs not worthy of their name, musically or lyrically, and for the most part those songs, and many of the others too, actually make me cringe. Jagger is just so utterly juvenile too in his lyrics at times.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-12 18:05 by Edward Twining.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 12, 2011 18:46
here's the prob:
if we go ahead and give them more credit, then we're going to have to up the credit on the big four. then, pretty soon we're going to be running short on credit and the whole thing is gonna collapse like a house of cards.
if we go ahead and give them more credit, then we're going to have to up the credit on the big four. then, pretty soon we're going to be running short on credit and the whole thing is gonna collapse like a house of cards.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: December 12, 2011 23:13
Quote
StonesTod
here's the prob:
if we go ahead and give them more credit, then we're going to have to up the credit on the big four. then, pretty soon we're going to be running short on credit and the whole thing is gonna collapse like a house of cards.
I think the key is to issue as much credit as possible, which would have the effect of inflating today's releases and creating a deflationary effect on the previous releases, making whatever they put out today BETTER than anything they have ever done.
You have to give me credit for that idea!
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: December 13, 2011 07:33
Quote
stonesdan60Quote
MJG196
Your opinion is incorrect.Quote
stonesdan60
This is just my opinion, but there's so much talk about the Stones last good album being Exile, or possibly Some Girls. Even their often-called "low point," Black and Blue is full of gems (I think the low point would be Satanic Majesties), as are GHS & IORR. While their later output is not as groundbreaking as their creative peak of Banquet thru Exile, it's still damn good.
No one's opinion is incorrect because opinion relates to the individual. If, In your opinion vegetables taste better than steak, I have no right to say your opinion is incorrect because it's valid for you personally. Likewise, none of us have the right to say that each other's opinions about music are "incorrect." It would be more proper to say,"I disagree with your opinion." If how I feel about liking much of the Stones latter day music is valid to me, that's my opinion and is 100% correct for me. Just as your disagreement is valid because it's real to you. I wouldn't retort that your opinion is incorrect. I simply disagree with you, respectfully.
Oh I've come across some opinions that were definitely wrong.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
thewatchman
()
Date: December 13, 2011 07:44
Quote
stonesdan60
This is just my opinion, but there's so much talk about the Stones last good album being Exile, or possibly Some Girls. Even their often-called "low point," Black and Blue is full of gems (I think the low point would be Satanic Majesties), as are GHS & IORR. While their later output is not as groundbreaking as their creative peak of Banquet thru Exile, it's still damn good. The worst thing about Emotional Rescue is the title track, a flaccid attempt to score another Miss You. But while no earth-shattering new ground is broken, there's still kick-ass tunes I love, like Summer Romance, Let Me Go, She's so Cold, Send it to Me. These are among some of my favorite tunes. Tattoo You is full of great tunes even if they did trick us at the time by mining the vaults. And then:
Undercover:
Tie You Up, She Was Hot, All The Way Down; all personal faves.
Dirty Work: Not ashamed to say I love this album because it's so Keith driven and includes more faves:
One Hit To The Body, Fight, Hold Back, Too Rude
Steel Wheels: Mixed Emotions, Sad Sad Sad, Almost Hear You Sigh
Voodoo Lounge: Out of Tears (an all time favorite slow one), I Go Wild, Sparks Will Fly
Bridges To Babylon: Low Down, Might As Well Get Juiced, Already Over Me (another favorite slow one), Gunface, Saint of Me, Out of Control, & Keith's two closing tunes
A Bigger Bang: I love everything on this but not too crazy about Streets of Love. I think it's easily their best since Some Girls.
I don't think it's fair to compare these albums to what they created between 1968 - 1972. During that period they truly BECAME the Stones and everything they've done since has been compared to that. (Hell, I have an older brother who thinks Aftermath is the standard by which all later output is negatively judged. To each their own.) Sure, if they had stopped recording after Exile or Some Girls, they would still have a definitive body of work. But if their later albums could judged on their own merit as if the Big Four albums didn't exist, it would be clear that they are great rock and roll albums. As for complaints that they try to copy themselves with post seventies albums, well - duh...they're not copying anything. They sound like the Stones because they ARE the Stones. They're just doing what they do and it's great stuff. I think it's amazing that they've continued to come up with so much great music for so many years. Do their post-Some Girls albums add much radically new to their legacy? Maybe not too much, but to me it's still damn good, thoroughly enjoyable rock and roll...especially compared to what else is out there. Who else out there comes close to the essence of true rock and roll than the Stones? Maybe they did it best in earlier days, but in my opinion, to this day still, nobody does it better. But why be so serious? It's Only Rock and Roll.....and I LIKE it! A final thought..I'm younger than many fans, so maybe it's all what you grow up with. GHS was the first album I ever bought. I didn't go back and discover their earlier work until later so maybe my Stones experience is ass-backwards, lol. I know younger people who think they started with Miss You or Start Me Up and compare everything to that, so I guess a lot of it is relative and subjective. Sorry if I bored you all to death with my treatise....
This concept that the Stones haven't produced anything great since the late seventies is ludicrous. Saint Of Me, Out Of Control, Already Over Me, and Like A Thief in The Night are as good as anything they have ever done. The four new tracks on Forty Licks were all good. ABB was well received. The women just love Streets Of Love. Black And Blue is one of my all time favorites. I think it is a great album. The latest Some girls outtakes were fabulous. The Exile outtakes were damn good. The new album is going to be a classic.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-13 07:47 by thewatchman.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
stonesdan60
()
Date: December 13, 2011 16:55
What if - hypothetically - the Stones never existed prior to 1978 and Some Girls was their debut album? How would they then rank among rock bands that have come along since that time? Perhaps they wouldn't have the legendary status that puts them at the top with The Beatles, Bob Dylan, etc. But I'll bet they'd be considered a hell of a lot better than most rock bands that debuted from '78 on. Would they be popular enough to pack stadiums? Maybe not. But I'd bet they'd be standing tall amongst their peers and they'd still have enough great songs to make for some great concerts. I wonder what some typical setlists might be? Just for fun:
Start Me Up
She's So Cold
Let Me Go
All The Way Down
Oh No Not You Again
She Was Hot
Blinded By Rainbows
Neighbors
When The Whip Comes Down
Slipping Away
Before They Make Me Run
Summer Romance
Undercover
Miss You
Beast of Burden
Saint of Me
Respectable
You Got Me Rocking
Out of Control
encores:
Rough Justice
Shattered
Start Me Up
She's So Cold
Let Me Go
All The Way Down
Oh No Not You Again
She Was Hot
Blinded By Rainbows
Neighbors
When The Whip Comes Down
Slipping Away
Before They Make Me Run
Summer Romance
Undercover
Miss You
Beast of Burden
Saint of Me
Respectable
You Got Me Rocking
Out of Control
encores:
Rough Justice
Shattered
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
billwebster
()
Date: December 13, 2011 21:35
Era favourites are "Jump On Top Of Me", "Too Tight", "She Saw Me Coming", "Don't Stop", "You Don't Have To Mean It", "Highwire", "Almost Hear You Sigh" and the list goes on and on and on.
This is the era in which I got interested in the Stones, yet they rarely play any of these songs in concert if at all. So I don't care about their concerts, just their new albums, including solo material. "Alfie" is better than its reputation and so is GITD. "Hideaway", "Don't Call Me Up", "Brand New Set Of Rules", "Blue", they all could have turned into great Stones songs, which cannot be said of "Streets Of Love" because it's just a mashup of "Out Of Tears" and "Already Over Me", two much superior songs. Yet, they released it as a single. Isn't it strange as to why artists in the latter part of their career tend to release the lamest songs as singles whereas the hot stuff becomes b-sides? Another example: It has happened to Elton John as well ("Across the River Thames").
Besides, I don't get the bashing which "Stealing My Heart", a pleasant would-be-stadium rocker, and "Keys To Your Love", a retro Stones' disco era tune, receive. They are good songs for sure.
The Stones made a big mistake not to finish further 10 songs in those sessions for a possible mid-tour album release. That would have shortened the wait to ABB by a lot.
This is the era in which I got interested in the Stones, yet they rarely play any of these songs in concert if at all. So I don't care about their concerts, just their new albums, including solo material. "Alfie" is better than its reputation and so is GITD. "Hideaway", "Don't Call Me Up", "Brand New Set Of Rules", "Blue", they all could have turned into great Stones songs, which cannot be said of "Streets Of Love" because it's just a mashup of "Out Of Tears" and "Already Over Me", two much superior songs. Yet, they released it as a single. Isn't it strange as to why artists in the latter part of their career tend to release the lamest songs as singles whereas the hot stuff becomes b-sides? Another example: It has happened to Elton John as well ("Across the River Thames").
Besides, I don't get the bashing which "Stealing My Heart", a pleasant would-be-stadium rocker, and "Keys To Your Love", a retro Stones' disco era tune, receive. They are good songs for sure.
The Stones made a big mistake not to finish further 10 songs in those sessions for a possible mid-tour album release. That would have shortened the wait to ABB by a lot.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 13, 2011 21:42
the stones need more fans like billwebster...and fewer like me.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
thewatchman
()
Date: December 14, 2011 06:40
Quote
James Kirk
I think that we all agree that the latter day output for the most part cannot compete with Exile, Sticy Fingers etc...On the other hand has there been an a rock album by anyone that has been as good as those albums since they were released?
Perhaps a better way to judge the Stones modern day output is to compare it to whats on the chart when the new record comes out. By those standards I think the Stones modern day albums stand up quite well...The problem with every new Stones release is that critics compare new material to their classic work. The Stones have to compete with their lofty standards that other bands have never reached and aren't held to that level of criticism.
I want the Stones to release another classic, but even their work that doesn't reach those levels is better than most of what is current at the moment.
Excellent points, James Kirk.
Re: Latter Day Stones Albums Deserve More Credit
Posted by:
stonesdan60
()
Date: December 15, 2011 11:15
{Quote
James Kirk
I think that we all agree that the latter day output for the most part cannot compete with Exile, Sticy Fingers etc...On the other hand has there been an a rock album by anyone that has been as good as those albums since they were released?
Perhaps a better way to judge the Stones modern day output is to compare it to whats on the chart when the new record comes out. By those standards I think the Stones modern day albums stand up quite well...The problem with every new Stones release is that critics compare new material to their classic work. The Stones have to compete with their lofty standards that other bands have never reached and aren't held to that level of criticism.
I want the Stones to release another classic, but even their work that doesn't reach those levels is better than most of what is current at the moment.}
This is similar to the debates among Dylan fans. Like many great artists, he had a certain period where inspired classics just poured from him; material that no one in his genre, including himself could ever top. In general, those periods of brilliance don't last forever. They come when an artist finds his muse and gets everything out of his system that's probably been brewing for years. So of course everything Dylan did later got compared negatively to his "classic" period, even though much of his later work was very good in it's own right. Yes, he produced some clunkers but he seems to have been on a roll since Time Out of Mind. I think that album, Love and Theft, Modern Times, and Together Through Life showcase a brilliant latter day Dylan. It's a different Dylan, but the lyrics are brilliant, and while his voice is ragged and raw, it fits the kind of songs he's been writing. I love his recent stuff, but OK - I know I'm off topic.
James Kirk
I think that we all agree that the latter day output for the most part cannot compete with Exile, Sticy Fingers etc...On the other hand has there been an a rock album by anyone that has been as good as those albums since they were released?
Perhaps a better way to judge the Stones modern day output is to compare it to whats on the chart when the new record comes out. By those standards I think the Stones modern day albums stand up quite well...The problem with every new Stones release is that critics compare new material to their classic work. The Stones have to compete with their lofty standards that other bands have never reached and aren't held to that level of criticism.
I want the Stones to release another classic, but even their work that doesn't reach those levels is better than most of what is current at the moment.}
This is similar to the debates among Dylan fans. Like many great artists, he had a certain period where inspired classics just poured from him; material that no one in his genre, including himself could ever top. In general, those periods of brilliance don't last forever. They come when an artist finds his muse and gets everything out of his system that's probably been brewing for years. So of course everything Dylan did later got compared negatively to his "classic" period, even though much of his later work was very good in it's own right. Yes, he produced some clunkers but he seems to have been on a roll since Time Out of Mind. I think that album, Love and Theft, Modern Times, and Together Through Life showcase a brilliant latter day Dylan. It's a different Dylan, but the lyrics are brilliant, and while his voice is ragged and raw, it fits the kind of songs he's been writing. I love his recent stuff, but OK - I know I'm off topic.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Christiaan , Doxa , ds1984 , fanch , fedecarp , gativubi , keefriffhards , maumau , Nankstone , stoned52 , StonedRambler , Stoney1962 , syrel , TURB0 , xke38
Guests:
1486
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10