Tell Me :
Talk
Yeah, and just two years earlier he made one producer almost crazy for not able to 'control' him. And now he is blaming the producer for destroying an album. Where did he lose his balls? Of all people, Mick Jagger, the biggest cock (well...) in business? To me he is it just hiding his own disinterest towards the project, which very well can be seen, for example, in his lyrical contribution to the songs. I think he 'okayed' the retro 'rock' nature of the project, because that was at the time 'in' (->$$$$$), but he truely wasn't inspired at all of the idea. And seemingly even though the album did okay, it wasn't such a huge hit to compansate his 'effort'. Yeah, blame it on Don Was...
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 01:45 by Doxa.
I think if Mick and Keith are the same page then no producer (or Stone) can tell them what to do but if they want different things then maybe handing over some of the responsibility to a third party they both trust avoids another war.
Yeah, that could be right. There probably needs to be 'neutral' voices there, like Chuck as well. But it also could be that Jagger just doesn't bother to care so much any longer. Has no real artistic ambition. A bit like Chuck is nowadays the guy who suggests the setlists (like 'you know best what the Stones fans might like to hear'). Interesting contrast to the little remark Jagger made in talking about the 1982 bootleg relaese concerning the 'odd' setlist; "What I was thinking..." indicates that it was all up to him...
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 02:17 by Doxa.
Well, Mick spent longer time on writing songs to VL with Keith than usual. Actually, I think Mick was amazed by the success of SW and the tour, and that made him put a lot of effort into VL.
When listening to Voodoo Brew/Stew/Residue you can easily tell that the band had very much developed material to choose from. That would never happen if Mick didn't give a toss about the project, imo.
OK, somehow I can agree with you, but to be factual Jagger said "slightly disappointed" not that DW "destroyed the album"
In any case, something strange is happening. Since I reworked VL for your thread on the LP version of CDs, cutting out Sparks and Wild (the two really really bad songs on it) and rearranging the list, it's starting to grow. Not a so bad album after all!
C
If true that they, including Mick, truely put their best effort there, the sadder it is, putting together such a mediocre, half-baked album. If the muse is not there, it is not. I wonder what happened to the focused and isnpired guy who just two years earlier made WANDERING SPIRIT, and was replaced by this 'through the motions' guy, throwing some most idiotic juvenile lyrics he ever has done? Jagger put a Rolling Stone mood/role on? If VOODOO LOUNGE is 'best' what 'modern' Jagger and Richards can accomplish together, it is better for them to work alone, having own courts, as in BRIDGES TO BABYLON.
So it could be that even though fisrt being all cylinders on, Jagger lost the interest within the project, because he really has sounded disappointed when talking about it. It needs also to be noted that even if Mick doesn't give a toss, that doesn't mean that he will not do his part somehow (there is a Jagger in DIRTY WORK). But altogether those comments about Was and him 'giving up' are rather extraordinary to a 'control-freak' like him. Did Keith screw up with him big time (again)? Jagger haven't really given another chance for a 'traditional' Rolling Stones album ever since.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 11:19 by Doxa.
Well, he probably dried up a bit creativity-wise, who knows?
I don't think the album is half-baked. The songs sound finished and well-produced (technically) to me. B2B sounds more unfinished, imo.
However, the might be something in Mick's statements. Songs like "Ivy League", "You Got It Made", "Zip Mouth Angel", "Honest Man" could easily have replaced songs like "Jugular", "Thru And Thru", "Blinded By Rainbows" and "I Go Wild", and if they took out a few other songs the album would have been a totally different story, imo. And it just might not be Jagger's mistake, as he states himself.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 11:38 by DandelionPowderman.
i luv donnie was. LUV HIM. plays a bad-ass bass...wonder if he and the stones ever discussed him joining the live act in that capacity...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 17:01 by StonesTod.
i'll take those three...kidnap charlie and now you've got a swell little quartet.
You're right. How clumsy of me. Charlie's in too.
not a single glint of glimmer in this band. hmmm..and by default, looks like chuck's the lead singer. just what he always wanted. the world is now gonna see just what a rockin' dude he is.
Actually... they should.
For the life of me I don't understand why multi-millionaire Keith let's anyone mess about with his sound.
He never used to.
Seeing that Don Was obviously didn't like the substanceless groove songs they had he instead inspired them to do such trollop and tepid songs as New Faces, Sweethearts Together, You Got Me Rocking and Sparks Will Fly.
Stunning. Obviously Mick lost interest.
Dirty Work!
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
KRiffhard
()
Date: November 15, 2012 22:47
Don Was is definitely anti-groove. Charlie and I worked on a lot of groove tunes that never made it on to the record. That was the one thing I was slightly disappointed by.
- Mick Jagger, May 1994
It's very much a kind of time-and-place album. In that way i was quite pleased with the results. But there were a lot of things that we wrote for Voodoo Lounge that Don (Was) steered us away from: groove songs, African influences and things like that. And he steered us away very clear of all that. And I think it was a mistake...(..)
Mick Jagger, 1995
Chris (Kimsey) and Steve (Lillywhite) would always put in their twopennyworth, whatever they could do, but they were operating much more under the orders of Mick and Keith, who would be telling them, Right, we're going to do this this way, and we want you to handle it this way, whereas they tend to give Don more of an open hand in what he is doing, more of his own choice about the direction he wants the song to go in.
- Ron Wood, 2003
...and this is the problem Ron.
- Mick Jagger, May 1994
It's very much a kind of time-and-place album. In that way i was quite pleased with the results. But there were a lot of things that we wrote for Voodoo Lounge that Don (Was) steered us away from: groove songs, African influences and things like that. And he steered us away very clear of all that. And I think it was a mistake...(..)
Mick Jagger, 1995
Chris (Kimsey) and Steve (Lillywhite) would always put in their twopennyworth, whatever they could do, but they were operating much more under the orders of Mick and Keith, who would be telling them, Right, we're going to do this this way, and we want you to handle it this way, whereas they tend to give Don more of an open hand in what he is doing, more of his own choice about the direction he wants the song to go in.
- Ron Wood, 2003
...and this is the problem Ron.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
KRiffhard
()
Date: November 15, 2012 22:55
"I'm certainly not anti-groove, just anti-groove without substance, in the context of this album. They had a number of great grooves. But it was like, OK, what goes on top of it? Where does it go? I just felt that it's not what people were looking for from the Stones. I was looking for a sign that they can great real serious about this, still play better than anybody and write better than anybody"
Don Was, May 1994
...and so, if you're 'anti-groove without substance', what about 'Suck on the jugular?' This is the song 'the people were looking from the Stones'?!
Don Was, May 1994
...and so, if you're 'anti-groove without substance', what about 'Suck on the jugular?' This is the song 'the people were looking from the Stones'?!
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: November 16, 2012 00:48
Jagger's comments just mean that he didn't give a shit. Just get the bugger out of his hands to hear the seirene call of Michael Cohl... If that been Jagger all cylinders on, it had been a different album...
- Doxa
- Doxa
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
vincentwhirlwind
()
Date: November 16, 2012 00:58
Some of Mick's stuff does suck though.........
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: November 16, 2012 01:08
Don Was is definitely anti-groove. Charlie and I worked on a lot of groove tunes that never made it on to the record. That was the one thing I was slightly disappointed by.
- Mick Jagger, May 1994
Laughable comment. As if a hired hand dictates what does and doesn't make the final cut on a Rolling Stones album - and deserves to take the blame if the fans dont like their songs.
It was obviously such a bad experience that he's hired him for every Stones record since!
- Mick Jagger, May 1994
Laughable comment. As if a hired hand dictates what does and doesn't make the final cut on a Rolling Stones album - and deserves to take the blame if the fans dont like their songs.
It was obviously such a bad experience that he's hired him for every Stones record since!
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: November 16, 2012 01:32
donnie "groove-meister" was rocks.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
gotdablouse
()
Date: November 16, 2012 01:40
Yeah and Don showed he could grove big time on Was not Was terrific version of "Papa was a rollin' stone" !
It's a bit hard to understand what happened with "Voodoo Lounge", it seems Mick lost interest after the sessions in Ireland and let Don Was and Keith mix it in Los Angeles. Did they have some kind of rule where they voted on stuff and Was could decide either way to keep things moving and he tended to side with Keith so Mick just took off?
Thanks to VB/VS/VR we know that they left a ton of good stuff in the can, many of them Keith's, "Make it Now", "You Got it Made", "It's Funny", just to name a few, and there was Mick's "Honest Man", "Ivy League", "Zip Mouth Angel". Why they picked crap like "Sparks will Fly" or "Blinded by Rainbows" over any of these songs is anyone's guess.
I think Mick said somewhere that Keith and Don Was were trying to make it sound like Exile, which they certainly didn't achieve, it's so "clean", if anything the two new tracks sound a lot rougher than anything on VL, possibly because they didn't have much time to fuss over it.
--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio
It's a bit hard to understand what happened with "Voodoo Lounge", it seems Mick lost interest after the sessions in Ireland and let Don Was and Keith mix it in Los Angeles. Did they have some kind of rule where they voted on stuff and Was could decide either way to keep things moving and he tended to side with Keith so Mick just took off?
Thanks to VB/VS/VR we know that they left a ton of good stuff in the can, many of them Keith's, "Make it Now", "You Got it Made", "It's Funny", just to name a few, and there was Mick's "Honest Man", "Ivy League", "Zip Mouth Angel". Why they picked crap like "Sparks will Fly" or "Blinded by Rainbows" over any of these songs is anyone's guess.
I think Mick said somewhere that Keith and Don Was were trying to make it sound like Exile, which they certainly didn't achieve, it's so "clean", if anything the two new tracks sound a lot rougher than anything on VL, possibly because they didn't have much time to fuss over it.
--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: November 16, 2012 01:42
Quote
Gazza
Don Was is definitely anti-groove. Charlie and I worked on a lot of groove tunes that never made it on to the record. That was the one thing I was slightly disappointed by.
- Mick Jagger, May 1994
Laughable comment. As if a hired hand dictates what does and doesn't make the final cut on a Rolling Stones album - and deserves to take the blame if the fans dont like their songs.
It was obviously such a bad experience that he's hired him for every Stones record since!
Yeah, and just two years earlier he made one producer almost crazy for not able to 'control' him. And now he is blaming the producer for destroying an album. Where did he lose his balls? Of all people, Mick Jagger, the biggest cock (well...) in business? To me he is it just hiding his own disinterest towards the project, which very well can be seen, for example, in his lyrical contribution to the songs. I think he 'okayed' the retro 'rock' nature of the project, because that was at the time 'in' (->$$$$$), but he truely wasn't inspired at all of the idea. And seemingly even though the album did okay, it wasn't such a huge hit to compansate his 'effort'. Yeah, blame it on Don Was...
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 01:45 by Doxa.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
Braincapers
()
Date: November 16, 2012 01:48
Quote
Gazza
...As if a hired hand dictates what does and doesn't make the final cut on a Rolling Stones album - and deserves to take the blame if the fans dont like their songs...
I think if Mick and Keith are the same page then no producer (or Stone) can tell them what to do but if they want different things then maybe handing over some of the responsibility to a third party they both trust avoids another war.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: November 16, 2012 02:14
Quote
BraincapersQuote
Gazza
...As if a hired hand dictates what does and doesn't make the final cut on a Rolling Stones album - and deserves to take the blame if the fans dont like their songs...
I think if Mick and Keith are the same page then no producer (or Stone) can tell them what to do but if they want different things then maybe handing over some of the responsibility to a third party they both trust avoids another war.
Yeah, that could be right. There probably needs to be 'neutral' voices there, like Chuck as well. But it also could be that Jagger just doesn't bother to care so much any longer. Has no real artistic ambition. A bit like Chuck is nowadays the guy who suggests the setlists (like 'you know best what the Stones fans might like to hear'). Interesting contrast to the little remark Jagger made in talking about the 1982 bootleg relaese concerning the 'odd' setlist; "What I was thinking..." indicates that it was all up to him...
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 02:17 by Doxa.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
gotdablouse
()
Date: November 16, 2012 10:29
Which it probably wasn't, and nowadays he and Keith would still get the last say anyway, Chuck can only suggest and coordinate obviously and there's nothing wrong with that, it lets Mick and Keith focus on other stuff.
Back to VL, something strange did happen with Mick's participation in the mixing as I wrote above, but he clearly approached things differently for B2B and the results were a lot better, both the songs and the production. If you are to believe "Old Gods Almost Dead" things were very tense in the end though with Mick going AWOL and Keith's book pretty much confirmed the drama.
--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio
Back to VL, something strange did happen with Mick's participation in the mixing as I wrote above, but he clearly approached things differently for B2B and the results were a lot better, both the songs and the production. If you are to believe "Old Gods Almost Dead" things were very tense in the end though with Mick going AWOL and Keith's book pretty much confirmed the drama.
--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 16, 2012 10:45
Quote
DoxaQuote
Gazza
Don Was is definitely anti-groove. Charlie and I worked on a lot of groove tunes that never made it on to the record. That was the one thing I was slightly disappointed by.
- Mick Jagger, May 1994
Laughable comment. As if a hired hand dictates what does and doesn't make the final cut on a Rolling Stones album - and deserves to take the blame if the fans dont like their songs.
It was obviously such a bad experience that he's hired him for every Stones record since!
Yeah, and just two years earlier he made one producer almost crazy for not able to 'control' him. And now he is blaming the producer for destroying an album. Where did he lose his balls? Of all people, Mick Jagger, the biggest cock (well...) in business? To me he is it just hiding his own disinterest towards the project, which very well can be seen, for example, in his lyrical contribution to the songs. I think he 'okayed' the retro 'rock' nature of the project, because that was at the time 'in' (->$$$$$), but he truely wasn't inspired at all of the idea. And seemingly even though the album did okay, it wasn't such a huge hit to compansate his 'effort'. Yeah, blame it on Don Was...
- Doxa
Well, Mick spent longer time on writing songs to VL with Keith than usual. Actually, I think Mick was amazed by the success of SW and the tour, and that made him put a lot of effort into VL.
When listening to Voodoo Brew/Stew/Residue you can easily tell that the band had very much developed material to choose from. That would never happen if Mick didn't give a toss about the project, imo.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
liddas
()
Date: November 16, 2012 11:02
Quote
DoxaQuote
Gazza
Don Was is definitely anti-groove. Charlie and I worked on a lot of groove tunes that never made it on to the record. That was the one thing I was slightly disappointed by.
- Mick Jagger, May 1994
Laughable comment. As if a hired hand dictates what does and doesn't make the final cut on a Rolling Stones album - and deserves to take the blame if the fans dont like their songs.
It was obviously such a bad experience that he's hired him for every Stones record since!
Yeah, and just two years earlier he made one producer almost crazy for not able to 'control' him. And now he is blaming the producer for destroying an album. Where did he lose his balls? Of all people, Mick Jagger, the biggest cock (well...) in business? To me he is it just hiding his own disinterest towards the project, which very well can be seen, for example, in his lyrical contribution to the songs. I think he 'okayed' the retro 'rock' nature of the project, because that was at the time 'in' (->$$$$$), but he truely wasn't inspired at all of the idea. And seemingly even though the album did okay, it wasn't such a huge hit to compansate his 'effort'. Yeah, blame it on Don Was...
- Doxa
OK, somehow I can agree with you, but to be factual Jagger said "slightly disappointed" not that DW "destroyed the album"
In any case, something strange is happening. Since I reworked VL for your thread on the LP version of CDs, cutting out Sparks and Wild (the two really really bad songs on it) and rearranging the list, it's starting to grow. Not a so bad album after all!
C
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: November 16, 2012 11:15
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
DoxaQuote
Gazza
Don Was is definitely anti-groove. Charlie and I worked on a lot of groove tunes that never made it on to the record. That was the one thing I was slightly disappointed by.
- Mick Jagger, May 1994
Laughable comment. As if a hired hand dictates what does and doesn't make the final cut on a Rolling Stones album - and deserves to take the blame if the fans dont like their songs.
It was obviously such a bad experience that he's hired him for every Stones record since!
Yeah, and just two years earlier he made one producer almost crazy for not able to 'control' him. And now he is blaming the producer for destroying an album. Where did he lose his balls? Of all people, Mick Jagger, the biggest cock (well...) in business? To me he is it just hiding his own disinterest towards the project, which very well can be seen, for example, in his lyrical contribution to the songs. I think he 'okayed' the retro 'rock' nature of the project, because that was at the time 'in' (->$$$$$), but he truely wasn't inspired at all of the idea. And seemingly even though the album did okay, it wasn't such a huge hit to compansate his 'effort'. Yeah, blame it on Don Was...
- Doxa
Well, Mick spent longer time on writing songs to VL with Keith than usual. Actually, I think Mick was amazed by the success of SW and the tour, and that made him put a lot of effort into VL.
When listening to Voodoo Brew/Stew/Residue you can easily tell that the band had very much developed material to choose from. That would never happen if Mick didn't give a toss about the project, imo.
If true that they, including Mick, truely put their best effort there, the sadder it is, putting together such a mediocre, half-baked album. If the muse is not there, it is not. I wonder what happened to the focused and isnpired guy who just two years earlier made WANDERING SPIRIT, and was replaced by this 'through the motions' guy, throwing some most idiotic juvenile lyrics he ever has done? Jagger put a Rolling Stone mood/role on? If VOODOO LOUNGE is 'best' what 'modern' Jagger and Richards can accomplish together, it is better for them to work alone, having own courts, as in BRIDGES TO BABYLON.
So it could be that even though fisrt being all cylinders on, Jagger lost the interest within the project, because he really has sounded disappointed when talking about it. It needs also to be noted that even if Mick doesn't give a toss, that doesn't mean that he will not do his part somehow (there is a Jagger in DIRTY WORK). But altogether those comments about Was and him 'giving up' are rather extraordinary to a 'control-freak' like him. Did Keith screw up with him big time (again)? Jagger haven't really given another chance for a 'traditional' Rolling Stones album ever since.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 11:19 by Doxa.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 16, 2012 11:37
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
DoxaQuote
Gazza
Don Was is definitely anti-groove. Charlie and I worked on a lot of groove tunes that never made it on to the record. That was the one thing I was slightly disappointed by.
- Mick Jagger, May 1994
Laughable comment. As if a hired hand dictates what does and doesn't make the final cut on a Rolling Stones album - and deserves to take the blame if the fans dont like their songs.
It was obviously such a bad experience that he's hired him for every Stones record since!
Yeah, and just two years earlier he made one producer almost crazy for not able to 'control' him. And now he is blaming the producer for destroying an album. Where did he lose his balls? Of all people, Mick Jagger, the biggest cock (well...) in business? To me he is it just hiding his own disinterest towards the project, which very well can be seen, for example, in his lyrical contribution to the songs. I think he 'okayed' the retro 'rock' nature of the project, because that was at the time 'in' (->$$$$$), but he truely wasn't inspired at all of the idea. And seemingly even though the album did okay, it wasn't such a huge hit to compansate his 'effort'. Yeah, blame it on Don Was...
- Doxa
Well, Mick spent longer time on writing songs to VL with Keith than usual. Actually, I think Mick was amazed by the success of SW and the tour, and that made him put a lot of effort into VL.
When listening to Voodoo Brew/Stew/Residue you can easily tell that the band had very much developed material to choose from. That would never happen if Mick didn't give a toss about the project, imo.
If true that they, including Mick, truely put their best effort there, the sadder it is, putting together such a mediocre, half-baked album. If the muse is not there, it is not. I wonder what happened to the focused and isnpired guy who just two years earlier made WANDERING SPIRIT, and was replaced by this 'through the motions' guy, throwing some most idiotic juvenile lyrics he ever has done? Jagger put a Rolling Stone mood/role on? If VOODOO LOUNGE is 'best' what 'modern' Jagger and Richards can accomplish together, it is better for them to work alone, having own courts, as in BRIDGES TO BABYLON.
So it could be that even though fisrt being all cylinders on, Jagger lost the interest within the project, because he really has sounded disappointed when talking about it. It needs also to be noted that even if Mick doesn't give a toss, that doesn't mean that he will not do his part somehow (there is a Jagger in DIRTY WORK). But altogether those comments about Was and him 'giving up' are rather extraordinary to a 'control-freak' like him. Did Keith screw up with him big time (again)? Jagger haven't really given another chance for a 'traditional' Rolling Stones album ever since.
- Doxa
Well, he probably dried up a bit creativity-wise, who knows?
I don't think the album is half-baked. The songs sound finished and well-produced (technically) to me. B2B sounds more unfinished, imo.
However, the might be something in Mick's statements. Songs like "Ivy League", "You Got It Made", "Zip Mouth Angel", "Honest Man" could easily have replaced songs like "Jugular", "Thru And Thru", "Blinded By Rainbows" and "I Go Wild", and if they took out a few other songs the album would have been a totally different story, imo. And it just might not be Jagger's mistake, as he states himself.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 11:38 by DandelionPowderman.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: November 16, 2012 12:17
Wasn't the post-WWIII deal that someone independent produced them and no arguments?
It might have even been contractual.
It might have even been contractual.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 16, 2012 12:34
Probably was, but I haven't seen it confirmed 
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
gotdablouse
()
Date: November 16, 2012 13:14
Dunno it wasn't needed for SW so why bother for the next one. The theory upon release was that Mick was indeed "dried up" after the excellent WS, but listening to VB/VS/VR that doesn't hold much ground. It's really too bad they had to go out and do these two rather excellent solo albums after SW, imagine a blend of WS and MO and a couple off of VL, wow that would have been something...
Anyway Mick must have taken a liking to Don Was over the years since he took that clown with his full kit (hat, glasses, beard) into the friggin' White House earlier this year, and in the first row too and what for, advice ? He should have taken Chuck or Matt instead if he needed that.
--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio
Anyway Mick must have taken a liking to Don Was over the years since he took that clown with his full kit (hat, glasses, beard) into the friggin' White House earlier this year, and in the first row too and what for, advice ? He should have taken Chuck or Matt instead if he needed that.
--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
tomcasagranda
()
Date: November 16, 2012 15:09
Don Was is not anti-groove; check out Was Not Was, and you'll find grooves and satire combined.
I think Don Was does a far better job with the Stones than the 80s sheen of Steel Wheels. But then I am in the minority on that.
I think Don Was does a far better job with the Stones than the 80s sheen of Steel Wheels. But then I am in the minority on that.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: November 16, 2012 17:00
Quote
tomcasagranda
Don Was is not anti-groove; check out Was Not Was, and you'll find grooves and satire combined.
I think Don Was does a far better job with the Stones than the 80s sheen of Steel Wheels. But then I am in the minority on that.
i luv donnie was. LUV HIM. plays a bad-ass bass...wonder if he and the stones ever discussed him joining the live act in that capacity...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-16 17:01 by StonesTod.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
Munichhilton
()
Date: November 16, 2012 17:16
The question is would Chuck allow Don in the band...and how long til Ronnie gets kicked out for painting a picture of that possibility.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: November 16, 2012 17:25
Quote
Munichhilton
The question is would Chuck allow Don in the band...and how long til Ronnie gets kicked out for painting a picture of that possibility.
i'll take those three...kidnap charlie and now you've got a swell little quartet.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
Munichhilton
()
Date: November 16, 2012 17:38
Quote
StonesTodQuote
Munichhilton
The question is would Chuck allow Don in the band...and how long til Ronnie gets kicked out for painting a picture of that possibility.
i'll take those three...kidnap charlie and now you've got a swell little quartet.
You're right. How clumsy of me. Charlie's in too.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: November 16, 2012 17:49
Quote
MunichhiltonQuote
StonesTodQuote
Munichhilton
The question is would Chuck allow Don in the band...and how long til Ronnie gets kicked out for painting a picture of that possibility.
i'll take those three...kidnap charlie and now you've got a swell little quartet.
You're right. How clumsy of me. Charlie's in too.
not a single glint of glimmer in this band. hmmm..and by default, looks like chuck's the lead singer. just what he always wanted. the world is now gonna see just what a rockin' dude he is.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
MrMonte
()
Date: November 16, 2012 19:37
no, they were looking for "Blinded By Rainbows!"
these are really interesting quotes, btw. It's hard to believe Mick and Keith just giving in to what Don Was wanted
these are really interesting quotes, btw. It's hard to believe Mick and Keith just giving in to what Don Was wanted
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
arthritis
()
Date: November 16, 2012 19:44
Don was must really enjoy hearing vocals 20% louder than the band. He also seems to enjoy guitars and drums that have been processed through a computer and sound plastic as a result.
After the final mix of doom&gloom was played back for the stones, charlie should have thrown don was into a wood chipper and let keith& ron mix the damn thing.
After the final mix of doom&gloom was played back for the stones, charlie should have thrown don was into a wood chipper and let keith& ron mix the damn thing.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: November 16, 2012 19:47
Quote
arthritis
and let keith & ron mix the damn thing.
Actually... they should.
For the life of me I don't understand why multi-millionaire Keith let's anyone mess about with his sound.
He never used to.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
KRiffhard
()
Date: November 16, 2012 21:09
Quote
arthritis
Don was must really enjoy hearing vocals 20% louder than the band. He also seems to enjoy guitars and drums that have been processed through a computer and sound plastic as a result.
After the final mix of doom&gloom was played back for the stones, charlie should have thrown don was into a wood chipper and let keith& ron mix the damn thing.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: November 16, 2012 21:28
Quote
Gazza
Don Was is definitely anti-groove. Charlie and I worked on a lot of groove tunes that never made it on to the record. That was the one thing I was slightly disappointed by.
- Mick Jagger, May 1994
Laughable comment. As if a hired hand dictates what does and doesn't make the final cut on a Rolling Stones album - and deserves to take the blame if the fans dont like their songs.
It was obviously such a bad experience that he's hired him for every Stones record since!
Seeing that Don Was obviously didn't like the substanceless groove songs they had he instead inspired them to do such trollop and tepid songs as New Faces, Sweethearts Together, You Got Me Rocking and Sparks Will Fly.
Stunning. Obviously Mick lost interest.
Re: Don 'anti-groove' Was
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: November 16, 2012 21:31
Quote
DoxaQuote
Gazza
Don Was is definitely anti-groove. Charlie and I worked on a lot of groove tunes that never made it on to the record. That was the one thing I was slightly disappointed by.
- Mick Jagger, May 1994
Laughable comment. As if a hired hand dictates what does and doesn't make the final cut on a Rolling Stones album - and deserves to take the blame if the fans dont like their songs.
It was obviously such a bad experience that he's hired him for every Stones record since!
Yeah, and just two years earlier he made one producer almost crazy for not able to 'control' him. And now he is blaming the producer for destroying an album. Where did he lose his balls? Of all people, Mick Jagger, the biggest cock (well...) in business? To me he is it just hiding his own disinterest towards the project, which very well can be seen, for example, in his lyrical contribution to the songs. I think he 'okayed' the retro 'rock' nature of the project, because that was at the time 'in' (->$$$$$), but he truely wasn't inspired at all of the idea. And seemingly even though the album did okay, it wasn't such a huge hit to compansate his 'effort'. Yeah, blame it on Don Was...
- Doxa
Dirty Work!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
AllAboutYours , balders , ChrisL , Dan , dandelion12 , DandelionPowderman , dhinkle555 , Fitzcaraldo , gagiwh , GJB , hockenheim95 , jstones , latvianinexile , MadMetaphoricalMax , makustone , Martin90 , Monkeytonkman , quarkie , rebelrebel , rogerriffin , StonyRoad , THE DON , The Sicilian , undertheradar , willprefecture
Guests:
1613
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10