For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
StonesTodQuote
Max'sKansasCityI thought I felt pretty sober... but I wasnt sure.Quote
StonesTodQuote
Max'sKansasCity
The more I drink the prettier she gets... or something like that.
mhm...but the piano has been drinking, not you or me...or something....
i'm sober
Quote
MunichhiltonQuote
StonesTodQuote
Max'sKansasCityI thought I felt pretty sober... but I wasnt sure.Quote
StonesTodQuote
Max'sKansasCity
The more I drink the prettier she gets... or something like that.
mhm...but the piano has been drinking, not you or me...or something....
i'm sober
Ha!
Quote
StonesTodQuote
MunichhiltonQuote
StonesTodQuote
Max'sKansasCityI thought I felt pretty sober... but I wasnt sure.Quote
StonesTodQuote
Max'sKansasCity
The more I drink the prettier she gets... or something like that.
mhm...but the piano has been drinking, not you or me...or something....
i'm sober
Ha!
well, it's all relative, right? i blame my relatives...or something...
Quote
Rockman
Awwwwwwwwww klrkcr.....didn't ya hang around for a lil' kiss and cuddle
Quote
Rip This
...frack me...it's gotten 1,183,624 hits now...
Quote
Justin
So? What does it matter how many likes/dislikes there are? It still got 1.7 million views in less than 2 days. Plus most of the written comments on the video support the notion that the song is being well received by the general public. Or wait: let me guess...those comments were all faked?...someone created a couple thousand accounts to post the nearly 4,000 mostly positive comments on the video?
Quote
stonesnow
Seriously Justin, why do my posts get to you so? It's just a difference of opinion. Grow up and accept the fact that not everyone is going to see things the same way you do. And if I wish to express that I am less than enthusiastic about this new Stones track, then I have just as much of a right to express my con views as do you with your pro views. There's no reason to get bitchy and snippy.
Quote
stonesnow
But tell me Justin, why is it so important to you that everyone must like this tune, or else? Why is my casual indifference to the song such a bother to you?
Quote
JustinQuote
stonesnow
Seriously Justin, why do my posts get to you so? It's just a difference of opinion. Grow up and accept the fact that not everyone is going to see things the same way you do. And if I wish to express that I am less than enthusiastic about this new Stones track, then I have just as much of a right to express my con views as do you with your pro views. There's no reason to get bitchy and snippy.
Do not label this as a "difference of opinion" and drag this discussion down to some elementary/4 year old level saying that I (or anyone else) refuse to accept your opinion. Give me a freakin' break. I assumed we were all adults here? This week has proven to me that that may not be the case.
You earlier trying to "prove" that Doom and Gloom is an overrated song by using the likes/dislikes and view count figures from Youtube is NOT you "expressing an opinion." You are manipulating the information to fit your agenda---a completely biased one, I will add. The likes/dislikes ratios found on YouTube are completely unreliable and do not prove anything especially since that is an optional feature on YouTube. Not everyone votes. You coming here and purporting that the numbers explain why the song "sucks" is not factual nor is it an opinion. It was a wasted effort to try to legitimize your hate for the song.Grow the f*ck up. It's not about that at all. You can come here and hate the song all you want--just don't come here and try to sell us your flawed half-baked theories that don't hold water in an attempt to legitimize your own opinion of the song.Quote
stonesnow
But tell me Justin, why is it so important to you that everyone must like this tune, or else? Why is my casual indifference to the song such a bother to you?
.
Quote
Justin
So? What does it matter how many likes/dislikes there are? It still got 1.7 million views in less than 2 days. Plus most of the written comments on the video support the notion that the song is being well received by the general public. Or wait: let me guess...those comments were all faked?...someone created a couple thousand accounts to post the nearly 4,000 mostly positive comments on the video?
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
Justin
So? What does it matter how many likes/dislikes there are? It still got 1.7 million views in less than 2 days. Plus most of the written comments on the video support the notion that the song is being well received by the general public. Or wait: let me guess...those comments were all faked?...someone created a couple thousand accounts to post the nearly 4,000 mostly positive comments on the video?
I'll only admit to creating 300 of those accounts and 800 comments. There are obviously others we can point fingers at as well. I'm not wearing this one alone.
I'm taking people on this board down with me...some big names.
I'm not saying exactly who, but here's a sampling G*zz*, St*n*sT*d, B*V*, M*x'sK*ns*sC*ty W*L*veT*Pl*yTh*Bl**s, Rockman (oops), B*st*n2006, StonesThen, HamburgHilton, D*xa, St*ffieSt*n*s...and yes, many others. Great groups of us creating multiple Youtube accounts, watching and 'Liking' it.
Quote
Gazza
The notion that any of us - and obviously I include myself in this - know better than what makes or defines a 'Stonesy song' or 'Stonesy sound' better than Mick, Keith, Ronnie and Charlie do is pretty absurd IMO.
Quote
Rockman
...what's youtube treacle?.....heh ha
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
Justin
So? What does it matter how many likes/dislikes there are? It still got 1.7 million views in less than 2 days. Plus most of the written comments on the video support the notion that the song is being well received by the general public. Or wait: let me guess...those comments were all faked?...someone created a couple thousand accounts to post the nearly 4,000 mostly positive comments on the video?
I'll only admit to creating 300 of those accounts and 800 comments. There are obviously others we can point fingers at as well. I'm not wearing this one alone.
I'm taking people on this board down with me...some big names.
I'm not saying exactly who, but here's a sampling G*zz*, St*n*sT*d, B*V*, M*x'sK*ns*sC*ty W*L*veT*Pl*yTh*Bl**s, Rockman (oops), B*st*n2006, StonesThen, HamburgHilton, D*xa, St*ffieSt*n*s...and yes, many others. Great groups of us creating multiple Youtube accounts, watching and 'Liking' it.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
bv
Doom and Gloom will be fantastic live. It is great as it is now, but it will top itself when the "boys" do it live on stage. I am sure. And we will know for sure in a few weeks time.
I agree.
Actually, they have a surprising amount of very good 'new material' released since the last tour. It would be great to get PMS, No Spare Parts and a couple of others on SG Deluxe, in addition to this and maybe the new Keith penned toon.
Quote
Doxa
Actually the philosophy is not that far from "Street Fighting Man". The basic idea is the same: so much going on (troubles) in the world, but the man in question, even recognizing the unfair state of affairs, for a reason or other, seems to prevent himself of doing anything active. To really making the world little better. In "Street Fighting Man" he just accepts his role as a passive outsider ("sing in a rock and roll band"), as a harmless entertainer, while in "Doom & Gloom" he just wants to go dancing (and drinking) with his woman (and leave the troubles worrying his mind behind for a moment).
Of course, there is a lot of implicit provocation in "Street Fighting Man", but in the end, the idea is basically the same. This man is not going to go to barricades, or doing anything effective. Of course, in "Street Fighting man" the passivity is more like a result of frustration knowing his limited position, even thoug having urge and idealism to do something, while in "Doom & Gloom" that is more like a nihilistic realism that better not even trying to think there is something he could do, so forget it it all...
In both cases, I think there is some genuine self-reflection in there.
- Doxa
Quote
maumauQuote
Gazza
The notion that any of us - and obviously I include myself in this - know better than what makes or defines a 'Stonesy song' or 'Stonesy sound' better than Mick, Keith, Ronnie and Charlie do is pretty absurd IMO.
that notion i meant by saying there's plenty of no stonesy songs in their catalog. Also i think that stonesy has more to do with subjective taste than musicology )
Quote
GazzaQuote
71Tele
OK, I listened to it some more and I like it better. Still sounds more like a solo Jagger track than a Stones song to me though.
There are dozens of very good Stones songs which dont sound like 'Stones songs' or where the collaboration between Jagger and Richards is minimal or even non existent. or where Charlie isnt that prominent.
The only thing that matters is whether it's an enjoyable song or not. And it is. The end always justifies the means.
I really dont see why people get wound up and over-analytical about the dynamics over who is too prominent and who isnt heard loudly enough. The fact is that for decades Mick and Keith have not been a songwriting unit in the true sense of the word. In this day and age and with technology being what it is, its quite obvious that when a band sets aside just four days or so to record two songs that whoever wrote the song is going to have already done a sizeable amount of work on it in their home studio and that full band involvement is going to be comparatively minimal. I'd expect 'One More Shot' to be the same, only that it would have more of Keith as he wrote it.
The days of Andrew Oldham locking them in a room and making them bash out a song together are long gone.
Quote
stonesnow
Oh, and that bit about "you can come here and" as well as "just don't come here and" does come across as a bit heavy-handed. You don't set the tone for my posts or for anyone else's posts--only your own, that's all you govern here. Learn it, know it, live it.
Quote
71TeleQuote
GazzaQuote
71Tele
OK, I listened to it some more and I like it better. Still sounds more like a solo Jagger track than a Stones song to me though.
There are dozens of very good Stones songs which dont sound like 'Stones songs' or where the collaboration between Jagger and Richards is minimal or even non existent. or where Charlie isnt that prominent.
The only thing that matters is whether it's an enjoyable song or not. And it is. The end always justifies the means.
I really dont see why people get wound up and over-analytical about the dynamics over who is too prominent and who isnt heard loudly enough. The fact is that for decades Mick and Keith have not been a songwriting unit in the true sense of the word. In this day and age and with technology being what it is, its quite obvious that when a band sets aside just four days or so to record two songs that whoever wrote the song is going to have already done a sizeable amount of work on it in their home studio and that full band involvement is going to be comparatively minimal. I'd expect 'One More Shot' to be the same, only that it would have more of Keith as he wrote it.
The days of Andrew Oldham locking them in a room and making them bash out a song together are long gone.
Yes, I know this and mostly agree, Gazza.
However...when even the basic formula (songwriting quality aside) of open-G guitar(s), Charlie's drumming, and Mick's singing is attempted and left wanting it does beg the question of how many elements can you take away from the Stones classic sound and still have a credible Rolling Stones track? If they were going for something different and unique here (say, a "Winter", or a dance tune, for example), complaints about it not sounding like the Stones formula would of course be silly. However, when they are clearly going for the "classic" fundamental template, and the guitars and drums sound more "hard rock" than Stones, it seems a crticism on that basis is legitimate. Doesn't mean the song is terrible, just that it really does sound much more like a Jagger track trying to pass itself off as a Stones track.