Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Witness

Quote
Naturalust

Naw, they nailed it with Far Away Eyes and Indian Girl is a great song. Sweethearts Together could have been OK but the vocals and lyrics just don't stand up, awful chorus plus neither Mick nor Keith nor Ronnie can play this style on guitar very convincingly. That slide stuff by Ronnie just doesn't fit the tune or style.

If they are going to venture into other styles, fine, but they should accentuate the things that make those styles great, tongue in cheek if necessary. A clear example of why Don Was should not be allowed anywhere near the Stones.

peace

As to my non-musician's ears there is nothing wrong or any misplaced style about any guitar playing on this song, and as I particularly enjoyed the voices of Mick and Keith in company, quite moving, in fact, and as I after my taste on the whole think that this is one of two stand out songs on that album, I for one cannot see this song isolated as basis for objections to Don Was as producer of Rolling Stones music.

Quote
Witness

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Witness

Quote
Naturalust

Naw, they nailed it with Far Away Eyes and Indian Girl is a great song. Sweethearts Together could have been OK but the vocals and lyrics just don't stand up, awful chorus plus neither Mick nor Keith nor Ronnie can play this style on guitar very convincingly. That slide stuff by Ronnie just doesn't fit the tune or style.

If they are going to venture into other styles, fine, but they should accentuate the things that make those styles great, tongue in cheek if necessary. A clear example of why Don Was should not be allowed anywhere near the Stones.

peace

As to my non-musician's ears there is nothing wrong or any misplaced style about any guitar playing on this song, and as I particularly enjoyed the voices of Mick and Keith in company, quite moving, in fact, and as I after my taste on the whole think that this is one of two stand out songs on that album, I for one cannot see this song isolated as basis for objections to Don Was as producer of Rolling Stones music.

Well, I had to blame someone . They needed someone to tell them the song was inferior. Glad the song moves you Witness, but I stand by my post. I can just hear Jimmy Miller or even Ian Stewart objecting to this drivel....no groove, cliche message, bad presentation.

Hard to believe the same group that recorded Gimme Shelter recorded this one.

peace

Substandart. Indian Girl Pt. II. Or Blinded By Love Pt. II. These "mexican influence"-tunes sound like a bad joke. Whenever this stuff started playing, I or whoever else was around nervously searched for the "skip"-button on the player. Nothing against this kind of music, but it just does not sound right played by the Rolling Stones.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-09 20:13 by alimente.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Witness

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Witness

Quote
Naturalust

Naw, they nailed it with Far Away Eyes and Indian Girl is a great song. Sweethearts Together could have been OK but the vocals and lyrics just don't stand up, awful chorus plus neither Mick nor Keith nor Ronnie can play this style on guitar very convincingly. That slide stuff by Ronnie just doesn't fit the tune or style.

If they are going to venture into other styles, fine, but they should accentuate the things that make those styles great, tongue in cheek if necessary. A clear example of why Don Was should not be allowed anywhere near the Stones.

peace

As to my non-musician's ears there is nothing wrong or any misplaced style about any guitar playing on this song, and as I particularly enjoyed the voices of Mick and Keith in company, quite moving, in fact, and as I after my taste on the whole think that this is one of two stand out songs on that album, I for one cannot see this song isolated as basis for objections to Don Was as producer of Rolling Stones music.

Well, I had to blame someone . They needed someone to tell them the song was inferior. Glad the song moves you Witness, but I stand by my post. I can just hear Jimmy Miller or even Ian Stewart objecting to this drivel....no groove, cliche message, bad presentation.

Hard to believe the same group that recorded Gimme Shelter recorded this one.

peace

The diversity of the Rolling Stones is as wide as or even wider than that. The band with the name the Rolling Stones also recorded "Have You Seen Your Mother, Baby, Standing in the Shadow". But even that same incarnation of the band, also "As Tears Go By".

And other posters could join the discussion and object to your assessment ( and mine) of "Indian Girl".

And while I was in vain trying to shorten the quotes, in the meantime that has happened.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-09 20:21 by Witness.

Quote
Witness

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Witness

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Witness

Quote
Naturalust

Naw, they nailed it with Far Away Eyes and Indian Girl is a great song. Sweethearts Together could have been OK but the vocals and lyrics just don't stand up, awful chorus plus neither Mick nor Keith nor Ronnie can play this style on guitar very convincingly. That slide stuff by Ronnie just doesn't fit the tune or style.

If they are going to venture into other styles, fine, but they should accentuate the things that make those styles great, tongue in cheek if necessary. A clear example of why Don Was should not be allowed anywhere near the Stones.

peace

As to my non-musician's ears there is nothing wrong or any misplaced style about any guitar playing on this song, and as I particularly enjoyed the voices of Mick and Keith in company, quite moving, in fact, and as I after my taste on the whole think that this is one of two stand out songs on that album, I for one cannot see this song isolated as basis for objections to Don Was as producer of Rolling Stones music.

Well, I had to blame someone . They needed someone to tell them the song was inferior. Glad the song moves you Witness, but I stand by my post. I can just hear Jimmy Miller or even Ian Stewart objecting to this drivel....no groove, cliche message, bad presentation.

Hard to believe the same group that recorded Gimme Shelter recorded this one.

peace

The diversity of the Rolling Stones is as wide as or even wider than that. The band with the name the Rolling Stones also recorded "Have You Seen Your Mother, Baby, Standing in the Shadow". But even that same incarnation of the band, also "As Tears Go By".

And other posters could join the discussion and object to your assessment ( and mine) of "Indian Girl".

And while I was in vain trying to shorten the quotes, in the meantime that has happened.

Witness, there are some Stones fans that celebrate the diversity of the output over the last 50 years and some that prefer 'their' stones to fit into whatever the narrow time period they prefer, ie the 'classic' 68-72 period or the early 'hits' period of 64-67.

Whatever, to each his own. In my opinion you miss a lot if you don't like the disco stuff, the ballads, Undercover of the Night, etc. etc.

Truth be told, I guess you can get a lot of enjoyment of these other styles from different bands as well...no need to hear disco from Mick. That said, but why not?

Quote
alimente
Substandart. Indian Girl Pt. II. Or Blinded By Love Pt. II. These "mexican influence"-tunes sound like a bad joke. Whenever this stuff started playing, I or whoever else was around nervously searched for the "skip"-button on the player. Nothing against this kind of music, but it just does not sound right played by the Rolling Stones.

To some extent, even if at the same time quite different in between them, I agree that there is some relation between "Indian Girl" and "Sweethearts Together". That was an important part of the reason that I
speculatively suggested that the latter is the only song of VOODOO LOUNGE that might have featured on EMOTIONAL RESCUE (among the first five songs). I happen to like both of these songs more than quite much, whereas you don't.

Quote
treaclefingers

Witness, there are some Stones fans that celebrate the diversity of the output over the last 50 years and some that prefer 'their' stones to fit into whatever the narrow time period they prefer, ie the 'classic' 68-72 period or the early 'hits' period of 64-67.

Whatever, to each his own. In my opinion you miss a lot if you don't like the disco stuff, the ballads, Undercover of the Night, etc. etc.

Truth be told, I guess you can get a lot of enjoyment of these other styles from different bands as well...no need to hear disco from Mick. That said, but why not?

I do agree. Besides, I wonder if not "Miss You" is unique, in both being a disco and a non-disco song at the same moment. And, of course, when I don't listen to the Stones, I often enjoy bands that are quite different to the Rolling Stones.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-09 20:45 by Witness.

This may be the right place to discuss it: What's up with that tape-drag happening at 3:14-3:16??? I spotted it from day one. Anyone else who have discovered it?

[www.myvideo.de]

Yep. Something similar happened on Respectable and Too Tough as well

Quote
Blueranger
This may be the right place to discuss it: What's up with that tape-drag happening at 3:14-3:16??? I spotted it from day one. Anyone else who have discovered it?

[www.myvideo.de]

Ha! I never noticed that before. Where is the quality control? Just strengthens my conviction that they didn't really give a toss about this one.

Drew

Quote
marcovandereijk
I am terribly sorry, but since it is a track talk, I have to post this.
Flaco Jiminez ...

Thanks for posting that. Flaco is IMO the only thing that makes this track marginally listenable. And there is one brief, sublime moment (at 2:08), a moment that he is solely responsible for.



Drew



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-10 02:05 by drewmaster.

Quote
Chris Fountain
Sweethearts Together is a great song. I do not want to hear anymore discussion.


I hope they play the song on this tour.


We're going to the Concert!!

+1

Quote
Rip This

Quote
Chris Fountain
Sweethearts Together is a great song. I do not want to hear anymore discussion.


I hope they play the song on this tour.


We're going to the Concert!!

+1

+2

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Rip This

Quote
Chris Fountain
Sweethearts Together is a great song. I do not want to hear anymore discussion.


I hope they play the song on this tour.


We're going to the Concert!!

+1

+2

-1

__________________________

Theoretically, this song should work. Some old-fashioned harmonizing between Mick and Keith coupled with venturing into a "Mexican-influenced" sort of sound (in which the Stones briefly dabbled in previously). However, this song just does not work for me at all. Melodically and lyrically a snoozefest. Really uninteresting guitar work. Have to agree with Naturalust regarding his Gimme Shelter comment. Cannot see at all pre-1989 Rolling Stones recording such a lame song, let alone including it on a record.

Quote
NICOS

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Rip This

Quote
Chris Fountain
Sweethearts Together is a great song. I do not want to hear anymore discussion.


I hope they play the song on this tour.


We're going to the Concert!!

+1

+2

-1

+1

Best not try to subtract me, Nicos....

Truly disgusting song from a once great band. And the video posted here didnt help either.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-10 02:02 by Redhotcarpet.

Love the subtle country guitar licks, great melody, great Mick vocals, fantastic backing vocals by Keith, and great bass lines by Darrel, I guess ... what's not to like?

Quote
LeonidP
Love the subtle country guitar licks, great melody, great Mick vocals, fantastic backing vocals by Keith, and great bass lines by Darrel, I guess ... what's not to like?

Amen.

+2

I can see Ronnie and Keith smiling, when they're trading licks and blending in blues, country and tex-mex stuff into this funny, but lovely tune. In Indian Girl it's only Mick that is doing stuff tongue in cheek, but here the whole band oozes of joy and love, just like the song itself does.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
+2

I can see Ronnie and Keith smiling, when they're trading licks and blending in blues, country and tex-mex stuff into this funny, but lovely tune. In Indian Girl it's only Mick that is doing stuff tongue in cheek, but here the whole band oozes of joy and love, just like the song itself does.

Despite a surface of some kind of irony to a certain extent, probably somewhat to lessen the impact of sentimentality, I never doubt that empathy is the underlying feeling of "Indian Girl".
Not in any way said in opposition to what you express about "Sweethearts Together".

Quote
Witness

Quote
DandelionPowderman
+2

I can see Ronnie and Keith smiling, when they're trading licks and blending in blues, country and tex-mex stuff into this funny, but lovely tune. In Indian Girl it's only Mick that is doing stuff tongue in cheek, but here the whole band oozes of joy and love, just like the song itself does.

Despite a surface of some kind of irony to a certain extent, probably somewhat to lessen the impact of sentimentality, I never doubt that empathy is the underlying feeling of "Indian Girl".
Not in any way said in opposition to what you express about "Sweethearts Together".

Neither do I, not at all. But Mick's attempt to "be cool" at the same time doesn't do it for me - especially when he is handling serious political matters.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Witness

Quote
DandelionPowderman
+2

I can see Ronnie and Keith smiling, when they're trading licks and blending in blues, country and tex-mex stuff into this funny, but lovely tune. In Indian Girl it's only Mick that is doing stuff tongue in cheek, but here the whole band oozes of joy and love, just like the song itself does.

Despite a surface of some kind of irony to a certain extent, probably somewhat to lessen the impact of sentimentality, I never doubt that empathy is the underlying feeling of "Indian Girl".
Not in any way said in opposition to what you express about "Sweethearts Together".

Neither do I, not at all. But Mick's attempt to "be cool" at the same time doesn't do it for me - especially when he is handling serious political matters.

Well, I have already suggested a somewhat lessening of the impact of sentimentality as a modifying interpretation to yours.

hmm.. earliest recollections... I was living in Spain at the time VOODOO LOUNGE was released, and didn't have a record player or anything, so I relied solely on Spanish media for it... "Love Is Strong" was circulating at MTV regularly, but however it was from Radio Quarenta I spotted the next song, which was "Sweethearts Together". It sounded soooo good...

Memories aside. The song reminds me of all those early Jagger/Richard pop ballads in which they were learning song-writing - some rather obvious chord changes, and a nice melody to go with them. Keith providing the basic music and some some key words, Mick finishing the melody and writing most of the lyrics. Things like "Congratulations", etc. Charming kind of in its naivety, but usually very few of them left any bigger impact. During their mature song-writing days - starting in 'big four' - they dropped that kind of stuff. So to listen an 'original' song like that from grown men hitting their fifties is a bit.. hmm.. a mark of degenaration? Of course, that suited rather well to the retro nature of VOODOO LOUNGE, representing one era of their past. Still I think there is a lot of caricature in the song - they can't be serious, now can they?

The naive pop ballad is covered with some touches of texmes cajuun, but to me that is just a kitch covered with a kitch - they are not really expanding their repertuare, but just icing the cake with some cheap triks. Think of McDonalds cheeseburger spiced up with some tabasco. The guitar work is weak and sloppy even for Stones standards - neither Keith or Ron seem to have wasted one thought for playing something meaningful and suitable - no, just their typical licks randonmly thrown in. Don Was, c'mon?

Yeah, it sounds fresh and sweet if one listens it once a decade or something... But it just can't stand a repeated listening. Probably the most typical VOODOO LOUNGE track in that sense.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-10 11:03 by Doxa.

Quote
Witness

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Witness

Quote
DandelionPowderman
+2

I can see Ronnie and Keith smiling, when they're trading licks and blending in blues, country and tex-mex stuff into this funny, but lovely tune. In Indian Girl it's only Mick that is doing stuff tongue in cheek, but here the whole band oozes of joy and love, just like the song itself does.

Despite a surface of some kind of irony to a certain extent, probably somewhat to lessen the impact of sentimentality, I never doubt that empathy is the underlying feeling of "Indian Girl".
Not in any way said in opposition to what you express about "Sweethearts Together".

Neither do I, not at all. But Mick's attempt to "be cool" at the same time doesn't do it for me - especially when he is handling serious political matters.

Well, I have already suggested a somewhat lessening of the impact of sentimentality as a modifying interpretation to yours.

Yeah, I noticed that

Quote
Doxa
hmm.. earliest recollections... I was living in Spain at the time VOODOO LOUNGE was released, and didn't have a record player or anything, so I relied solely on Spanish media for it... "Love Is Strong" was circulating at MTV regularly, but however it was from Radio Quarenta I spotted the next song, which was "Sweethearts Together". It sounded soooo good...

Memories aside. The song reminds me of all those early Jagger/Richard pop ballads in which they were learning song-writing - some rather obvious chord changes, and a nice melody to go with them. Keith providing the basic music music and some some key words, Mick finishing the melody and writing most of the lyrics. Things like "Congratulations", etc. Charming kind of in its naivety, but usually very few of them left any bigger impact. During their mature song-writing days - starting in 'big four' - they dropped that kind of stuff. So to listen an 'original' song like that from grown men hitting their fifties is a bit.. hmm.. a mark of degenaration? Of course, that suited rather well to the retro nature of VOODOO LOUNGE, representing one era of their past. Still I think there is a lot of caricature in the song - they can't be serious, now can they?

The naive pop ballad is covered with some touches of texmes cajuun, but to me that is just a kitch covered with a kitch - they are not really expanding their repertuare, but just icing the cake with some cheap triks. Think of McDonals cheeseburger spiced up with some tabasco. The guitar work is weak and sloppy for even Stones standards - neither Keith or Ron seem to have wasted one thought for playing something meaningful and suitable - no, just their typical licks randonmly thrown in. Don Was, c'mon?

Yeah, it sounds fresh and sweet if one listens it once a decade or something... But it just can't stand a repeated listening. Probably the most typical VOODOO LOUNGE track in that sense.

- Doxa

Did they? What about Sweet Black Angel, Sweet Virginia, the first half of 100 Years Ago, Dead Flowers, No Expectations etc.?

I hear some of the same naive approach to songwriting there as well. And, probably not by coincident, they're all great songs

And you forgot to mention that they used this approach on many of their best songs on great albums as Aftermath and Between The Buttons as well

And in no way is the guitar work sloppy on Sweethearts Together. I'm gonna have to ask what you mean by that?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-10 11:19 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
DandelionPowderman


Did they? What about Sweet Black Angel, Sweet Virginia, the first half of 100 Years Ago, Dead Flowers, No Expectations etc.?

I hear some of the same naive approach to songwriting there as well. And, probably not by coincident, they're all great songs

And you forgot to mention that they used this approach on many of their best songs on great albums as Aftermath and Between The Buttons as well

There is no cheesy amateur-sounding pop ballad in "Sweet Black Angel", "Sweet Virginia", "Dead Flowers", "100 Years Ago", "No Expectations", but instances of mature songcraft, expressing wit, edge and feelings. Whareas "Sweethearts Together" is something one could hear in Eurovision Song Contest or something.

Yeah, AFTERMATH/BETWEEN THE BUTTONS 'pop' period contains material in which the pop ballad method is used beautifully, suiting well to their style at the time. But "Sweethearts Together" belongs to to earlier attempts Mick and Keith staarted learning song-writing, mostly addressing them to some other artists to record than the Stones ("That Girl Belongs To Yesterday", etc). Stuff Jagger later described with a word "crap". Some gems there, though ("Tell Me", "As Tears Go By", etc.).

- Doxa

Well, I disagree I think many of their best songs are very pure and simple (not cheesy ). The Stones without that naive touch is very often just another rock band for me.

All the songs I mentioned have that approach. I think you're stretching it far by describing Dead Flowers, Sweet Virginia and the others as "mature songcraft". They're doing the very same thing: dressing up a simple song in the clothes of traditional american music.

On the other hand, we might discuss the lyrical content, and how borderline cheesy that might me. But that's a different story, and that is highly relevant for some of the other songs as well.

Musically, I don't find any cheesiness nor anything amateurish with Sweetheart Together. Instead, I find it exploring and joyful. Not my favourite tune, but a very good one, and it's different. I cherish that



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-10 11:32 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
Doxa
hmm.. earliest recollections... I was living in Spain at the time VOODOO LOUNGE was released, and didn't have a record player or anything, so I relied solely on Spanish media for it... "Love Is Strong" was circulating at MTV regularly, but however it was from Radio Quarenta I spotted the next song, which was "Sweethearts Together". It sounded soooo good...

Memories aside. The song reminds me of all those early Jagger/Richard pop ballads in which they were learning song-writing - some rather obvious chord changes, and a nice melody to go with them. Keith providing the basic music and some some key words, Mick finishing the melody and writing most of the lyrics. Things like "Congratulations", etc. Charming kind of in its naivety, but usually very few of them left any bigger impact. During their mature song-writing days - starting in 'big four' - they dropped that kind of stuff. So to listen an 'original' song like that from grown men hitting their fifties is a bit.. hmm.. a mark of degenaration? Of course, that suited rather well to the retro nature of VOODOO LOUNGE, representing one era of their past. Still I think there is a lot of caricature in the song - they can't be serious, now can they?

The naive pop ballad is covered with some touches of texmes cajuun, but to me that is just a kitch covered with a kitch - they are not really expanding their repertuare, but just icing the cake with some cheap triks. Think of McDonalds cheeseburger spiced up with some tabasco. The guitar work is weak and sloppy even for Stones standards - neither Keith or Ron seem to have wasted one thought for playing something meaningful and suitable - no, just their typical licks randonmly thrown in. Don Was, c'mon?

Yeah, it sounds fresh and sweet if one listens it once a decade or something... But it just can't stand a repeated listening. Probably the most typical VOODOO LOUNGE track in that sense.

- Doxa

I write more slowly, so I have not taken in the exchange in the later posts.

My idea of VOODOO LOUNGE contrasts with that of a retro album as such. I imagine it as a refinding of their identity. That means in my take of it, not reconstructing what the Stones had been. Instead constructing what it would mean to represent their former identity in a new setting.

Two songs to me then seem, so to speak, to be made like “Stones song- by –numbers” almost as a deliberate method, “You Got Me Rocking” and “I Go Wild”. But apart from those, I find it a little exaggerated that the Stones made more or less a repetition of old song formulas. Not saying that they did not at all let them inspire of former songs, but not as a formula. Instead rather that the band refound their identity, from which they made maybe small steps into new directions. (I seem to have read from time to time here that unused outtakes, that I have not heard, were moving farther from this identity than the used songs.) BRIDGES TO BABYLON later was at least to represent much larger steps from their refound identity. The only problem was their much lessened frequencies of releases by then. (Possibly due to the reception of new material, as contrasted to the public’s attitude to and preference of the old songs.)

As such I never have thought of “Sweethearts Together” in the light of “Congratulations” and such songs. Reminded of the possibility, I still do not feel that way. And if you think they don’t take the song seriously, I may agree in the special sense that there is an open self-irony in their parading as newborn sweethearts that had just begun. It may be an an unambitious song, as contrasted with the ambitious song ideas, but I am among those who find it inspired and fresh.
(Now work).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-03-10 11:50 by Witness.

Well, Dandie, if you think "Sweethearts Together" is same as "Sweet Virginia" or "Dead Flowers", good for you. I hear there a huge difference. Being 'pure' and 'simple' has nothing to do with it. Mick and Keith are - or used to be - masters making magical results from simple ideas, but "Sweetheats Together" is just cheesy, cheesy, cheesy, cheap, cheap, cheap.

Anyway, VOODOO LOUNGE is the album I least like any of them, and I think I have never been able to overcome the disappointment it left for me. Some sort of Stones follower - being actually interested and eager in following their musical adventure and 'believe' in them - in me died with that album at the time. I think a track like "Sweethearts Together" is typically a reason for that. To me the whole album sounds like the Stones are artistically giving up, that they just don't care any longer, and are actually underestimating the taste and intelligent of their audience. They didn't sound serious any longer, but were just offering easy listening versions of their typical cliches the people associate with them. "Stones For Dummies" is my title for that album.

But as I see it, VOODOO LOUNGE is not an album made from an artistic impulse, and not either for the people who have followed them from album to album, but just an introctionary pastishe album of their music for 'casual' fans. If one likes that, one can throw it away, and start digging the real thing from the past.

- Doxa