Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: PreviousFirst...158159160161162163164165166167168...LastNext
Current Page: 163 of 307
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: kleermaker ()
Date: August 2, 2015 15:23

Quote
LuxuryStones
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
LuxuryStones

Just closed my eyes and listened unbiased, twice. Tone, timing, vibrato, melodic approach. He lost it, gone with the wind, imo.

To be fair it wasn't his best performance of the tune, even he is clearly unhappy with it when he finished. I think part of the problem was him being thrown out there for one tune without the proper time to warm up with the band and get a good feel for the stage, venue, the other musicians and the sound. I could point to plenty of Keith and Ronnie situations where those things you mention are gone too but others are basically carrying them through it. Taylor was out there all alone with little help....just sayin. It any case the crowd seemed to love it.

Could be part of the case indeed, and right, the same goes for Ron and Keith as well..and as long as the crowd loves it, it's ok of course.

The crowd reacted in an unexpectedly enthousiastic way, by someone most of them even didn't know his name. So your last sentence is trivializing the crowd's reaction. They obviously heard something special and were moved.

But you are a bit sour, because of nostalgic reasons. Remember that the timing etc. also sounded bad on the audience recording of the Glastonbury Knocking. Until we heard that Knocking in excellent audio quality and could here that everything was fine. You can check it on my channel. cool smiley

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: StonesCat ()
Date: August 2, 2015 19:29

Quote
kleermaker
Quote
LuxuryStones
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
LuxuryStones

Just closed my eyes and listened unbiased, twice. Tone, timing, vibrato, melodic approach. He lost it, gone with the wind, imo.

To be fair it wasn't his best performance of the tune, even he is clearly unhappy with it when he finished. I think part of the problem was him being thrown out there for one tune without the proper time to warm up with the band and get a good feel for the stage, venue, the other musicians and the sound. I could point to plenty of Keith and Ronnie situations where those things you mention are gone too but others are basically carrying them through it. Taylor was out there all alone with little help....just sayin. It any case the crowd seemed to love it.

Could be part of the case indeed, and right, the same goes for Ron and Keith as well..and as long as the crowd loves it, it's ok of course.

The crowd reacted in an unexpectedly enthousiastic way, by someone most of them even didn't know his name. So your last sentence is trivializing the crowd's reaction. They obviously heard something special and were moved.

But you are a bit sour, because of nostalgic reasons. Remember that the timing etc. also sounded bad on the audience recording of the Glastonbury Knocking. Until we heard that Knocking in excellent audio quality and could here that everything was fine. You can check it on my channel. cool smiley

You're right, but honestly, MT could have dropped dead the day he left the Stones and his legacy was golden. I don't get bothered by latter day apologists or people who don't "get it" anymore. There's nothing going on since about 1989 Stoneswise that the casual music fan will know, or care about, in 20 years. Whether Ronnie was drunk, finally on form, or Keith was good or bad, or MT was good or bad in his comeback with them, the book was already written on the Stones. Kind of like complaining about a Bob Dylan performance in, say, 2011. Doesn't matter.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: August 2, 2015 19:56

Quote
StonesCat
Quote
kleermaker
Quote
LuxuryStones
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
LuxuryStones

Just closed my eyes and listened unbiased, twice. Tone, timing, vibrato, melodic approach. He lost it, gone with the wind, imo.

To be fair it wasn't his best performance of the tune, even he is clearly unhappy with it when he finished. I think part of the problem was him being thrown out there for one tune without the proper time to warm up with the band and get a good feel for the stage, venue, the other musicians and the sound. I could point to plenty of Keith and Ronnie situations where those things you mention are gone too but others are basically carrying them through it. Taylor was out there all alone with little help....just sayin. It any case the crowd seemed to love it.

Could be part of the case indeed, and right, the same goes for Ron and Keith as well..and as long as the crowd loves it, it's ok of course.

The crowd reacted in an unexpectedly enthousiastic way, by someone most of them even didn't know his name. So your last sentence is trivializing the crowd's reaction. They obviously heard something special and were moved.

But you are a bit sour, because of nostalgic reasons. Remember that the timing etc. also sounded bad on the audience recording of the Glastonbury Knocking. Until we heard that Knocking in excellent audio quality and could here that everything was fine. You can check it on my channel. cool smiley

You're right, but honestly, MT could have dropped dead the day he left the Stones and his legacy was golden. I don't get bothered by latter day apologists or people who don't "get it" anymore. There's nothing going on since about 1989 Stoneswise that the casual music fan will know, or care about, in 20 years. Whether Ronnie was drunk, finally on form, or Keith was good or bad, or MT was good or bad in his comeback with them, the book was already written on the Stones. Kind of like complaining about a Bob Dylan performance in, say, 2011. Doesn't matter.

well said. and indeed most books about the stones do stop in the 1980s, if not sooner.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: straycatblues73 ()
Date: August 2, 2015 21:12

Quote
matxil
Quote
Turner68

you're forgetting about the footage captured in the movie "Gimme Shelter" from Altamont where Keith literally has to stop the song and point at MT and say (in the mike, so everyone could hear) "hey man, if that cat doesn't cool it, we're not going to play". although there may be other examples, it's the only one i can recall where they actually stopped the song to lecture Taylor about noodling.

Or the one, somewhere in the 80s, while playing Satisfaction where Mick Taylor actually runs up on stage and Keith has to take off his Telecaster to slam him off stage again.

ha ha ha ha ha ha aha haha aha ahaha ahahhhaa

thanks guys for diffusing what seem to be heading in an ugly direction .

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: August 2, 2015 21:21

smileys with beer

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: shortfatfanny ()
Date: August 5, 2015 01:45

Quote
Turner68
Quote
StonesCat
Quote
kleermaker
Quote
LuxuryStones
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
LuxuryStones

Just closed my eyes and listened unbiased, twice. Tone, timing, vibrato, melodic approach. He lost it, gone with the wind, imo.

To be fair it wasn't his best performance of the tune, even he is clearly unhappy with it when he finished. I think part of the problem was him being thrown out there for one tune without the proper time to warm up with the band and get a good feel for the stage, venue, the other musicians and the sound. I could point to plenty of Keith and Ronnie situations where those things you mention are gone too but others are basically carrying them through it. Taylor was out there all alone with little help....just sayin. It any case the crowd seemed to love it.

Could be part of the case indeed, and right, the same goes for Ron and Keith as well..and as long as the crowd loves it, it's ok of course.

The crowd reacted in an unexpectedly enthousiastic way, by someone most of them even didn't know his name. So your last sentence is trivializing the crowd's reaction. They obviously heard something special and were moved.

But you are a bit sour, because of nostalgic reasons. Remember that the timing etc. also sounded bad on the audience recording of the Glastonbury Knocking. Until we heard that Knocking in excellent audio quality and could here that everything was fine. You can check it on my channel. cool smiley

You're right, but honestly, MT could have dropped dead the day he left the Stones and his legacy was golden. I don't get bothered by latter day apologists or people who don't "get it" anymore. There's nothing going on since about 1989 Stoneswise that the casual music fan will know, or care about, in 20 years. Whether Ronnie was drunk, finally on form, or Keith was good or bad, or MT was good or bad in his comeback with them, the book was already written on the Stones. Kind of like complaining about a Bob Dylan performance in, say, 2011. Doesn't matter.

well said. and indeed most books about the stones do stop in the 1980s, if not sooner.

even the Crossfire Hurricane documentary did.


Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: SuperC ()
Date: August 6, 2015 04:22

Just about when the long, slow, downhill slide started.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: August 6, 2015 20:07

Quote
StonesCat
Quote
kleermaker
Quote
LuxuryStones
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
LuxuryStones

Just closed my eyes and listened unbiased, twice. Tone, timing, vibrato, melodic approach. He lost it, gone with the wind, imo.

To be fair it wasn't his best performance of the tune, even he is clearly unhappy with it when he finished. I think part of the problem was him being thrown out there for one tune without the proper time to warm up with the band and get a good feel for the stage, venue, the other musicians and the sound. I could point to plenty of Keith and Ronnie situations where those things you mention are gone too but others are basically carrying them through it. Taylor was out there all alone with little help....just sayin. It any case the crowd seemed to love it.

Could be part of the case indeed, and right, the same goes for Ron and Keith as well..and as long as the crowd loves it, it's ok of course.

The crowd reacted in an unexpectedly enthousiastic way, by someone most of them even didn't know his name. So your last sentence is trivializing the crowd's reaction. They obviously heard something special and were moved.

But you are a bit sour, because of nostalgic reasons. Remember that the timing etc. also sounded bad on the audience recording of the Glastonbury Knocking. Until we heard that Knocking in excellent audio quality and could here that everything was fine. You can check it on my channel. cool smiley

You're right, but honestly, MT could have dropped dead the day he left the Stones and his legacy was golden. I don't get bothered by latter day apologists or people who don't "get it" anymore. There's nothing going on since about 1989 Stoneswise that the casual music fan will know, or care about, in 20 years. Whether Ronnie was drunk, finally on form, or Keith was good or bad, or MT was good or bad in his comeback with them, the book was already written on the Stones. Kind of like complaining about a Bob Dylan performance in, say, 2011. Doesn't matter.

Perhaps you are somewhat right about their recorded musical legacy, but their live performances are still delighting millions of fans worldwide and people tend to remember all these shows. Plenty of casual fans have been enjoying the shows in a way that is pretty hard to dismiss. To write the Stones or Dylan off in such a way makes me think you are the one who doesn't get it. It's all about the performances these days, they are still great entertainment and as entertainers people will likely be talking about their ability to be great ones into their 70's as much as they will be talking about their pre-1989 "legacy".

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: kleermaker ()
Date: August 7, 2015 18:23

Quote
Naturalust
Quote
StonesCat
Quote
kleermaker
Quote
LuxuryStones
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
LuxuryStones

Just closed my eyes and listened unbiased, twice. Tone, timing, vibrato, melodic approach. He lost it, gone with the wind, imo.

To be fair it wasn't his best performance of the tune, even he is clearly unhappy with it when he finished. I think part of the problem was him being thrown out there for one tune without the proper time to warm up with the band and get a good feel for the stage, venue, the other musicians and the sound. I could point to plenty of Keith and Ronnie situations where those things you mention are gone too but others are basically carrying them through it. Taylor was out there all alone with little help....just sayin. It any case the crowd seemed to love it.

Could be part of the case indeed, and right, the same goes for Ron and Keith as well..and as long as the crowd loves it, it's ok of course.

The crowd reacted in an unexpectedly enthousiastic way, by someone most of them even didn't know his name. So your last sentence is trivializing the crowd's reaction. They obviously heard something special and were moved.

But you are a bit sour, because of nostalgic reasons. Remember that the timing etc. also sounded bad on the audience recording of the Glastonbury Knocking. Until we heard that Knocking in excellent audio quality and could here that everything was fine. You can check it on my channel. cool smiley

You're right, but honestly, MT could have dropped dead the day he left the Stones and his legacy was golden. I don't get bothered by latter day apologists or people who don't "get it" anymore. There's nothing going on since about 1989 Stoneswise that the casual music fan will know, or care about, in 20 years. Whether Ronnie was drunk, finally on form, or Keith was good or bad, or MT was good or bad in his comeback with them, the book was already written on the Stones. Kind of like complaining about a Bob Dylan performance in, say, 2011. Doesn't matter.

Perhaps you are somewhat right about their recorded musical legacy, but their live performances are still delighting millions of fans worldwide and people tend to remember all these shows. Plenty of casual fans have been enjoying the shows in a way that is pretty hard to dismiss. To write the Stones or Dylan off in such a way makes me think you are the one who doesn't get it. It's all about the performances these days, they are still great entertainment and as entertainers people will likely be talking about their ability to be great ones into their 70's as much as they will be talking about their pre-1989 "legacy".

Stonescat is of course very right, and you implicitly admit it, by saying (quote):
"they are still great entertainment". Back then they weren't. It's like the difference between a concert and a show, between having an great musical experience and being entertained.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: August 7, 2015 19:02

Quote
kleermaker
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
StonesCat
Quote
kleermaker
Quote
LuxuryStones
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
LuxuryStones

Just closed my eyes and listened unbiased, twice. Tone, timing, vibrato, melodic approach. He lost it, gone with the wind, imo.

To be fair it wasn't his best performance of the tune, even he is clearly unhappy with it when he finished. I think part of the problem was him being thrown out there for one tune without the proper time to warm up with the band and get a good feel for the stage, venue, the other musicians and the sound. I could point to plenty of Keith and Ronnie situations where those things you mention are gone too but others are basically carrying them through it. Taylor was out there all alone with little help....just sayin. It any case the crowd seemed to love it.

Could be part of the case indeed, and right, the same goes for Ron and Keith as well..and as long as the crowd loves it, it's ok of course.

The crowd reacted in an unexpectedly enthousiastic way, by someone most of them even didn't know his name. So your last sentence is trivializing the crowd's reaction. They obviously heard something special and were moved.

But you are a bit sour, because of nostalgic reasons. Remember that the timing etc. also sounded bad on the audience recording of the Glastonbury Knocking. Until we heard that Knocking in excellent audio quality and could here that everything was fine. You can check it on my channel. cool smiley

You're right, but honestly, MT could have dropped dead the day he left the Stones and his legacy was golden. I don't get bothered by latter day apologists or people who don't "get it" anymore. There's nothing going on since about 1989 Stoneswise that the casual music fan will know, or care about, in 20 years. Whether Ronnie was drunk, finally on form, or Keith was good or bad, or MT was good or bad in his comeback with them, the book was already written on the Stones. Kind of like complaining about a Bob Dylan performance in, say, 2011. Doesn't matter.

Perhaps you are somewhat right about their recorded musical legacy, but their live performances are still delighting millions of fans worldwide and people tend to remember all these shows. Plenty of casual fans have been enjoying the shows in a way that is pretty hard to dismiss. To write the Stones or Dylan off in such a way makes me think you are the one who doesn't get it. It's all about the performances these days, they are still great entertainment and as entertainers people will likely be talking about their ability to be great ones into their 70's as much as they will be talking about their pre-1989 "legacy".

Stonescat is of course very right, and you implicitly admit it, by saying (quote):
"they are still great entertainment". Back then they weren't. It's like the difference between a concert and a show, between having an great musical experience and being entertained.

Huh? I think you are cutting straws a bit here kleerie. A great live musical experience is always hugely entertaining. No doubt the concert experiences of old were more purely focused on the music and the entertainment value of current large shows may rely on other factors...but shows like the Fonda basically strip all that away and prove they are still able to entertain without the frills they present in a large concert environment.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: August 7, 2015 19:16

Quote
Naturalust
Quote
kleermaker
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
StonesCat
Quote
kleermaker
Quote
LuxuryStones
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
LuxuryStones

Just closed my eyes and listened unbiased, twice. Tone, timing, vibrato, melodic approach. He lost it, gone with the wind, imo.

To be fair it wasn't his best performance of the tune, even he is clearly unhappy with it when he finished. I think part of the problem was him being thrown out there for one tune without the proper time to warm up with the band and get a good feel for the stage, venue, the other musicians and the sound. I could point to plenty of Keith and Ronnie situations where those things you mention are gone too but others are basically carrying them through it. Taylor was out there all alone with little help....just sayin. It any case the crowd seemed to love it.

Could be part of the case indeed, and right, the same goes for Ron and Keith as well..and as long as the crowd loves it, it's ok of course.

The crowd reacted in an unexpectedly enthousiastic way, by someone most of them even didn't know his name. So your last sentence is trivializing the crowd's reaction. They obviously heard something special and were moved.

But you are a bit sour, because of nostalgic reasons. Remember that the timing etc. also sounded bad on the audience recording of the Glastonbury Knocking. Until we heard that Knocking in excellent audio quality and could here that everything was fine. You can check it on my channel. cool smiley

You're right, but honestly, MT could have dropped dead the day he left the Stones and his legacy was golden. I don't get bothered by latter day apologists or people who don't "get it" anymore. There's nothing going on since about 1989 Stoneswise that the casual music fan will know, or care about, in 20 years. Whether Ronnie was drunk, finally on form, or Keith was good or bad, or MT was good or bad in his comeback with them, the book was already written on the Stones. Kind of like complaining about a Bob Dylan performance in, say, 2011. Doesn't matter.

Perhaps you are somewhat right about their recorded musical legacy, but their live performances are still delighting millions of fans worldwide and people tend to remember all these shows. Plenty of casual fans have been enjoying the shows in a way that is pretty hard to dismiss. To write the Stones or Dylan off in such a way makes me think you are the one who doesn't get it. It's all about the performances these days, they are still great entertainment and as entertainers people will likely be talking about their ability to be great ones into their 70's as much as they will be talking about their pre-1989 "legacy".

Stonescat is of course very right, and you implicitly admit it, by saying (quote):
"they are still great entertainment". Back then they weren't. It's like the difference between a concert and a show, between having an great musical experience and being entertained.

Huh? I think you are cutting straws a bit here kleerie. A great live musical experience is always hugely entertaining. No doubt the concert experiences of old were more purely focused on the music and the entertainment value of current large shows may rely on other factors...but shows like the Fonda basically strip all that away and prove they are still able to entertain without the frills they present in a large concert environment.

his point is that now it's just entertainment, but that in the past it used to be about much more than that - not least of which, real musical creativity and innovation.

as much as it pains me, i agree with the esteemed mr. kleermaker.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: kleermaker ()
Date: August 7, 2015 20:43

Quote
Naturalust
Quote
kleermaker
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
StonesCat
Quote
kleermaker
Quote
LuxuryStones
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
LuxuryStones

Just closed my eyes and listened unbiased, twice. Tone, timing, vibrato, melodic approach. He lost it, gone with the wind, imo.

To be fair it wasn't his best performance of the tune, even he is clearly unhappy with it when he finished. I think part of the problem was him being thrown out there for one tune without the proper time to warm up with the band and get a good feel for the stage, venue, the other musicians and the sound. I could point to plenty of Keith and Ronnie situations where those things you mention are gone too but others are basically carrying them through it. Taylor was out there all alone with little help....just sayin. It any case the crowd seemed to love it.

Could be part of the case indeed, and right, the same goes for Ron and Keith as well..and as long as the crowd loves it, it's ok of course.

The crowd reacted in an unexpectedly enthousiastic way, by someone most of them even didn't know his name. So your last sentence is trivializing the crowd's reaction. They obviously heard something special and were moved.

But you are a bit sour, because of nostalgic reasons. Remember that the timing etc. also sounded bad on the audience recording of the Glastonbury Knocking. Until we heard that Knocking in excellent audio quality and could here that everything was fine. You can check it on my channel. cool smiley

You're right, but honestly, MT could have dropped dead the day he left the Stones and his legacy was golden. I don't get bothered by latter day apologists or people who don't "get it" anymore. There's nothing going on since about 1989 Stoneswise that the casual music fan will know, or care about, in 20 years. Whether Ronnie was drunk, finally on form, or Keith was good or bad, or MT was good or bad in his comeback with them, the book was already written on the Stones. Kind of like complaining about a Bob Dylan performance in, say, 2011. Doesn't matter.

Perhaps you are somewhat right about their recorded musical legacy, but their live performances are still delighting millions of fans worldwide and people tend to remember all these shows. Plenty of casual fans have been enjoying the shows in a way that is pretty hard to dismiss. To write the Stones or Dylan off in such a way makes me think you are the one who doesn't get it. It's all about the performances these days, they are still great entertainment and as entertainers people will likely be talking about their ability to be great ones into their 70's as much as they will be talking about their pre-1989 "legacy".

Stonescat is of course very right, and you implicitly admit it, by saying (quote):
"they are still great entertainment". Back then they weren't. It's like the difference between a concert and a show, between having an great musical experience and being entertained.

Huh? I think you are cutting straws a bit here kleerie. A great live musical experience is always hugely entertaining. No doubt the concert experiences of old were more purely focused on the music and the entertainment value of current large shows may rely on other factors...but shows like the Fonda basically strip all that away and prove they are still able to entertain without the frills they present in a large concert environment.

They sounded like a cover band to me during that Fonda show (and beware, it is not the rule, but the exception to it, playing in such an environment). Jagger even imitating Johnny Cash on Dead Flowers. Very entertaining indeed. But the concert I attended in 1973 was everything but entertaining. It was still the real thing, for the last time too.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Olly ()
Date: August 7, 2015 20:47

Quote
kleermaker

They sounded like a cover band to me during that Fonda show (and beware, it is not the rule, but the exception to it, playing in such an environment). Jagger even imitating Johnny Cash on Dead Flowers. Very entertaining indeed. But the concert I attended in 1973 was everything but entertaining. It was still the real thing, for the last time too.


kleermaker, I have noticed that you refer to finality a lot in your posts.

Can you explain why you view 1973 as 'the last time' the Stones were or delivered 'the real thing'?

.....

Olly.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: August 7, 2015 21:07

Quote
kleermaker
They sounded like a cover band to me during that Fonda show (and beware, it is not the rule, but the exception to it, playing in such an environment). Jagger even imitating Johnny Cash on Dead Flowers. Very entertaining indeed. But the concert I attended in 1973 was everything but entertaining. It was still the real thing, for the last time too.

Johnny Cash? lmfao You really think so? I don't understand how the real thing could be anything but entertaining but I guess you have a very specific definition of what entertainment is and musicians playing mind blowing live music doesn't fit that definition. Perhaps it was more of a religious experience for you..smoking smiley

I can however understand that someone who saw a 1973 show might be a little disappointed seeing a modern day show where the songs are basically the same but not as fresh and dangerous as they were when they were new, fresh and had some serious Taylor musicianship on them.

If the Fonda show holds no appeal for you it's pretty clear the modern Stones are not your thing, that is about as good as I expect they will ever be these days.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: kleermaker ()
Date: August 7, 2015 21:23

Quote
Naturalust
Quote
kleermaker
They sounded like a cover band to me during that Fonda show (and beware, it is not the rule, but the exception to it, playing in such an environment). Jagger even imitating Johnny Cash on Dead Flowers. Very entertaining indeed. But the concert I attended in 1973 was everything but entertaining. It was still the real thing, for the last time too.

Johnny Cash? lmfao You really think so? I don't understand how the real thing could be anything but entertaining but I guess you have a very specific definition of what entertainment is and musicians playing mind blowing live music doesn't fit that definition. Perhaps it was more of a religious experience for you..smoking smiley

I can however understand that someone who saw a 1973 show might be a little disappointed seeing a modern day show where the songs are basically the same but not as fresh and dangerous as they were when they were new, fresh and had some serious Taylor musicianship on them.

If the Fonda show holds no appeal for you it's pretty clear the modern Stones are not your thing, that is about as good as I expect they will ever be these days.

When you attend let's say one of the great Mozart operas or a Mahler symphony, do you call that a concert or entertainment?

I'll tell you something. I saw them in 1973 and in 1976. The first time it was a concert I attended. No strange things, no tricks, no phalluses or Jagger acting like an acrobat, hanging on a rope and flying through the air, no giggling with one of the guitarists, no smoking on stage (except the music itself), no air guitar, but real guitar playing. Just the concert, conveying all the emotions their music contains. The last time that happened was in 1973.

So "a little bit disappointed" in 1976 is just an understatement.

You younger people grew up with the shows, with the entourage, with the stadium shows, with the fireworks, in one word: with the entertainment.

I'm sorry to say, but the real thing ended in 1973. All things after that: just entertainment and fun. But musically it was over and out.

(This is also a reply to Olly's question)

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: August 7, 2015 21:30

Quote
kleermaker
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
kleermaker
They sounded like a cover band to me during that Fonda show (and beware, it is not the rule, but the exception to it, playing in such an environment). Jagger even imitating Johnny Cash on Dead Flowers. Very entertaining indeed. But the concert I attended in 1973 was everything but entertaining. It was still the real thing, for the last time too.

Johnny Cash? lmfao You really think so? I don't understand how the real thing could be anything but entertaining but I guess you have a very specific definition of what entertainment is and musicians playing mind blowing live music doesn't fit that definition. Perhaps it was more of a religious experience for you..smoking smiley

I can however understand that someone who saw a 1973 show might be a little disappointed seeing a modern day show where the songs are basically the same but not as fresh and dangerous as they were when they were new, fresh and had some serious Taylor musicianship on them.

If the Fonda show holds no appeal for you it's pretty clear the modern Stones are not your thing, that is about as good as I expect they will ever be these days.

When you attend let's say one of the great Mozart operas or a Mahler symphony, do you call that a concert or entertainment?

I'll tell you something. I saw them in 1973 and in 1976. The first time it was a concert I attended. No strange things, no tricks, no phalluses or Jagger acting like an acrobat, hanging on a rope and flying through the air, no giggling with one of the guitarists, no smoking on stage (except the music itself), no air guitar, but real guitar playing. Just the concert, conveying all the emotions their music contains. The last time that happened was in 1973.

So "a little bit disappointed" in 1976 is just an understatement.

You younger people grew up with the shows, with the entourage, with the stadium shows, with the fireworks, in one word: with the entertainment.

I'm sorry to say, but the real thing ended in 1973. All things after that: just entertainment and fun. But musically it was over and out.

(This is also a reply to Olly's question)

you're off by a year. the real thing ended in 1972. GHS and 1973 were a mighty fall from Exile and 72.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: kleermaker ()
Date: August 7, 2015 21:36

Quote
Turner68
Quote
kleermaker
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
kleermaker
They sounded like a cover band to me during that Fonda show (and beware, it is not the rule, but the exception to it, playing in such an environment). Jagger even imitating Johnny Cash on Dead Flowers. Very entertaining indeed. But the concert I attended in 1973 was everything but entertaining. It was still the real thing, for the last time too.

Johnny Cash? lmfao You really think so? I don't understand how the real thing could be anything but entertaining but I guess you have a very specific definition of what entertainment is and musicians playing mind blowing live music doesn't fit that definition. Perhaps it was more of a religious experience for you..smoking smiley

I can however understand that someone who saw a 1973 show might be a little disappointed seeing a modern day show where the songs are basically the same but not as fresh and dangerous as they were when they were new, fresh and had some serious Taylor musicianship on them.

If the Fonda show holds no appeal for you it's pretty clear the modern Stones are not your thing, that is about as good as I expect they will ever be these days.

When you attend let's say one of the great Mozart operas or a Mahler symphony, do you call that a concert or entertainment?

I'll tell you something. I saw them in 1973 and in 1976. The first time it was a concert I attended. No strange things, no tricks, no phalluses or Jagger acting like an acrobat, hanging on a rope and flying through the air, no giggling with one of the guitarists, no smoking on stage (except the music itself), no air guitar, but real guitar playing. Just the concert, conveying all the emotions their music contains. The last time that happened was in 1973.

So "a little bit disappointed" in 1976 is just an understatement.

You younger people grew up with the shows, with the entourage, with the stadium shows, with the fireworks, in one word: with the entertainment.

I'm sorry to say, but the real thing ended in 1973. All things after that: just entertainment and fun. But musically it was over and out.

(This is also a reply to Olly's question)

you're off by a year. the real thing ended in 1972. GHS and 1973 were a mighty fall from Exile and 72.

That is a matter of taste. But we were talking about the difference between concert and show/musical experience and entertainment.

You might, contrary to me, dislike GHS and the 1973 tours, but GHS is (like for instance Some Girls) no fun album and the 1973 concerts were no entertainment.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Olly ()
Date: August 7, 2015 21:44

Quote
kleermaker

When you attend let's say one of the great Mozart operas or a Mahler symphony, do you call that a concert or entertainment?

I'll tell you something. I saw them in 1973 and in 1976. The first time it was a concert I attended. No strange things, no tricks, no phalluses or Jagger acting like an acrobat, hanging on a rope and flying through the air, no giggling with one of the guitarists, no smoking on stage (except the music itself), no air guitar, but real guitar playing. Just the concert, conveying all the emotions their music contains. The last time that happened was in 1973.

So "a little bit disappointed" in 1976 is just an understatement.

You younger people grew up with the shows, with the entourage, with the stadium shows, with the fireworks, in one word: with the entertainment.

I'm sorry to say, but the real thing ended in 1973. All things after that: just entertainment and fun. But musically it was over and out.

(This is also a reply to Olly's question)


Thought-provoking comments.

I've said it before, but the classical concert analogy is a false one.

I find myself questioning the very definitions of 'entertainment' and 'concert' and find them too broad to either include or exclude what you suggest.

You seem dismayed at the thought of 'entertainment', as if you want a Stones show to be the opposite, or to be something it is not, such as an opera or a symphony.

I also think you erroneously associate the end of Taylor's tenure with the Stones with the end of the Stones.

.....

Olly.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: HMS ()
Date: August 7, 2015 22:03

The end of Taylor´s tenure with the Stones was not the end of the Stones but the end of Taylor. smoking smiley

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Olly ()
Date: August 7, 2015 22:14

Quote
HMS
The end of Taylor´s tenure with the Stones was not the end of the Stones but the end of Taylor. smoking smiley


This is sure to have many...

...hammering on [their] table, blushing with rage and anger.

.....

Olly.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: StonesCat ()
Date: August 7, 2015 22:32

Quote
Olly
Quote
HMS
The end of Taylor´s tenure with the Stones was not the end of the Stones but the end of Taylor. smoking smiley


This is sure to have many...

...hammering on [their] table, blushing with rage and anger.


Obviously trying way too hard to get a rise again and again, so I doubt it.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: August 7, 2015 22:44

Quote
kleermaker

When you attend let's say one of the great Mozart operas or a Mahler symphony, do you call that a concert or entertainment?

I'll tell you something. I saw them in 1973 and in 1976. The first time it was a concert I attended. No strange things, no tricks, no phalluses or Jagger acting like an acrobat, hanging on a rope and flying through the air, no giggling with one of the guitarists, no smoking on stage (except the music itself), no air guitar, but real guitar playing. Just the concert, conveying all the emotions their music contains. The last time that happened was in 1973.

So "a little bit disappointed" in 1976 is just an understatement.

You younger people grew up with the shows, with the entourage, with the stadium shows, with the fireworks, in one word: with the entertainment.

I'm sorry to say, but the real thing ended in 1973. All things after that: just entertainment and fun. But musically it was over and out.

(This is also a reply to Olly's question)

Personally I consider good musical experiences entertainment. I think it's a semantics thing here where you obviously consider other elements of a band playing that are not purely musical as "entertainment". Fair enough.

I've been entertained by excellent bar bands who basically just stand there and rip on their instruments and I've been entertained at Pink Floyd shows where the lasers are a big part of the show. The best experiences are where the other stuff enhances the experience by engaging other senses and doesn't detract from the music in any way, just adds to it. The musicians are still playing their instruments and not really relying on the other stuff to impress but concentrating on their role in the show...playing to the best of their ability.

In any case, all big acts these days use "entertainment" stuff to enhance the show when they play big venues, it's just part of the experience. I guess you would be disappointed at any modern rock concert these days. But like you I tend to concentrate of the music and if it's not happening all the additional props and pyro in the world can't float my boat.

There is no way a band like the Stones wasn't going to grow with the industry and include more "entertainment" with their shows, it was a natural progression, might as well complain that everyone isn't using land lines and getting around with horse and buggy. If Taylor was still playing with them full time throughout the whole journey I'm sure they would be doing the same type things they are today and what they did in 1976.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: kleermaker ()
Date: August 7, 2015 23:45

Quote
Naturalust
Quote
kleermaker

When you attend let's say one of the great Mozart operas or a Mahler symphony, do you call that a concert or entertainment?

I'll tell you something. I saw them in 1973 and in 1976. The first time it was a concert I attended. No strange things, no tricks, no phalluses or Jagger acting like an acrobat, hanging on a rope and flying through the air, no giggling with one of the guitarists, no smoking on stage (except the music itself), no air guitar, but real guitar playing. Just the concert, conveying all the emotions their music contains. The last time that happened was in 1973.

So "a little bit disappointed" in 1976 is just an understatement.

You younger people grew up with the shows, with the entourage, with the stadium shows, with the fireworks, in one word: with the entertainment.

I'm sorry to say, but the real thing ended in 1973. All things after that: just entertainment and fun. But musically it was over and out.

(This is also a reply to Olly's question)

Personally I consider good musical experiences entertainment. I think it's a semantics thing here where you obviously consider other elements of a band playing that are not purely musical as "entertainment". Fair enough.

I've been entertained by excellent bar bands who basically just stand there and rip on their instruments and I've been entertained at Pink Floyd shows where the lasers are a big part of the show. The best experiences are where the other stuff enhances the experience by engaging other senses and doesn't detract from the music in any way, just adds to it. The musicians are still playing their instruments and not really relying on the other stuff to impress but concentrating on their role in the show...playing to the best of their ability.

In any case, all big acts these days use "entertainment" stuff to enhance the show when they play big venues, it's just part of the experience. I guess you would be disappointed at any modern rock concert these days. But like you I tend to concentrate of the music and if it's not happening all the additional props and pyro in the world can't float my boat.

There is no way a band like the Stones wasn't going to grow with the industry and include more "entertainment" with their shows, it was a natural progression, might as well complain that everyone isn't using land lines and getting around with horse and buggy. If Taylor was still playing with them full time throughout the whole journey I'm sure they would be doing the same type things they are today and what they did in 1976.

Yeah, in the end everything in life is entertainment.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: August 8, 2015 00:24

Quote
kleermaker
Yeah, in the end everything in life is entertainment.

No need to get philosophical on us kleerie. smoking smiley

Curious if you have enjoyed any other large venue concerts since 1976?

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Olly ()
Date: August 8, 2015 00:30

Quote
Naturalust
Quote
kleermaker
Yeah, in the end everything in life is entertainment.

No need to get philosophical on us kleerie. smoking smiley

Curious if you have enjoyed any other large venue concerts since 1976?


I'd be doubtful; the Stones have barely been worthy of acknowledgement since Taylor left, remember...

.....

Olly.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: kleermaker ()
Date: August 8, 2015 00:45

I was also at a Rolling Stones stadium concert in 1982 in Rotterdam, but guess what: I even didn't find it entertaining. smiling smiley

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: August 8, 2015 00:46

Quote
Olly
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
kleermaker
Yeah, in the end everything in life is entertainment.

No need to get philosophical on us kleerie. smoking smiley

Curious if you have enjoyed any other large venue concerts since 1976?


I'd be doubtful; the Stones have barely been worthy of acknowledgement since Taylor left, remember...

Exactly why I'm asking Olly, if it was mostly a Taylor thing I could understand to some extent but if it is response to what all large rock concerts became in the 70's that's another thing all together.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Olly ()
Date: August 8, 2015 01:47

Quote
Naturalust

Exactly why I'm asking Olly, if it was mostly a Taylor thing I could understand to some extent but if it is response to what all large rock concerts became in the 70's that's another thing all together.


I misread and thought you were asking about post-1976 Stones concerts.

.....

Olly.

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: His Majesty ()
Date: August 12, 2015 00:20

Quote
kleermaker


By Sympathy For The D, yes indeed. But our old friend His Majesty has once convincingly argued that Brian Jones had a substantial participation in BB and that BB and LIB are absolutely not on the same line in that respect. His argument is convincingly sustained by N. Zentgraf's info:

Line-up ‘Sympathy For The Devil’: MJ (voc)/KR (gtr, bass, bvoc)/BJ (bvoc)/BW
(maracas, bvoc)/CW (dr, bvoc)/Nicky Hopkins (p, bvoc)/Anita Pallenberg
(bvoc)/Marianne Faithfull (bvoc)/Rocky Dijon (congas)
Line-up ‘No Expectations’: MJ (voc)/KR (gtr)/BJ (gtr)/BW (bass)/CW (perc)/
Nicky Hopkins (p)
Line-up ‘Dear Doctor’: MJ (voc, tamb)/KR (gtr, bvoc)/BW (bass)/BJ (harm)/
CW (dr)/Nicky Hopkins (tack p)/Dave Mason (gtr)
Line-up ‘Parachute Woman’: MJ (voc, harm)/KR (gtr)/BW (bass)/CW (dr)/BJ (harm)
Line-up ‘Jig-Saw Puzzle’: MJ (voc)/KR (gtr)/BJ (mellotron)/BW (bass, synth)/
CW (dr)/Nicky Hopkins (p)
Line-up ‘Street Fighting Man’: MJ (voc)/KR (gtr, bass)/BJ (sitar, tamboura)/
CW (dr)/Nicky Hopkins (p)/Dave Mason (shehnai, bass dr)
Line-up ‘Prodigal Son’: MJ (voc)/KR (gtr)/BJ (harm)/CW (dr)
Line-up ‘Stray Cat Blues’: MJ (voc)/KR (gtr)/BJ (mellotron)/BW (bass)/
CW (dr)/Nicky Hopkins (p)/Rocky Dijon (congas)
Line-up ‘Factory Girl’: MJ (voc)/KR (gtr)/BW (bass)/CW (perc)/Rocky Dijon
(congas)/Dave Mason (mandolin)/Rick Grech (fiddle)
Line-up ‘Salt Of The Earth’: MJ (voc)/KR (gtr, voc)/BW (bass)/CW (dr)/Nicky
Hopkins (p)/Watts Street Gospel Choir (bvoc)

So quite some imput from Brain on BB, notably on the most beautiful song of the album, No Expectations (btw: one of MT's favourite songs, and rightly so, thanks to BJ, for a big part).

smoking smiley

Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: August 12, 2015 00:26

It's great to see this Kleermaker.

There is a strange phenomena of "creeping credit" among stones fans where Brian seems to get less and less credit and others (ahem) more and more.

One of the worst examples was a couple months ago a knowledgeable poster categorized YCAGWYW (which Brian plays on) as a Taylor song (Taylor of course doesn't play on it) and got upset when I called him on it.

I think BB should be considered an album with Brian in the band and contributing and accorded as much or more credit than say Wyman.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-08-12 00:27 by Turner68.

Goto Page: PreviousFirst...158159160161162163164165166167168...LastNext
Current Page: 163 of 307


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1965
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home