For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
This Dead Flowers might be the best rendition they've ever done, imo.
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
This Dead Flowers might be the best rendition they've ever done, imo.
It is a good one. I' not so familiar with other 'recent' versions (of which I know Paradiso '95 is also a good one, though), but if we compare it to 70's renditions, it doesn't pale at all.
I think one big difference to the live versions of '71/'72 is that Jagger is able to interpret the song better nowadays than in then. Especially the low register verse seemed to be a struggle for Jagger back then. Maybe it is this kind of material - a slow c%w song, with lower register - is easier to do wen you are older...
But then again, what makes the old versions unique are, of course, Taylor's fluidy guitar solos and Mick and Keith's joined chorus vocals. Keith puts his stamp on this one also, but his voice lacks that bright naturalness it used to had then.
But over-all it is a joyful, compact perforance from anyone - a nice listening!
- Doxa
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
This Dead Flowers might be the best rendition they've ever done, imo.
It is a good one. I' not so familiar with other 'recent' versions (of which I know Paradiso '95 is also a good one, though), but if we compare it to 70's renditions, it doesn't pale at all.
I think one big difference to the live versions of '71/'72 is that Jagger is able to interpret the song better nowadays than in then. Especially the low register verse seemed to be a struggle for Jagger back then. Maybe it is this kind of material - a slow c%w song, with lower register - is easier to do wen you are older...
But then again, what makes the old versions unique are, of course, Taylor's fluidy guitar solos and Mick and Keith's joined chorus vocals. Keith puts his stamp on this one also, but his voice lacks that bright naturalness it used to had then.
But over-all it is a joyful, compact perforance from anyone - a nice listening!
- Doxa
I agree, but Keith's vocals are quite prominent in the mix here, and I really like Ronnie's wild B-Bender solos and licks on this version - suits the song better than Taylor's "pretty-solo", imo.
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
MathijsQuote
Erik_Snow
Oh you meant it that way; yes you're right. But they've allready lost lotsa customers by now, too, due to the waiting.
In either case, they don't make much money on these series, and since they're cashing in to the extreme on the 4 shows they're playing this year, maybe they simply look at the vault-releases as a "gift" to the fans, and don't care too much about the income.
The income probably is no more than another pair of handmade Nike sneakers for Jagger and other ancient gun for CHarlie's collection
The Stones couldn't care less how many people buy this -they got their money when they sold the six shows to Google, whom use it to push their Google Music thing.
Mathijs
Oh yes that's true. It really makes no big difference if they care or not, point is that they're losing out on money by delaying the European release with a week, doesn't matter if it's google or RS losing. So maybe they have plans for a different show to available as lossless from stonesarchive, for us europeans
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
genco
Mathijs, for european people is not Google. We buy through stonesarchive.com
True, but the Stones run the Stonesarchive-site themselves, but already got paid for the Google Music-thing - hence the archve will never be priority # 1, unfortunately...
Quote
kowalskiQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
genco
Mathijs, for european people is not Google. We buy through stonesarchive.com
True, but the Stones run the Stonesarchive-site themselves, but already got paid for the Google Music-thing - hence the archve will never be priority # 1, unfortunately...
From Stones Archive privacy policy statement :
"This website, located at http:/ /www.livenation.com (the "Site" ), is owned and operated by Bravado International Group, Inc."
[media.musictoday.com]
The Stones archive website is run by Bravado, a company specialized in merchandising items. I guess they are currently more interested in promoting their super expensive box sets (which don't seem to sell so well) than releasing a 7$ download...
Quote
liddasQuote
Erik_SnowQuote
MathijsQuote
Erik_Snow
Oh you meant it that way; yes you're right. But they've allready lost lotsa customers by now, too, due to the waiting.
In either case, they don't make much money on these series, and since they're cashing in to the extreme on the 4 shows they're playing this year, maybe they simply look at the vault-releases as a "gift" to the fans, and don't care too much about the income.
The income probably is no more than another pair of handmade Nike sneakers for Jagger and other ancient gun for CHarlie's collection
The Stones couldn't care less how many people buy this -they got their money when they sold the six shows to Google, whom use it to push their Google Music thing.
Mathijs
Oh yes that's true. It really makes no big difference if they care or not, point is that they're losing out on money by delaying the European release with a week, doesn't matter if it's google or RS losing. So maybe they have plans for a different show to available as lossless from stonesarchive, for us europeans
They haven't released it in Europe only to prove that Gazza's insinuations (there was a sordid marketing strategy behind the StonesArchive presale and the announcement of this release) were wrong ...
As a matter of fact the StonesArchive presale sold 1 ticket (and I know the purchaser) and so far no new boot ...
C
Quote
Deltics
The FLAC version hasn't been made available yet.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
It would actually surprise me a lot if it won't be available thru Stones Archive, eventually...
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Which show are you attending, liddas?
Quote
liddasQuote
DandelionPowderman
Which show are you attending, liddas?
Nov. 29. I was able to find a floor seat on Keith side. 406£ ... Insane!
C
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
kowalskiQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
genco
Mathijs, for european people is not Google. We buy through stonesarchive.com
True, but the Stones run the Stonesarchive-site themselves, but already got paid for the Google Music-thing - hence the archve will never be priority # 1, unfortunately...
From Stones Archive privacy policy statement :
"This website, located at http:/ /www.livenation.com (the "Site" ), is owned and operated by Bravado International Group, Inc."
[media.musictoday.com]
The Stones archive website is run by Bravado, a company specialized in merchandising items. I guess they are currently more interested in promoting their super expensive box sets (which don't seem to sell so well) than releasing a 7$ download...
Sorry, you're right of course. But isn't Bravado merely running the net shop-solutions + marketing the releases, and not paying the Stones zillions for releasing these shows, like Google does?
Quote
kowalskiQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
kowalskiQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
genco
Mathijs, for european people is not Google. We buy through stonesarchive.com
True, but the Stones run the Stonesarchive-site themselves, but already got paid for the Google Music-thing - hence the archve will never be priority # 1, unfortunately...
From Stones Archive privacy policy statement :
"This website, located at http:/ /www.livenation.com (the "Site" ), is owned and operated by Bravado International Group, Inc."
[media.musictoday.com]
The Stones archive website is run by Bravado, a company specialized in merchandising items. I guess they are currently more interested in promoting their super expensive box sets (which don't seem to sell so well) than releasing a 7$ download...
Sorry, you're right of course. But isn't Bravado merely running the net shop-solutions + marketing the releases, and not paying the Stones zillions for releasing these shows, like Google does?
You must be right. Maybe it's just Google who had the Toronto show released too early.
Quote
Munichhilton
It's decent enough, but I think the complaints are stemming from the gazillion shows they could have chosen from. There are far far far better than this era...
Quote
StonesTodQuote
Munichhilton
It's decent enough, but I think the complaints are stemming from the gazillion shows they could have chosen from. There are far far far better than this era...
correct. the problems with this show is that it's not the show it should be...or something.
i hear keystone is venturing into belgian-stylings, btw....
Quote
MunichhiltonQuote
StonesTodQuote
Munichhilton
It's decent enough, but I think the complaints are stemming from the gazillion shows they could have chosen from. There are far far far better than this era...
correct. the problems with this show is that it's not the show it should be...or something.
i hear keystone is venturing into belgian-stylings, btw....
Belgian? Like waffles? Like beer waffles?
Quote
StonesTodQuote
MunichhiltonQuote
StonesTodQuote
Munichhilton
It's decent enough, but I think the complaints are stemming from the gazillion shows they could have chosen from. There are far far far better than this era...
correct. the problems with this show is that it's not the show it should be...or something.
i hear keystone is venturing into belgian-stylings, btw....
Belgian? Like waffles? Like beer waffles?
they weren't specific...