For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Green Lady
A couple of people here (me included) described those SNL performances as "covers" - and I think doxa has diagnosed what we felt uneasy about. They were great covers, by excellent bands - but what we were watching was a couple of great cover bands who just happened to have managed to sign up the real (and fantastic) Mick Jagger as their singer for the night. It was their take, not Mick's. Maybe it's just that it's such a long time since we've seen Mick being driven by the band instead of driving it, but it sort of feels subtly wrong.
Quote
Green Lady
A couple of people here (me included) described those SNL performances as "covers" - and I think doxa has diagnosed what we felt uneasy about. They were great covers, by excellent bands - but what we were watching was a couple of great cover bands who just happened to have managed to sign up the real (and fantastic) Mick Jagger as their singer for the night. It was their take, not Mick's. Maybe it's just that it's such a long time since we've seen Mick being driven by the band instead of driving it, but it sort of feels subtly wrong.
Quote
Doxa
Okay, some thoughts about Jagger's musical performance - that's all I've seen since I have no access to the whole show - - Doxa
Quote
Rip ThisQuote
Doxa
Okay, some thoughts about Jagger's musical performance - that's all I've seen since I have no access to the whole show - - Doxa
apart from some slight difficulty in keeping the vocal range necessary in the afterparty version of Birch (near the end of the song)...Jagger was nothing short of excellent....having said that I think you have an uncanny ability to stae the obvious in a BS rant...
Quote
Doxa
Actually, both sixties numbers - "The Last Time" and "19th Nervous Breakdown" - are 'young man's numbers', and the Stones have always had difficulties in their elder days in how to deliver them; their recent sound does not do justice for them, and usually the versions tend up sounding a bit comical and artificial. Those numbers ask a lot of energy, and certain straight-forward attitude, they somehow lost already in 1968/69 when their sound got more sophisticated, and they developed as musicians.
Quote
JustinQuote
Doxa
Actually, both sixties numbers - "The Last Time" and "19th Nervous Breakdown" - are 'young man's numbers', and the Stones have always had difficulties in their elder days in how to deliver them; their recent sound does not do justice for them, and usually the versions tend up sounding a bit comical and artificial. Those numbers ask a lot of energy, and certain straight-forward attitude, they somehow lost already in 1968/69 when their sound got more sophisticated, and they developed as musicians.
I've been stewing about this comment since I read it a few days ago, Doxa and I wanted to bring up my thoughts. I wanted to make a point about it because I think you're hitting a very important nerve that could be at the crux of the issue here: just how energized Mick is and the "lack" of gusto the Stones seem to have. You are correct in saying that these two numbers do require a substantial amout of "punk" energy. The energy was delivered successfully by both Foo Fighters and Arcade Fire especially since they are relatively "young" bands (compared to the Stones).
But I don't particularly agree that the Stones' semi-recent attempts of these same songs were "difficult" or "comical." Taking a look at the Double Door performances of both songs, I think they approached these songs exactly correct: with maturity and respect to the original material. Hearing them re-approach these songs in a new way shows that they are in fact allowing the songs to breathe and to age. To expect them to perform these songs as if they were in their early twenties when they originally wrote these songs is a little unfair (and weird!).
Songs are an extension of people and how they view life and where they currently are in their life and it's no surprise that the band came at this song with a different angle than they did 30 years ago when they first recorded it. People change, attitudes change and songs can in fact change.
i think the bitch is a dudeQuote
Rip This
thx....stand corrected on the bitch
Quote
JustinQuote
Doxa
Actually, both sixties numbers - "The Last Time" and "19th Nervous Breakdown" - are 'young man's numbers', and the Stones have always had difficulties in their elder days in how to deliver them; their recent sound does not do justice for them, and usually the versions tend up sounding a bit comical and artificial. Those numbers ask a lot of energy, and certain straight-forward attitude, they somehow lost already in 1968/69 when their sound got more sophisticated, and they developed as musicians.
I've been stewing about this comment since I read it a few days ago, Doxa and I wanted to bring up my thoughts. I wanted to make a point about it because I think you're hitting a very important nerve that could be at the crux of the issue here: just how energized Mick is and the "lack" of gusto the Stones seem to have. You are correct in saying that these two numbers do require a substantial amout of "punk" energy. The energy was delivered successfully by both Foo Fighters and Arcade Fire especially since they are relatively "young" bands (compared to the Stones).
But I don't particularly agree that the Stones' semi-recent attempts of these same songs were "difficult" or "comical." Taking a look at the Double Door performances of both songs, I think they approached these songs exactly correct: with maturity and respect to the original material. Hearing them re-approach these songs in a new way shows that they are in fact allowing the songs to breathe and to age. To expect them to perform these songs as if they were in their early twenties when they originally wrote these songs is a little unfair (and weird!).
Songs are an extension of people and how they view life and where they currently are in their life and it's no surprise that the band came at this song with a different angle than they did 30 years ago when they first recorded it. People change, attitudes change and songs can in fact change.
Going back to the SNL performance, it makes perfect sense for AF and FF to nail it exactly like the original recordings. It's not their song to tamper with. It's not their sound. All they have to work with are the original recordings. It's no surprise that they almost got the songs down note-by-note. The energy was most definitely theirs but the songs were definitely still the Stones'. What FF and AF did--which the Stones can't/wont' do is to copy a song. The Stones can't even copy their own records! Take a look at every cover the Stones have done....Temptations, James Brown, Buddy Holly...none of their covers sound like copies of the originals...the songs are squeezed through the Stones filter and they come out sounding like Mick and Keith rewrote the damn thing! The Stones are not interested in replicating notes or delivering perfect versions that mirror the original version...they're always looking for something ELSE in the song. They have every right to look for that "something else" because it's THEIR song. What the FF and AF did was deliver the songs as they've always heard it--and NOT at all performed with a new interpretation (which is exactly why I think everyone loved it). It's fun to watch Mick up onstage with a drummer and a guitar player that is 20-30 years old younger than him and I would expect them to play these songs this way. But to expect a 70 year old drummer to play "19th Nervous Breakdown" like that would've been a little silly and almost inappropriate.
I am not sure if I got my point across amidst all this babbling but I don't particularly agree with many people on the board putting AF and FF on a pedestal because of how they came at their performance. I absolutely loved their performances and wouldn't change a damn thing about them but to then KNOCK the Stones that they couldn't do the same thing is wrong, in my opinion. To my ears, the Stones can still take a 30 or 40 year old song and make it sound modern. It takes a band like AF or FF (or anyone else) to copy the song note-by-note to remind you just how old the song can be. It's fun to listen to but I think songs deserve more than just carbon copies of each other.
it's called a tripple entendre...where is StonesTod when you need him?...he would have gotten that.Quote
riverrati think the bitch is a dudeQuote
Rip This
thx....stand corrected on the bitch
I can only totally agree with that comment. For me it was only the "It's Only Rock and Roll" which was finally played the slowheavy speed nearly like on the album when Mick Jagger managed the pace and the lead on the song.Quote
Doxa
All in all, he did his frontman job nicely but the difference between these performances and the past Stones shows has been that I didn't get the feeling that Jagger is leading the band, but more like following it. (The same with "Bitch" in post-party videos). It looked sometimes that Jagger was struggling in order to keep in the same speed, or maintaining the same energy level. He didn't control the scene, but more like trying to cope with it. But like I said, the blues number was the one Jagger was home with, and totally controlled the scene.
Okay, I leave the conclusions concerning the future, Jagger's condition to tour, etc. out now.
- Doxa
Quote
Doxa
I need to correct my reply to Justin above.
He actually posted this version of "19th Nervous Breakdown" in other thread:
This very much disqualifies what I claimed above - that the Stones are just trying to give one-to-one treatment of the song. Okay, the version is not probably the finest under the sun, but I like the 'idea' of delivering it differently. Jagger does even not try to find the old 'rebel without a cause' within himself, but gives it totally new clothing. A wise decision. A bit like with "Get Off of My Cloud" in 1975. It is funny to compare this version - and also "The Last Time" from Double Door - the way Jagger performs and sings in SNL where he goes very close to the original.
- Doxa
Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
Doxa, those 1997 and Bigger Bang versions of 19th Nervous Breakdown are horrendous. That 1997 one they get a pass on because it was the first show etc but the 2005/7 one they get a fail. How come they can still slaughter JJF at a 'decent' speed but they slowed 19th Nervous Breakdown to a crawl? Horrible.
They've been doing Satisfaction because 'they have to'. There's never been a real reason for them to do it since the 1969/70 tours other than a excuse to play one of their biggest singles.
There was some huge expectation of Mick doing something great that was affiliated with the whole SNL thing that, of course, didn't turn out to be for those that were disappointed.
Doing what he did was...what? What he was doing with other bands.
It's stupid.
Quote
treaclefingers
And maybe that's what some of us REALLY liked about it. I bet if you asked Mick, that is also what he liked about it. A new energy.
Quote
stupidguy2Quote
treaclefingers
And maybe that's what some of us REALLY liked about it. I bet if you asked Mick, that is also what he liked about it. A new energy.
Ditto. I think is one of those times where you just go with the feel of things, nothing complicated, nothing deep...
Just a 68-year old performer finding that spark again...
and it happened to be with young performers with a fresh, raw energy.
I loved it!
Quote
riverrat
Ya'all might have seen this, and I'm sorry that I'm not going to take the time to look thru 56 pages tonight, so apologies in advance if it's already here, and if not, it's fun to see Steven Tyler's reaction to Mick's portrayal of him: