Tell Me :
Talk
Oh sure, that sounds great, but I'm not sure this conglomeration on stage can do those songs justice anymore. I saw them in 2013 and they didn't rock through Get Off My Cloud, The Last Time, IORR, and Paint it Black, they waltzed through them lackadaisically.
Well said.
I honestly believe that anyone who feels the band is only about the "bottom line" really doesn't know The Rolling Stones and likely never did.
re: waltzing...Spot on! There's no way, no friggin' way they could possibly waltz thru Doncha Bother Me or All Sold Out. I love when Mick hits the falsetto in doncha bother me NO MO. Maybe my all time favorite moment in the entire catalogue. they couldn't possibly waltz it. no way. They'd have to step up. If they did Miss Amanda Jones i'd go out of my flippin mind. They could drive it thru the roof!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-27 07:28 by josepi.
Thanks to you guys, comedy is not dead.
That's probably why they played I'm Going Down or Champagne And Reefer on that tour. And, mind you, there was no "waltzing" through those tunes
But the Stones have always played old music. From Prodigal Son and Stop Breaking Down, and that music has always meshed seamlessly with their tracks. The great thing about great blues is the timelessness of it. Magical Mystery Tour was an album full of hits, but they all sound like the "psychedelic era" when listened to today. Gimme Shelter, on the other hand, sounds like it could have been from 1969, from yesterday or from 90 years ago, like the next track, Love in Vain. It's always been "old".
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-27 15:14 by drbryant.
Do you think it would have been #4 without Kanye or Rihanna?
He has just completed an album with new songs + he wrote OMS in 2012.
agreed. what complete bollocks. everyone knows it was a mellotron flute not a real one.
he must be completely exhausted.
And here I was thinking my comment had flown in under the radar.
No. The Kanye song has a nice enough melody, but the auto tune ruins it for me. The older/younger musician collaboration is nothing new. At least both of them are alive, the Natiale Cole/Nat King Cole thing was kinda creepy.
Really?!
I thought it was unforgettable.
Touche, Treacle.
No one is forced to buy the tickets or to even listen to their music. They do what they do for their own reasons, and so do we all. It seems to me to be pointless to compare the Stones to individual artists. It's not at all the same.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: February 27, 2015 04:34
Quote
josepi
The problem to me, anyway, is not that they do "oldies" per se. It's that they do the same old songs night after night, tour after tour, when they have such a great catalogue to choose from. Heck, 5 songs from Exile have NEVER been done live and another handful only a time or two. What happend to Aftermath and Between the Buttons??? I'd gladly fork over $1000 for a show that had a few like Doncha Bother Me, It's Not Easy, I Am Waiting, Flight 505, All Sold Out, Miss Amanda Jones. What About BB? Parachute Woman, Dear Doctor, Jigsaw Puzzle. Just toss in a couple of the above and I'm happy.
Oh sure, that sounds great, but I'm not sure this conglomeration on stage can do those songs justice anymore. I saw them in 2013 and they didn't rock through Get Off My Cloud, The Last Time, IORR, and Paint it Black, they waltzed through them lackadaisically.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
triceratops
()
Date: February 27, 2015 05:06
Mick Jagger has lots more interests than music and at his age this is perfectly legitamite. He is a bit bored re-doing the music of his youth up on stage. Keith and Charlie too. Paul McCartney really likes doing this at 70+ years so more power to him!
I don't blame Mick one bit for steering The Stones into a less active direction than Paul who is busiser musically than he was 10 years ago. Paul got a second wind from marrying Nancy S. She inspires him!
So why are The Stones still out there touring? Because they are The Rolling Stones! And people expect it as much as the snow in Boston and Norway. The Stones see they are still wanted so they go out and fill this need and make some money too. So do the people in their organization which I believe is part of the reason they still go out. The Stones like seeing their people, their employees, earning money they depend on.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-27 05:07 by triceratops.
I don't blame Mick one bit for steering The Stones into a less active direction than Paul who is busiser musically than he was 10 years ago. Paul got a second wind from marrying Nancy S. She inspires him!
So why are The Stones still out there touring? Because they are The Rolling Stones! And people expect it as much as the snow in Boston and Norway. The Stones see they are still wanted so they go out and fill this need and make some money too. So do the people in their organization which I believe is part of the reason they still go out. The Stones like seeing their people, their employees, earning money they depend on.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-27 05:07 by triceratops.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
James Kirk
()
Date: February 27, 2015 05:31
Quote
triceratops
Mick Jagger has lots more interests than music and at his age this is perfectly legitamite. He is a bit bored re-doing the music of his youth up on stage. Keith and Charlie too. Paul McCartney really likes doing this at 70+ years so more power to him!
I don't blame Mick one bit for steering The Stones into a less active direction than Paul who is busiser musically than he was 10 years ago. Paul got a second wind from marrying Nancy S. She inspires him!
So why are The Stones still out there touring? Because they are The Rolling Stones! And people expect it as much as the snow in Boston and Norway. The Stones see they are still wanted so they go out and fill this need and make some money too. So do the people in their organization which I believe is part of the reason they still go out. The Stones like seeing their people, their employees, earning money they depend on.[/quote
I don't buy that for one second. The Stones have been extremely active over the last decade plus, but activity does not equal creativity...The Stones have become a touring act that's only focus is the bottom line.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
MisterDDDD
()
Date: February 27, 2015 05:56
Quote
triceratops
Mick Jagger has lots more interests than music and at his age this is perfectly legitamite. He is a bit bored re-doing the music of his youth up on stage. Keith and Charlie too. Paul McCartney really likes doing this at 70+ years so more power to him!
I don't blame Mick one bit for steering The Stones into a less active direction than Paul who is busiser musically than he was 10 years ago. Paul got a second wind from marrying Nancy S. She inspires him!
So why are The Stones still out there touring? Because they are The Rolling Stones! And people expect it as much as the snow in Boston and Norway. The Stones see they are still wanted so they go out and fill this need and make some money too. So do the people in their organization which I believe is part of the reason they still go out. The Stones like seeing their people, their employees, earning money they depend on.
Well said.
I honestly believe that anyone who feels the band is only about the "bottom line" really doesn't know The Rolling Stones and likely never did.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
josepi
()
Date: February 27, 2015 07:20
Quote
24FPSQuote
josepi
The problem to me, anyway, is not that they do "oldies" per se. It's that they do the same old songs night after night, tour after tour, when they have such a great catalogue to choose from. Heck, 5 songs from Exile have NEVER been done live and another handful only a time or two. What happend to Aftermath and Between the Buttons??? I'd gladly fork over $1000 for a show that had a few like Doncha Bother Me, It's Not Easy, I Am Waiting, Flight 505, All Sold Out, Miss Amanda Jones. What About BB? Parachute Woman, Dear Doctor, Jigsaw Puzzle. Just toss in a couple of the above and I'm happy.
Oh sure, that sounds great, but I'm not sure this conglomeration on stage can do those songs justice anymore. I saw them in 2013 and they didn't rock through Get Off My Cloud, The Last Time, IORR, and Paint it Black, they waltzed through them lackadaisically.
re: waltzing...Spot on! There's no way, no friggin' way they could possibly waltz thru Doncha Bother Me or All Sold Out. I love when Mick hits the falsetto in doncha bother me NO MO. Maybe my all time favorite moment in the entire catalogue. they couldn't possibly waltz it. no way. They'd have to step up. If they did Miss Amanda Jones i'd go out of my flippin mind. They could drive it thru the roof!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-27 07:28 by josepi.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
Long John Stoner
()
Date: February 27, 2015 07:59
Quote
lem motlowQuote
RoughJusticeOnYa
Might as well read:
"Paul McCartney has a top 5 single... tough it's nothing more than yet another one of those sh*ty st*nkers of songs, these insults to humanity he's been writing ever since who-knows-how-long; a man who defecates absolutely gruesome stuff like "Mull Of Kintire", "Ebony and Ivory", "the Girl is mine" ànd "ob la di (etc.)" in ONE & the same lifetime should never have been knighted but horendously tortured instead;
while Mick Jagger is happy, just like Stonesfans worldwide, having the Stones to be the killer LIVE act they've always been, first & foremost; being able to play from an almighty, almost surreally impressive backcatalogue with literally dozens of popular hits as well as all-time rock'n'roll classics that make it really REALLY hard NOT to play the same songs over & over again, especially in view of the crowds the're still catching..."
But I DO think I'm miscueing, here... (Where did I go wrong?!)
EDIT: Ooops - now I see. "...happy just like Stonesfans worldwide": should 've chosen those words more carefully.
no kidding.i'm filing this one under "beatleheads say the funniest things"
those #3 and #5 billboard chartings are absolute bombs that dropped off the charts after a few days.if one of them even made it to being a gold record i'd be shocked.
not to mention the music,if you can call it that, absolutly sucks on ice.its cringeworthy to even listen to paul try to get through one of his "new songs'
yet his lapdogs,i mean fans use all these flowery words they saw in music reviews-"its vital new grounbreaking material"-no its crap no one wants to hear from a has been who has lost his ability to write a decent song.
is he gonna do an entire live show of the songs from these records that didnt sell?-no, he's gonna make people suffer through a couple of them and then go to the hits.at least the stones knew when to give it up.
the title of this thread should be "paul mccartney crawls on his knees to kanye west to get a hit while the stones keep rolling"
Thanks to you guys, comedy is not dead.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
emotionalbarbecue
()
Date: February 27, 2015 09:22
Veeatles fans getting ready for posting on Stones Forums.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 27, 2015 09:53
Quote
josepiQuote
24FPSQuote
josepi
The problem to me, anyway, is not that they do "oldies" per se. It's that they do the same old songs night after night, tour after tour, when they have such a great catalogue to choose from. Heck, 5 songs from Exile have NEVER been done live and another handful only a time or two. What happend to Aftermath and Between the Buttons??? I'd gladly fork over $1000 for a show that had a few like Doncha Bother Me, It's Not Easy, I Am Waiting, Flight 505, All Sold Out, Miss Amanda Jones. What About BB? Parachute Woman, Dear Doctor, Jigsaw Puzzle. Just toss in a couple of the above and I'm happy.
Oh sure, that sounds great, but I'm not sure this conglomeration on stage can do those songs justice anymore. I saw them in 2013 and they didn't rock through Get Off My Cloud, The Last Time, IORR, and Paint it Black, they waltzed through them lackadaisically.
re: waltzing...Spot on! There's no way, no friggin' way they could possibly waltz thru Doncha Bother Me or All Sold Out. I love when Mick hits the falsetto in doncha bother me NO MO. Maybe my all time favorite moment in the entire catalogue. they couldn't possibly waltz it. no way. They'd have to step up. If they did Miss Amanda Jones i'd go out of my flippin mind. They could drive it thru the roof!
That's probably why they played I'm Going Down or Champagne And Reefer on that tour. And, mind you, there was no "waltzing" through those tunes
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: February 27, 2015 10:05
They are both an oldies act. Sir Paul is perhaps a less predictable oldies act than Sir Michael. But Sir Michael's privat life is, on the other hand, perhaps, less predictable than Sir Paul's.
And the latter is what creates most media attention these days. Not so much the music. Which is old...
And the latter is what creates most media attention these days. Not so much the music. Which is old...
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
drbryant
()
Date: February 27, 2015 11:23
Since this Forum is again discussing Paul McCartney (something that seems to happen about as often as Ron Wood vs. Mick Taylor), I thought that I would repost one of the great posts from our beloved Macca-fan Ferrante9 (also known as Shearer9 and a few other names). He was special - other Macca fans have a high hurdle.
Quote
ferrante9
no!!!!!!!!!
let me tell you what s up
can mick play jenny wren on the guitar?
can keith or ron play blackbird right???
that's what i thought
the stones are just straight rock and roll and that's about it.
macca can do all types of music. rock, heavy metal, folk, pop, disco, county, acoustic, ballads etc....
chaos and creation is the album of the year!!!!
driving rain was even better than forty licks!!! just listen to lonely road...the best song ever wrtitten since yesterday and hope of delivrance.
flamming pie and flowers in the dirt paul were both masterpieces.
off the ground was a worldwide smash hit!!!!
if it wasn't for macca, the stones would be nobody......who wrote i wanna be your man to make the stones popular????
the asnwer is paul mccartney.
who inveted havy metal? paul mccartney with helter skelter!!!!!!
who is a better musician overall ? paul mccartney.....versatile to say the least.
from drums to flute,........ he probably is a better drummer than charlie.....did you hear the drumming on back in the USSR????
macca is the best bassist of all time!!! just listen to silly love song......
macca is the best songwriter of all time and he is one of the best signer of all time too......listen to oh darling or lonley road......nevermind mick.
chaos and creation is a mellow album, however, it contains very melodic stuff ....bigger bang is just an hour of straight rock and roll...that's it!!!!
as far as the tour......pauls' tour is more fun because the music is a lot better.
the stones just goes trhough the set list quickly so they can go home.......no passion what so ever..........
and remember......tehs toens played in front of 450 000 in toronto, but it was a festival which featured other acts.
macca holds the recod of most people at a concert for a solo act...rio 1990 , in front of 184 000 people.
he also played in rome in 2003 in front of 500 000.....a freec oncert though.
wings outsold the stones and the beatles combined in the 70s
he is the richest musician of all time
he was named the most succesful composer of all time
what's up with that huh????
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
frankotero
()
Date: February 27, 2015 11:31
Wow, already 4 pages on this subject. Obviously very important to some people. Some say don't make comparisons, but it's almost impossible in my opinion as they're both peers in the same genre of music and generation. Regardless which way The Stones decide to turn it's up to them, I'd agree with this logic. But to put down Macca would be wrong as he remains creatively active and still has something to say. Personally I love this. I'm also disappointed at the lack of out-put from The Stones but it won't sway me from being a big fan. They still move me. I'm proud to be a fan of both bands, though some friends call me a renegade, lol. I never could agree with the rivalry.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
drbryant
()
Date: February 27, 2015 11:55
Quote
Stoneage
They are both an oldies act. Sir Paul is perhaps a less predictable oldies act than Sir Michael. But Sir Michael's privat life is, on the other hand, perhaps, less predictable than Sir Paul's.
And the latter is what creates most media attention these days. Not so much the music. Which is old...
But the Stones have always played old music. From Prodigal Son and Stop Breaking Down, and that music has always meshed seamlessly with their tracks. The great thing about great blues is the timelessness of it. Magical Mystery Tour was an album full of hits, but they all sound like the "psychedelic era" when listened to today. Gimme Shelter, on the other hand, sounds like it could have been from 1969, from yesterday or from 90 years ago, like the next track, Love in Vain. It's always been "old".
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-27 15:14 by drbryant.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
RomanCandle
()
Date: February 27, 2015 12:16
Great post drbryant.
"As I type he has the #4 single in America with Four, Five Seconds. A song that has hit #1 several different countries as well as #1 on the R+B chart in America and hit #2 in Europe."
top 5 single or no, that say nothing about the song itself
IMO, this is:
one of the worst Kanye West songs
one of the worst Rihanna songs
one of the worst Macca songs
The combination of three great pop musicians doesn't always make a great song.
"As I type he has the #4 single in America with Four, Five Seconds. A song that has hit #1 several different countries as well as #1 on the R+B chart in America and hit #2 in Europe."
top 5 single or no, that say nothing about the song itself
IMO, this is:
one of the worst Kanye West songs
one of the worst Rihanna songs
one of the worst Macca songs
The combination of three great pop musicians doesn't always make a great song.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 27, 2015 12:28
Quote
RomanCandle
Great post drbryant.
"As I type he has the #4 single in America with Four, Five Seconds. A song that has hit #1 several different countries as well as #1 on the R+B chart in America and hit #2 in Europe."
top 5 single or no, that say nothing about the song itself
IMO, this is:
one of the worst Kanye West songs
one of the worst Rihanna songs
one of the worst Macca songs
The combination of three great pop musicians doesn't always make a great song.
Do you think it would have been #4 without Kanye or Rihanna?
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
BowieStone
()
Date: February 27, 2015 12:29
Why is it always Jaggers fault? If the stones was the only thing he did, the stones would be more than a nostalgia band. But the man has a lot of interests.
I think Keith is the most happy. He hasn't written a complete song in, what, 20 years?
I think Keith is the most happy. He hasn't written a complete song in, what, 20 years?
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
Palace Revolution 2000
()
Date: February 27, 2015 12:33
To try to tweist this into a Macca vs. Stones argument, is to try and deflect attention from the real issue. Because OP could have said 'Neil Young' instead of McCartney. Or Nick Cave, Tom Waits, Bowie, even Lou Reed until his final days. All artists who may have lost a step or two, but are still writing, and still growing.
I hate that the Stones' live show is what it is. Or that the last album, was what it was. ( .e. no good)
On the other hand - all these acts I mentioned are solo acts. And this is a HUGE! achievement by the Stones: that they even still exist; as that real band. They are alive, and they are not riddled with nameless session guys like the Beach Boys were . Macca has kept his same band for a good bit of years now. I think he has done great. But he writes, and conducts all his affairs and music himself.
The Stones have volatile egos, and have kept it going for real an awful long time.
IMO they have shown that they have found a way to sill produce a good album in this splintered, adult, version of themselves. Bridges to Babylon was the result. And if they found a way to work kn new songs with all 4 of them in a room - even better. I think they could. I just don't think Mick wants to. I wonder if Keith's book brought about something unfixable.
I hate that the Stones' live show is what it is. Or that the last album, was what it was. ( .e. no good)
On the other hand - all these acts I mentioned are solo acts. And this is a HUGE! achievement by the Stones: that they even still exist; as that real band. They are alive, and they are not riddled with nameless session guys like the Beach Boys were . Macca has kept his same band for a good bit of years now. I think he has done great. But he writes, and conducts all his affairs and music himself.
The Stones have volatile egos, and have kept it going for real an awful long time.
IMO they have shown that they have found a way to sill produce a good album in this splintered, adult, version of themselves. Bridges to Babylon was the result. And if they found a way to work kn new songs with all 4 of them in a room - even better. I think they could. I just don't think Mick wants to. I wonder if Keith's book brought about something unfixable.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 27, 2015 12:57
Quote
BowieStone
Why is it always Jaggers fault? If the stones was the only thing he did, the stones would be more than a nostalgia band. But the man has a lot of interests.
I think Keith is the most happy. He hasn't written a complete song in, what, 20 years?
He has just completed an album with new songs + he wrote OMS in 2012.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
MrThompsonWooft
()
Date: February 27, 2015 13:36
It seems to me that some people around here are more defined by their distaste for McCartney rather than their love for the Stones.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
ash
()
Date: February 27, 2015 13:49
All jesting aside, i don't think being an oldies act is necessarily a bad thing. It's not what you do it's the way that you do it.
At times on that last tour the band were really impressive if not positively awesome. My parents are the same age as Mick and Keith...they can't even go bird-watching like they used to...it's a miracle Mick, Keith, Charlie et al. can still do this at all. In Keith's case it's a miracle he's even still standing as that can often pose problems for the undead.
While McCartney does rely on the same old stuff for the bulk of his 30+ singsong setlist, he has also worked his way through virtually all of his Beatle songs at one time or another, even obscure or naff ones just for the hell of it because presumably a/ he wants to and b/he knows most of the crowd will go nuts if he pulls out an early B-side like I'll Get You or as above, All Together Now which is featured in the Yellow Submarine film and part of the Beatles forward-looking "Childrens Brainwashing Programme" initiated by Apple in 1968 which has yielded extremely successful results since the band split up. He's played John's Mr Kite, Day In The Life too...wish he'd do Tomorrow Never Knows.
Point is, despite playing many of the same old brilliant,average and really vomit-inducing (he's still the master of those) songs, he is also doing a bit extra. All this while facing the fact that his once awesome voice is really going to pieces, sometimes it's not there at all but usually comes back to a degree a few songs in to the set.
Both he and The Stones are fortunate to have such remarkable back catalogues.
I do not believe the current day band can do much justice to the Jones era songs - they just don't/can't/won't play like that anymore and not because Brian was some kind of Christ like genius before someone says it, but simply because the band can't or won't play like that anymore and i also get the feeling that they really don't rate that period as much as many of us do. Paint it black,Cloud,even Satisfaction etc..nearly always come across as lumpy and perfunctory to my ears...that could just be me?
Beggars/Bleed is the turning point, they've never really strayed far from that basic formula and the "great run" simply improves/refines that formula.
I still feel that the Stones best move would be to take the Brian Wilson route - not the staying in bed not shaving or washing,having the fridge moved to the bedroom, snort as much coke as possible route, but performing albums like Pet Sounds and the even better Smile album in their entirety. He also did the whole new Lucky Old Sun album live iirc. Not a fan of that album but still, points for covering new ground and taking the time and effort to learn it - given that he has to read his own name and the chorus lyrics of Barbara Ann off an autocue the guy is really making considerable effort when he does not have to. He could just stay at home busy doing nothing.
I would like to see the Stones record a series of Blu-rays at somewhere like the Festival Hall , London for 2 weeks (with Taylor) where they play Beggars/Sticky/Bleed/Exile in their entirety, 2 albums per gig with Jagger standing still (ish) so he can concentrate on singing. His voice is in great shape. They could warm up with 4 or 5 moldies and then play one album, take a break and then do another album after a couple of warm ups. They've never done that before. That would be a very positive step forward in the absence of new material.
I cannot see that happening because for it to work effectively they'd have to play smaller venues and i do not believe they'd consider it financially worthwhile especially as it would no doubt deeply affect their tax position which is an important consideration for the modern day rock n roll outlaw...
what does McCartney know about being a rock n roll outlaw ? he has 40,000 people happily singing along with his silly pot songs ! He's a different kind of outlaw all together - " he's a different kind of outlaw ". If the Stones were a bit more Bonnie and Clyde, then McCartney is Alias Smith and Jones. Nothing wrong with that.
There's little point comparing the two...not to mention the fact that 3/4 of his real band are missing including arguably the best singer, the lead guitarist and the bloke with the big nose who is as important as Charlie is to the Stones.
I think perhaps we'd like the Stones to be more dangerous but let's face it, that probably runs in direct contravention to their health care insurance...Mick would never stand for such behaviour...the people downstairs like Keith and Ron should know their place and behave accordingly.
I'm sure Paul's delighted he's in the charts again. I don't know a Beatle/Paul fan who bought it. Maybe it's us fans holding him and the Stones back....maybe they should not make the effort to please us..if they actually had to work to win over a new audience maybe they'd pull something out of the bag...why should they bother, haven't they done enough already, was Mike Love right when he said to Brian Wilson "Don't fcuk with the formula" ? why should i speak since i know nothing ?
Am i alone in thinking perhaps it's just a good thing that enough of the Stones are alive to put on the occasional show ? Let's face it, things aren't looking too good for The Beatles right now, top 10 hits aside for the bass player...I'm really glad i saw both Macca and The Stones and a few times during each of their shows i got a glimpse of what it was 50 years ago that made them both so great that 50 years later they're still playing to huge sold out places that you and i could only dream of playing in.
The trip is over but if we're really lucky we might just get a few flashbacks to remind us that nostalgia isn't what it used to be. At least it occasionally features Taylor on lead guitar and a 2nd rate Beatle tune. That's better than the nostalgia my parents had to put up with when they were my age.
Here's Tammy with the weather...
At times on that last tour the band were really impressive if not positively awesome. My parents are the same age as Mick and Keith...they can't even go bird-watching like they used to...it's a miracle Mick, Keith, Charlie et al. can still do this at all. In Keith's case it's a miracle he's even still standing as that can often pose problems for the undead.
While McCartney does rely on the same old stuff for the bulk of his 30+ singsong setlist, he has also worked his way through virtually all of his Beatle songs at one time or another, even obscure or naff ones just for the hell of it because presumably a/ he wants to and b/he knows most of the crowd will go nuts if he pulls out an early B-side like I'll Get You or as above, All Together Now which is featured in the Yellow Submarine film and part of the Beatles forward-looking "Childrens Brainwashing Programme" initiated by Apple in 1968 which has yielded extremely successful results since the band split up. He's played John's Mr Kite, Day In The Life too...wish he'd do Tomorrow Never Knows.
Point is, despite playing many of the same old brilliant,average and really vomit-inducing (he's still the master of those) songs, he is also doing a bit extra. All this while facing the fact that his once awesome voice is really going to pieces, sometimes it's not there at all but usually comes back to a degree a few songs in to the set.
Both he and The Stones are fortunate to have such remarkable back catalogues.
I do not believe the current day band can do much justice to the Jones era songs - they just don't/can't/won't play like that anymore and not because Brian was some kind of Christ like genius before someone says it, but simply because the band can't or won't play like that anymore and i also get the feeling that they really don't rate that period as much as many of us do. Paint it black,Cloud,even Satisfaction etc..nearly always come across as lumpy and perfunctory to my ears...that could just be me?
Beggars/Bleed is the turning point, they've never really strayed far from that basic formula and the "great run" simply improves/refines that formula.
I still feel that the Stones best move would be to take the Brian Wilson route - not the staying in bed not shaving or washing,having the fridge moved to the bedroom, snort as much coke as possible route, but performing albums like Pet Sounds and the even better Smile album in their entirety. He also did the whole new Lucky Old Sun album live iirc. Not a fan of that album but still, points for covering new ground and taking the time and effort to learn it - given that he has to read his own name and the chorus lyrics of Barbara Ann off an autocue the guy is really making considerable effort when he does not have to. He could just stay at home busy doing nothing.
I would like to see the Stones record a series of Blu-rays at somewhere like the Festival Hall , London for 2 weeks (with Taylor) where they play Beggars/Sticky/Bleed/Exile in their entirety, 2 albums per gig with Jagger standing still (ish) so he can concentrate on singing. His voice is in great shape. They could warm up with 4 or 5 moldies and then play one album, take a break and then do another album after a couple of warm ups. They've never done that before. That would be a very positive step forward in the absence of new material.
I cannot see that happening because for it to work effectively they'd have to play smaller venues and i do not believe they'd consider it financially worthwhile especially as it would no doubt deeply affect their tax position which is an important consideration for the modern day rock n roll outlaw...
what does McCartney know about being a rock n roll outlaw ? he has 40,000 people happily singing along with his silly pot songs ! He's a different kind of outlaw all together - " he's a different kind of outlaw ". If the Stones were a bit more Bonnie and Clyde, then McCartney is Alias Smith and Jones. Nothing wrong with that.
There's little point comparing the two...not to mention the fact that 3/4 of his real band are missing including arguably the best singer, the lead guitarist and the bloke with the big nose who is as important as Charlie is to the Stones.
I think perhaps we'd like the Stones to be more dangerous but let's face it, that probably runs in direct contravention to their health care insurance...Mick would never stand for such behaviour...the people downstairs like Keith and Ron should know their place and behave accordingly.
I'm sure Paul's delighted he's in the charts again. I don't know a Beatle/Paul fan who bought it. Maybe it's us fans holding him and the Stones back....maybe they should not make the effort to please us..if they actually had to work to win over a new audience maybe they'd pull something out of the bag...why should they bother, haven't they done enough already, was Mike Love right when he said to Brian Wilson "Don't fcuk with the formula" ? why should i speak since i know nothing ?
Am i alone in thinking perhaps it's just a good thing that enough of the Stones are alive to put on the occasional show ? Let's face it, things aren't looking too good for The Beatles right now, top 10 hits aside for the bass player...I'm really glad i saw both Macca and The Stones and a few times during each of their shows i got a glimpse of what it was 50 years ago that made them both so great that 50 years later they're still playing to huge sold out places that you and i could only dream of playing in.
The trip is over but if we're really lucky we might just get a few flashbacks to remind us that nostalgia isn't what it used to be. At least it occasionally features Taylor on lead guitar and a 2nd rate Beatle tune. That's better than the nostalgia my parents had to put up with when they were my age.
Here's Tammy with the weather...
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
ash
()
Date: February 27, 2015 14:26
Quote
drbryant
Since this Forum is again discussing Paul McCartney (something that seems to happen about as often as Ron Wood vs. Mick Taylor), I thought that I would repost one of the great posts from our beloved Macca-fan Ferrante9 (also known as Shearer9 and a few other names). He was special - other Macca fans have a high hurdle.Quote
ferrante9
no!!!!!!!!!
let me tell you what s up
can mick play jenny wren on the guitar?
can keith or ron play blackbird right???
that's what i thought
the stones are just straight rock and roll and that's about it.
macca can do all types of music. rock, heavy metal, folk, pop, disco, county, acoustic, ballads etc....
chaos and creation is the album of the year!!!!
driving rain was even better than forty licks!!! just listen to lonely road...the best song ever wrtitten since yesterday and hope of delivrance.
flamming pie and flowers in the dirt paul were both masterpieces.
off the ground was a worldwide smash hit!!!!
if it wasn't for macca, the stones would be nobody......who wrote i wanna be your man to make the stones popular????
the asnwer is paul mccartney.
who inveted havy metal? paul mccartney with helter skelter!!!!!!
who is a better musician overall ? paul mccartney.....versatile to say the least.
from drums to flute,........ he probably is a better drummer than charlie.....did you hear the drumming on back in the USSR????
macca is the best bassist of all time!!! just listen to silly love song......
macca is the best songwriter of all time and he is one of the best signer of all time too......listen to oh darling or lonley road......nevermind mick.
chaos and creation is a mellow album, however, it contains very melodic stuff ....bigger bang is just an hour of straight rock and roll...that's it!!!!
as far as the tour......pauls' tour is more fun because the music is a lot better.
the stones just goes trhough the set list quickly so they can go home.......no passion what so ever..........
and remember......tehs toens played in front of 450 000 in toronto, but it was a festival which featured other acts.
macca holds the recod of most people at a concert for a solo act...rio 1990 , in front of 184 000 people.
he also played in rome in 2003 in front of 500 000.....a freec oncert though.
wings outsold the stones and the beatles combined in the 70s
he is the richest musician of all time
he was named the most succesful composer of all time
what's up with that huh????
agreed. what complete bollocks. everyone knows it was a mellotron flute not a real one.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
RomanCandle
()
Date: February 27, 2015 14:40
"At times on that last tour the band were really impressive if not positively awesome. My parents are the same age as Mick and Keith...they can't even go bird-watching like they used to...it's a miracle Mick, Keith, Charlie et al. can still do this at all. In Keith's case it's a miracle he's even still standing as that can often pose problems for the undead."
I would not call it a miracle. They probably would not be alive today if they had been poor.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-27 14:42 by RomanCandle.
I would not call it a miracle. They probably would not be alive today if they had been poor.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-27 14:42 by RomanCandle.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: February 27, 2015 14:52
"Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act"
Your brain PC with a 1990's OS. This is the 2010's. Sales don't matter, chars don't matter,hype matters.
Jagger put the Stones in the elitist list of names/brands/entities that are cool. Therefore it's cool for young people to wear Stones t-shirts and buy Stones tickets.
Macca sells 1960's nostalgia for an audience of ppl who either remember the 60's or lament the fact they weren't born in the 60's.
In either case it's defo not cool. In 2010's patois Macca is an old fart.
Your brain PC with a 1990's OS. This is the 2010's. Sales don't matter, chars don't matter,hype matters.
Jagger put the Stones in the elitist list of names/brands/entities that are cool. Therefore it's cool for young people to wear Stones t-shirts and buy Stones tickets.
Macca sells 1960's nostalgia for an audience of ppl who either remember the 60's or lament the fact they weren't born in the 60's.
In either case it's defo not cool. In 2010's patois Macca is an old fart.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 27, 2015 14:57
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
BowieStone
Why is it always Jaggers fault? If the stones was the only thing he did, the stones would be more than a nostalgia band. But the man has a lot of interests.
I think Keith is the most happy. He hasn't written a complete song in, what, 20 years?
He has just completed an album with new songs + he wrote OMS in 2012.
he must be completely exhausted.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: February 27, 2015 15:17
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
stonehearted
<<What is this, then?
[Doom and Gloom YoutTube clip]>>
A song they'll be dropping from their set list this summer and setting aside forever, like ABB (except in those European markets that made Streets of Love a hit).
wow...that's rough justice stonehearted.
And here I was thinking my comment had flown in under the radar.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
latebloomer
()
Date: February 27, 2015 15:35
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
RomanCandle
Great post drbryant.
"As I type he has the #4 single in America with Four, Five Seconds. A song that has hit #1 several different countries as well as #1 on the R+B chart in America and hit #2 in Europe."
top 5 single or no, that say nothing about the song itself
IMO, this is:
one of the worst Kanye West songs
one of the worst Rihanna songs
one of the worst Macca songs
The combination of three great pop musicians doesn't always make a great song.
Do you think it would have been #4 without Kanye or Rihanna?
No. The Kanye song has a nice enough melody, but the auto tune ruins it for me. The older/younger musician collaboration is nothing new. At least both of them are alive, the Natiale Cole/Nat King Cole thing was kinda creepy.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 27, 2015 15:37
Quote
latebloomerQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
RomanCandle
Great post drbryant.
"As I type he has the #4 single in America with Four, Five Seconds. A song that has hit #1 several different countries as well as #1 on the R+B chart in America and hit #2 in Europe."
top 5 single or no, that say nothing about the song itself
IMO, this is:
one of the worst Kanye West songs
one of the worst Rihanna songs
one of the worst Macca songs
The combination of three great pop musicians doesn't always make a great song.
Do you think it would have been #4 without Kanye or Rihanna?
No. The Kanye song has a nice enough melody, but the auto tune ruins it for me. The older/younger musician collaboration is nothing new. At least both of them are alive, the Natiale Cole/Nat King Cole thing was kinda creepy.
Really?!
I thought it was unforgettable.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
latebloomer
()
Date: February 27, 2015 15:38
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
latebloomerQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
RomanCandle
Great post drbryant.
"As I type he has the #4 single in America with Four, Five Seconds. A song that has hit #1 several different countries as well as #1 on the R+B chart in America and hit #2 in Europe."
top 5 single or no, that say nothing about the song itself
IMO, this is:
one of the worst Kanye West songs
one of the worst Rihanna songs
one of the worst Macca songs
The combination of three great pop musicians doesn't always make a great song.
Do you think it would have been #4 without Kanye or Rihanna?
No. The Kanye song has a nice enough melody, but the auto tune ruins it for me. The older/younger musician collaboration is nothing new. At least both of them are alive, the Natiale Cole/Nat King Cole thing was kinda creepy.
Really?!
I thought it was unforgettable.
Touche, Treacle.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
James Kirk
()
Date: February 27, 2015 15:50
For the record when I started this thread my intention wasn't to discuss the success of Paul McCartney. My intention was simply to contrast McCartney's continuing creativity to the Stones total lack of output + continued repeating off themselves on the road doing nearly the same exact show year after year. You could substitute Bruce Springsteen or any number of other artists and the argument would still be valid.
The Stones are in a unique position to at least attempt to grow this music up with mature rock/blues records, but unlike McCartney they simply don't try. They just use their iconic brand to sell wildly expensive concert tickets to line their pockets...They are taking the easy way out.
They still have enough credibility to make albums that matter (like Bob Dylan for example) but they prefer to charge fans $500 to hear them sing "It's Only Rock + Roll" AGAIN and not even try to be creative.
The Stones are in a unique position to at least attempt to grow this music up with mature rock/blues records, but unlike McCartney they simply don't try. They just use their iconic brand to sell wildly expensive concert tickets to line their pockets...They are taking the easy way out.
They still have enough credibility to make albums that matter (like Bob Dylan for example) but they prefer to charge fans $500 to hear them sing "It's Only Rock + Roll" AGAIN and not even try to be creative.
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: February 27, 2015 15:58
<<You could substitute Bruce Springsteen or any number of other artists and the argument would still be valid.>>
True, but only the topic of Macca/Beatles will get you 4 pages of posts in under 24 hours, all because of ALO's marketing strategy from 50 years ago. It's Beatles v. Stones 4Ever!
True, but only the topic of Macca/Beatles will get you 4 pages of posts in under 24 hours, all because of ALO's marketing strategy from 50 years ago. It's Beatles v. Stones 4Ever!
Re: Paul McCartney has a top 5 single...While Mick Jagger is happy having the Stones be an oldies act
Posted by:
latebloomer
()
Date: February 27, 2015 15:59
Quote
James Kirk
For the record when I started this thread my intention wasn't to discuss the success of Paul McCartney. My intention was simply to contrast McCartney's continuing creativity to the Stones total lack of output + continued repeating off themselves on the road doing nearly the same exact show year after year. You could substitute Bruce Springsteen or any number of other artists and the argument would still be valid.
The Stones are in a unique position to at least attempt to grow this music up with mature rock/blues records, but unlike McCartney they simply don't try. They just use their iconic brand to sell wildly expensive concert tickets to line their pockets...They are taking the easy way out.
They still have enough credibility to make albums that matter (like Bob Dylan for example) but they prefer to charge fans $500 to hear them sing "It's Only Rock + Roll" AGAIN and not even try to be creative.
No one is forced to buy the tickets or to even listen to their music. They do what they do for their own reasons, and so do we all. It seems to me to be pointless to compare the Stones to individual artists. It's not at all the same.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
5strings , cyclist , dishevelmentblues , eduardoacdc , EggersBand , guytout59 , IrelandCalling4 , maumau , NashvilleBlues , Nellcote1971 , RollingFreak , StonedRambler , Stonesfan2146 , Taylor1 , waterrats
Guests:
1667
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10