Quote
24FPS

Quote
jamesfdouglas


People who think that they play as well now vs the pre-Vegas years 3) simply don't hear music like a musician and literally cannot tell how bad they are....

You don't have to be a musician to hear how they've lost a few steps. Keith can't solo anymore. Charlie's lost that snap.

The Rolling Stones are not a blues band, even for the 1-2 years when they tried to be, they were unsuccessful. The Stones are more of a 'jack-of-all-trades' band, but not a master of any.

How were they unsuccessful? They had a number one hit in the UK with a stirring rendition of Little Red Rooster. The blues players they emulated praised them. If anything the Stones were masters at turning current sounds into pop records.


There's nothing The Rolling Stones do, or have ever done, that has not been bettered in some way by bands, or members of other bands.

Who did better rock/disco? Rod Stewart? I've never heard better Elizabethan pop than Lady Jane. Give me your example of better. What band had better dynamics than JJF/HTW/Brown Sugar? Okay, maybe they weren't the best Reggae band in the world. Or very good at covering the Drifters. But I could name a few cover songs they made their own, or at least equaled the original.

As for my own unpopular opinion, Indian Girl is a great song.

Quote
NICOS

Quote
jamesfdouglas

Quote
FrankM

Quote
jamesfdouglas
The Stones aren't a band anymore at all. They're a brand. They're corporate whores which you all bend over and spread for. They'll keep going for as long as they can bleed the wallet of blind fools who attach their own self-worth an image to, JUST like any overpriced clothing label.

People who think that they play as well now vs the pre-Vegas years are either 1) blinded by hero worship 2) blinded by brand worship 3) believe that by buying $o hard into the brand that they i) know them personally or ii) have bought a more weighted opinion of them or... 3) simply don't hear music like a musician and literally cannot tell how bad they are as long as they hear a beat and words - sort of a musical illiteracy.

The Rolling Stones are not a blues band, even for the 1-2 years when they tried to be, they were unsuccessful. The Stones are more of a 'jack-of-all-trades' band, but not a master of any.

There's nothing the The Rolling Stones do, or have ever done, that has not been bettered in some way by bands, or members of other bands. They never have truly been "The World's Greatest Rock and Roll Band" - that self-made tagline is only believed by ignorant people.

Well they are certainly better than your crappy arse band- at least you have to give them props for that.

I gave my unpopular opinion. You chose once again to slam me personally.
Get a life, dick-muncher.

^{Well they are certainly better than your crappy arse band- at least you have to give them props for that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.}

The fun of this post is to give your unpopular opinion about the band you love (otherwise you wouldn't be here) so why get personal

Quote
jamesfdouglas

Quote
24FPS

Quote
jamesfdouglas


People who think that they play as well now vs the pre-Vegas years 3) simply don't hear music like a musician and literally cannot tell how bad they are....

You don't have to be a musician to hear how they've lost a few steps. Keith can't solo anymore. Charlie's lost that snap.

The Rolling Stones are not a blues band, even for the 1-2 years when they tried to be, they were unsuccessful. The Stones are more of a 'jack-of-all-trades' band, but not a master of any.

How were they unsuccessful? They had a number one hit in the UK with a stirring rendition of Little Red Rooster. The blues players they emulated praised them. If anything the Stones were masters at turning current sounds into pop records.


There's nothing The Rolling Stones do, or have ever done, that has not been bettered in some way by bands, or members of other bands.

Who did better rock/disco? Rod Stewart? I've never heard better Elizabethan pop than Lady Jane. Give me your example of better. What band had better dynamics than JJF/HTW/Brown Sugar? Okay, maybe they weren't the best Reggae band in the world. Or very good at covering the Drifters. But I could name a few cover songs they made their own, or at least equaled the original.

As for my own unpopular opinion, Indian Girl is a great song.

Better Rock-disco - yes, Rod Stewart. Hell KISS did beter with 'I Was Made for Lovin' You'. But yeah, rock-disco-funk. I'd say the Stones never outdid Sly and the Family Stone, Earth, Wind & Fire. As for pasty white UK people giving it a go... the #$%&ing Bee Gees OWNED it.

Elizabethan Pop (could this have a gayer name?)... gah! Who the hell made up that term?? If you mean frilly pretentiously-repressed sounding harpsichord-laden drivel, The Beatles outdid the Stones with that psuedo-style. In Fact Both Aftermath and Between the Buttons don't come close to Rubber Soul and Revolver. Not even close.

What band had better dynamics than Jumping Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women or Brown Sugar? Oh, I don't know... maybe The Beatles, Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin??? Add in The Allman Brothers and Jimi Hendrix... with those five there's no need to listen to The Sones ever again.

Quote
jamesfdouglas

Quote
24FPS

Quote
jamesfdouglas


People who think that they play as well now vs the pre-Vegas years 3) simply don't hear music like a musician and literally cannot tell how bad they are....

You don't have to be a musician to hear how they've lost a few steps. Keith can't solo anymore. Charlie's lost that snap.

The Rolling Stones are not a blues band, even for the 1-2 years when they tried to be, they were unsuccessful. The Stones are more of a 'jack-of-all-trades' band, but not a master of any.

How were they unsuccessful? They had a number one hit in the UK with a stirring rendition of Little Red Rooster. The blues players they emulated praised them. If anything the Stones were masters at turning current sounds into pop records.


There's nothing The Rolling Stones do, or have ever done, that has not been bettered in some way by bands, or members of other bands.

Who did better rock/disco? Rod Stewart? I've never heard better Elizabethan pop than Lady Jane. Give me your example of better. What band had better dynamics than JJF/HTW/Brown Sugar? Okay, maybe they weren't the best Reggae band in the world. Or very good at covering the Drifters. But I could name a few cover songs they made their own, or at least equaled the original.

As for my own unpopular opinion, Indian Girl is a great song.

Better Rock-disco - yes, Rod Stewart. Hell KISS did beter with 'I Was Made for Lovin' You'. But yeah, rock-disco-funk. I'd say the Stones never outdid Sly and the Family Stone, Earth, Wind & Fire. As for pasty white UK people giving it a go... the #$%&ing Bee Gees OWNED it.

Elizabethan Pop (could this have a gayer name?)... gah! Who the hell made up that term?? If you mean frilly pretentiously-repressed sounding harpsichord-laden drivel, The Beatles outdid the Stones with that psuedo-style. In Fact Both Aftermath and Between the Buttons don't come close to Rubber Soul and Revolver. Not even close.

What band had better dynamics than Jumping Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women or Brown Sugar? Oh, I don't know... maybe The Beatles, Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin??? Add in The Allman Brothers and Jimi Hendrix... with those five there's no need to listen to The Sones ever again.

Quote
tomcasagranda
I would recommend Reinventing Bach by Paul Elie, which is a great book on the influence of Bach on both rock and classical music.

Quote
Sixsixseveneight
I can't stand Mick Taylor.

Quote
FrankM

Quote
jamesfdouglas

Quote
24FPS

Quote
jamesfdouglas


People who think that they play as well now vs the pre-Vegas years 3) simply don't hear music like a musician and literally cannot tell how bad they are....

You don't have to be a musician to hear how they've lost a few steps. Keith can't solo anymore. Charlie's lost that snap.

The Rolling Stones are not a blues band, even for the 1-2 years when they tried to be, they were unsuccessful. The Stones are more of a 'jack-of-all-trades' band, but not a master of any.

How were they unsuccessful? They had a number one hit in the UK with a stirring rendition of Little Red Rooster. The blues players they emulated praised them. If anything the Stones were masters at turning current sounds into pop records.


There's nothing The Rolling Stones do, or have ever done, that has not been bettered in some way by bands, or members of other bands.

Who did better rock/disco? Rod Stewart? I've never heard better Elizabethan pop than Lady Jane. Give me your example of better. What band had better dynamics than JJF/HTW/Brown Sugar? Okay, maybe they weren't the best Reggae band in the world. Or very good at covering the Drifters. But I could name a few cover songs they made their own, or at least equaled the original.

As for my own unpopular opinion, Indian Girl is a great song.

Better Rock-disco - yes, Rod Stewart. Hell KISS did beter with 'I Was Made for Lovin' You'. But yeah, rock-disco-funk. I'd say the Stones never outdid Sly and the Family Stone, Earth, Wind & Fire. As for pasty white UK people giving it a go... the #$%&ing Bee Gees OWNED it.

Elizabethan Pop (could this have a gayer name?)... gah! Who the hell made up that term?? If you mean frilly pretentiously-repressed sounding harpsichord-laden drivel, The Beatles outdid the Stones with that psuedo-style. In Fact Both Aftermath and Between the Buttons don't come close to Rubber Soul and Revolver. Not even close.

What band had better dynamics than Jumping Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women or Brown Sugar? Oh, I don't know... maybe The Beatles, Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin??? Add in The Allman Brothers and Jimi Hendrix... with those five there's no need to listen to The Sones ever again.

Maybe someday you will reach the point where you never need to post again lol.

Quote
spsimmons
Mick's hair looked best on the Steel Wheels tour.

Quote
FrankM

Quote
NICOS

Quote
jamesfdouglas

Quote
FrankM

Quote
jamesfdouglas
The Stones aren't a band anymore at all. They're a brand. They're corporate whores which you all bend over and spread for. They'll keep going for as long as they can bleed the wallet of blind fools who attach their own self-worth an image to, JUST like any overpriced clothing label.

People who think that they play as well now vs the pre-Vegas years are either 1) blinded by hero worship 2) blinded by brand worship 3) believe that by buying $o hard into the brand that they i) know them personally or ii) have bought a more weighted opinion of them or... 3) simply don't hear music like a musician and literally cannot tell how bad they are as long as they hear a beat and words - sort of a musical illiteracy.

The Rolling Stones are not a blues band, even for the 1-2 years when they tried to be, they were unsuccessful. The Stones are more of a 'jack-of-all-trades' band, but not a master of any.

There's nothing the The Rolling Stones do, or have ever done, that has not been bettered in some way by bands, or members of other bands. They never have truly been "The World's Greatest Rock and Roll Band" - that self-made tagline is only believed by ignorant people.

Well they are certainly better than your crappy arse band- at least you have to give them props for that.

I gave my unpopular opinion. You chose once again to slam me personally.
Get a life, dick-muncher.

^{Well they are certainly better than your crappy arse band- at least you have to give them props for that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.}

The fun of this post is to give your unpopular opinion about the band you love (otherwise you wouldn't be here) so why get personal

If he just gave his opinion on the band and left it at that I wouldn't have said anything- even though he whines and complains like an old lady. He then went on to make the stupid statement that anybody that believes they are The World's Greatest Rock And Roll Band" is ignorant.

If you hurl insults expect to get them back- kind of like a boomerang.

Quote
tomcasagranda

Quote
jamesfdouglas

Quote
24FPS

Quote
jamesfdouglas


People who think that they play as well now vs the pre-Vegas years 3) simply don't hear music like a musician and literally cannot tell how bad they are....

You don't have to be a musician to hear how they've lost a few steps. Keith can't solo anymore. Charlie's lost that snap.

The Rolling Stones are not a blues band, even for the 1-2 years when they tried to be, they were unsuccessful. The Stones are more of a 'jack-of-all-trades' band, but not a master of any.

How were they unsuccessful? They had a number one hit in the UK with a stirring rendition of Little Red Rooster. The blues players they emulated praised them. If anything the Stones were masters at turning current sounds into pop records.


There's nothing The Rolling Stones do, or have ever done, that has not been bettered in some way by bands, or members of other bands.

Who did better rock/disco? Rod Stewart? I've never heard better Elizabethan pop than Lady Jane. Give me your example of better. What band had better dynamics than JJF/HTW/Brown Sugar? Okay, maybe they weren't the best Reggae band in the world. Or very good at covering the Drifters. But I could name a few cover songs they made their own, or at least equaled the original.

As for my own unpopular opinion, Indian Girl is a great song.

Better Rock-disco - yes, Rod Stewart. Hell KISS did beter with 'I Was Made for Lovin' You'. But yeah, rock-disco-funk. I'd say the Stones never outdid Sly and the Family Stone, Earth, Wind & Fire. As for pasty white UK people giving it a go... the #$%&ing Bee Gees OWNED it.

Elizabethan Pop (could this have a gayer name?)... gah! Who the hell made up that term?? If you mean frilly pretentiously-repressed sounding harpsichord-laden drivel, The Beatles outdid the Stones with that psuedo-style. In Fact Both Aftermath and Between the Buttons don't come close to Rubber Soul and Revolver. Not even close.

What band had better dynamics than Jumping Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women or Brown Sugar? Oh, I don't know... maybe The Beatles, Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin??? Add in The Allman Brothers and Jimi Hendrix... with those five there's no need to listen to The Sones ever again.

Elizabethan rock ? Interesting choice of phraseology, for what can be best described as Baroque pop. The Zombies, aside from Procol Harum's first album, and The Beatles, were the best practitioners of it.

I wouldn't exactly call it Elizabethan rock, as it is more Baroque. For example, A Whiter Shade of Pale is based on the meeting between Bach's Air On A G String and When A Man Loves A Woman. Likewise, the harpsichord in In My Life is similar to the Toccata & Fugue series by Bach, and if you listen closely to both Penny Lane and All You Need Is Love, you hear elements of the Brandenburg Concertos by Bach. You also hear, via The Byrds on She Don't Care About Time, Jesus Joy of Man's Desiring by Bach.

I know that Brian Jones listened to John Dowland, an Elizabethan composer, which may have influenced Ruby Tuesday's composition, but She's A Rainbow is definitely Baroque in influence, and, probably, Beatle-esque, too, in influence. Dowland, however, caused Sting to create an entire album of his tunes, which I am not a fan of. Elvis Costello also did some Dowland tunes, which can be found on Disc 2 of the expanded Juliet Letters, and he does a far better job with the Dowland.

I would add that Richard Thompson recently, in his 1,000 Years of Popular Music, performed Vecchio's Sa Bon Si Ca Tempo, which was a 16th century Madrigal, and some of the folkier acts from the late 60s were influenced by Madrigals.

Quote
Braincapers
Keith's 2 songs are the highlight of the show

Quote
sonomastone

Quote
Braincapers
Keith's 2 songs are the highlight of the show

I agree. Not only because he's my favorite, but also because a) literally anything could happen (bad or good) - you get a sense that something is on the line when he steps up to the microphone, and b) i really believe he's feeling the song - whereas with Mick on a good day you can tell he's feeling the beat, and feeding of the audience, but you rarely get the sense he's truly inhabiting the song. Mick singing
SFTD or JJF is an accomplished showman putting one of his hits through its paces. Keith singing "Before They Make Me Run" is a guy singing about how he looked into the abyss and stepped back.

Quote
tatters
Dirty Work is their best album since Some Girls.