Quote
Redhotcarpet
I love this song and I love the album iorr. Sleazy 70s Jagger. I love that Jagger. The best Jagger there ever was.

Yes, although I also like 1980 She's So Cold Jagger...if you was a bugey, a sweet sweet bugey....

Good song on one of their worst albums.

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
Witness

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
Witness
Too late now, Silver Dagger, afterwards to quote your post on a smartphone:

Consult the thread, where the opening post tried to introduce a discussion of the 'filler' concept. In a post in that thread, stonehearted indicated most adequately that the first album would have one intended filler. By motive, I then agreed that "Now I've Got a Witness" so far, formally, may be seen as a filler. However, with a view to its good effect, I disagreed on the whole.

Even with the greatest artists there is filler as well as killer. And of course let's not forget the killer diller. ><

I have to ask you then, Silver Dagger: What is a "filler" / 'filler' in your understanding?

The two songs that annoy me the most, are "Melody" and "Tops". In your use of concepts, should I then condemn those two songs as "fillers"? Then there are a couple of songs that I probably think are weaker, but annoy me less. Does that fact make them "fillers" to me in your use of the language?

Added in this edit: And if I was not outspoken enough, I myself do not use the language that way. To do that, is in my outlook cheap and lazy language.

A second much later edit: One misplaced "?" cleared away.

Filler is anything which to your own ears is below standard songwriting. You've mentioned two which you consider to be filler. That is what filler is. I'm just saying that not everything that the Stones put out was up to their own high standards.

Well, if you really have read my posts here, you ought to have understood that I myself do disagree in such an unprincipled use of the language, saying this is what a 'filler' is.

I think it's a weak composed song nothing is happening even Charlies drumming is a going nowhere and where is Nicky some standard piano licks ........most of the time I skipped it playing IORR..................
Actually I find it the most bad song on "good" album..............

__________________________

Quote
Ket
have to say it's one of their worst ever, sappy and souless.

Nope. That, their worst ever, is strictly reserved for the one and only Streets Of Shit. Er, I mean Love. Streets Of Love.

Quote
24FPS
Just listened to the whole album the other day, the Virgin remastered version, driving around.

Ahhhh, a proper Stones fan. The Virgins are supreme. Excellent taste.

Not their best work but even for cruise control it's pretty good. And the timing in some places... genius. The video is hilarious because Mick's voice sounds like he's leering... and he does it in the video even though he's singing live to the film.

In fact, the video version is better than the LP version.

Quote
Witness

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
Witness

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
Witness
Too late now, Silver Dagger, afterwards to quote your post on a smartphone:

Consult the thread, where the opening post tried to introduce a discussion of the 'filler' concept. In a post in that thread, stonehearted indicated most adequately that the first album would have one intended filler. By motive, I then agreed that "Now I've Got a Witness" so far, formally, may be seen as a filler. However, with a view to its good effect, I disagreed on the whole.

Even with the greatest artists there is filler as well as killer. And of course let's not forget the killer diller. ><

I have to ask you then, Silver Dagger: What is a "filler" / 'filler' in your understanding?

The two songs that annoy me the most, are "Melody" and "Tops". In your use of concepts, should I then condemn those two songs as "fillers"? Then there are a couple of songs that I probably think are weaker, but annoy me less. Does that fact make them "fillers" to me in your use of the language?

Added in this edit: And if I was not outspoken enough, I myself do not use the language that way. To do that, is in my outlook cheap and lazy language.

A second much later edit: One misplaced "?" cleared away.

Filler is anything which to your own ears is below standard songwriting. You've mentioned two which you consider to be filler. That is what filler is. I'm just saying that not everything that the Stones put out was up to their own high standards.

Well, if you really have read my posts here, you ought to have understood that I myself do disagree in such an unprincipled use of the language, saying this is what a 'filler' is.

Who cares? It's a free world man. Get over it.

If there is a 'filler' on IORR-album, that would be 'Short and Curlies'....

2 1 2 0

READING ALL THIS HERE ON THE FIRST THREE PAGES I JUST CAN SAY AS TO ANY OTHER

TRACK TAKLK BEFORE:

A SONG IS NOTHING YOU CAN HAVE A "OPINION" ABOUT.
So changing opions here is needless like a flu.

A SONG IS EVERYTHING YOU CAN HAVE FEELINGS about.

So I concentrate at "Track Talk" on those who instead of argueing around such a subjective thing like a song just simply express their feelings about them.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Ket
have to say it's one of their worst ever, sappy and souless.

Nope. That, their worst ever, is strictly reserved for the one and only Streets Of Shit. Er, I mean Love. Streets Of Love.

that is another bad one I would say they are both shite

Quote
Ket

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Ket
have to say it's one of their worst ever, sappy and souless.

Nope. That, their worst ever, is strictly reserved for the one and only Streets Of Shit. Er, I mean Love. Streets Of Love.

that is another bad one I would say they are both shite

That's a bit much. Saying SOL and TTNG are equally bad? NO WAY. That is just... wrong!!!!!!

TTNG is equal to Wild Horses in this instance.

Quote
nightskyman

Quote
Title5Take1
Posted before on this forum on another Goodbye thread:

From the book JAGGER: REBEL, ROCK STAR, RAMBLER, ROGUE by Marc Spitz:

CARLY SIMON: "We wrote a song together that became a song on the Stones' next album called TILL THE NEXT GOODBYE. I thought that that was going to be a joint venture, but I'd never heard from Mick about how he'd like me to share the royalties. It's the very least I can do to thank Mick for turning what could of been an ordinary record [YOU'RE SO VAIN on which Mick sang backing vocals] into an iconic huge song for me over the years—so, my god, let him take all of my songs and say that he wrote them."

Come to think of it the song does sound a bit like one of Carly Simon's.

Yes, however, this is the first I heard of her claim. Interesting she credits
Mick with much of the success of "your so vain". His role was just backing vocals
but I suppose this increased airplay when first released. Certainly her most
successful tune.

Quote
Ket

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Ket
have to say it's one of their worst ever, sappy and souless.

Nope. That, their worst ever, is strictly reserved for the one and only Streets Of Shit. Er, I mean Love. Streets Of Love.

that is another bad one I would say they are both shite

Yeah Ket. And here is one for you: That´s all one´s person´s fault - Mick Taylor - the crappiest guitar player the world has ever seen.

(Just to let you feel how it is to read a totally wrong, dull opinion)

Quote
swimtothemoon

Quote
nightskyman

Quote
Title5Take1
Posted before on this forum on another Goodbye thread:

From the book JAGGER: REBEL, ROCK STAR, RAMBLER, ROGUE by Marc Spitz:

CARLY SIMON: "We wrote a song together that became a song on the Stones' next album called TILL THE NEXT GOODBYE. I thought that that was going to be a joint venture, but I'd never heard from Mick about how he'd like me to share the royalties. It's the very least I can do to thank Mick for turning what could of been an ordinary record [YOU'RE SO VAIN on which Mick sang backing vocals] into an iconic huge song for me over the years—so, my god, let him take all of my songs and say that he wrote them."

Come to think of it the song does sound a bit like one of Carly Simon's.

Yes, however, this is the first I heard of her claim. Interesting she credits
Mick with much of the success of "your so vain". His role was just backing vocals
but I suppose this increased airplay when first released. Certainly her most
successful tune.

From the same book (believe it or don't), Spitz: "She and Mick worked on another song in the studio that night, fooling around at the piano between takes, and nearly came up with another duet." And, regarding Mick's backing vocals on YOU'RE SO VAIN, Carly Simon says, "His part is fantastic. It's iconic. It brings the record over the line." And the author adds, "Simon was so inspired by Mick's contribution that she later rerecorded her lead vocals."

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
Witness

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
Witness

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
Witness
Too late now, Silver Dagger, afterwards to quote your post on a smartphone:

Consult the thread, where the opening post tried to introduce a discussion of the 'filler' concept. In a post in that thread, stonehearted indicated most adequately that the first album would have one intended filler. By motive, I then agreed that "Now I've Got a Witness" so far, formally, may be seen as a filler. However, with a view to its good effect, I disagreed on the whole.

Even with the greatest artists there is filler as well as killer. And of course let's not forget the killer diller. ><

I have to ask you then, Silver Dagger: What is a "filler" / 'filler' in your understanding?

The two songs that annoy me the most, are "Melody" and "Tops". In your use of concepts, should I then condemn those two songs as "fillers"? Then there are a couple of songs that I probably think are weaker, but annoy me less. Does that fact make them "fillers" to me in your use of the language?

Added in this edit: And if I was not outspoken enough, I myself do not use the language that way. To do that, is in my outlook cheap and lazy language.

A second much later edit: One misplaced "?" cleared away.

Filler is anything which to your own ears is below standard songwriting. You've mentioned two which you consider to be filler. That is what filler is. I'm just saying that not everything that the Stones put out was up to their own high standards.

Well, if you really have read my posts here, you ought to have understood that I myself do disagree in such an unprincipled use of the language, saying this is what a 'filler' is.

Who cares? It's a free world man. Get over it.

Very well. In that free world I state as my view that the only intended Stones filler did not end up that way. So Stones never had a filler. And my saying so, should not concern you either in that allegedly free world.

memo from turner:

i have too much respect for my fellow IORRians to believe that anyone posting that they like this song has actually listened to it.

-- from the desk of Turner

Quote
Witness

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
Witness

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
Witness

Quote
Silver Dagger

Quote
Witness
Too late now, Silver Dagger, afterwards to quote your post on a smartphone:

Consult the thread, where the opening post tried to introduce a discussion of the 'filler' concept. In a post in that thread, stonehearted indicated most adequately that the first album would have one intended filler. By motive, I then agreed that "Now I've Got a Witness" so far, formally, may be seen as a filler. However, with a view to its good effect, I disagreed on the whole.

Even with the greatest artists there is filler as well as killer. And of course let's not forget the killer diller. ><

I have to ask you then, Silver Dagger: What is a "filler" / 'filler' in your understanding?

The two songs that annoy me the most, are "Melody" and "Tops". In your use of concepts, should I then condemn those two songs as "fillers"? Then there are a couple of songs that I probably think are weaker, but annoy me less. Does that fact make them "fillers" to me in your use of the language?

Added in this edit: And if I was not outspoken enough, I myself do not use the language that way. To do that, is in my outlook cheap and lazy language.

A second much later edit: One misplaced "?" cleared away.

Filler is anything which to your own ears is below standard songwriting. You've mentioned two which you consider to be filler. That is what filler is. I'm just saying that not everything that the Stones put out was up to their own high standards.

Well, if you really have read my posts here, you ought to have understood that I myself do disagree in such an unprincipled use of the language, saying this is what a 'filler' is.

Who cares? It's a free world man. Get over it.

Very well. In that free world I state as my view that the only intended Stones filler did not end up that way. So Stones never had a filler. And my saying so, should not concern you either in that allegedly free world.

D'you know what Witness? It absolutely doesn't and I can sleep well at night. Have a nice day.

Quote
Turner68
memo from turner:

i have too much respect for my fellow IORRians to believe that anyone posting that they like this song has actually listened to it.

-- from the desk of Turner

WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?? -
YOURS IS THE MOST ARROGANT POST I READ SINCE 12 YEARS BEING IN IORR.

Quote
Tops
Good song on one of their worst albums.

Hmmmm. Let's see.

DIRTY WORK
THEIR SATANIC MAJESTIES REQUEST
BETWEEN THE BUTTONS


It's not on one of their worst albums since those three are their worst albums.

Quote
caschimann

Quote
Turner68
memo from turner:

i have too much respect for my fellow IORRians to believe that anyone posting that they like this song has actually listened to it.

-- from the desk of Turner

WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?? -
YOURS IS THE MOST ARROGANT POST I READ SINCE 12 YEARS BEING IN IORR.

Relax. It's funny!

Quote
Turner68
memo from turner:

i have too much respect for my fellow IORRians to believe that anyone posting that they like this song has actually listened to it.

-- from the desk of Turner

your post is filler

ALways been a big fan of Till the Next Goodbye. Great song.

Isn't that the one Mick stole from Carly Simon?

Quote
StonesCat
Not a huge, huge fan but after seeing it (IIRC) in the Sweet Summer Sun close, I appreciated it more. Got a glimmer at the rehearsals last year, would have been interesting.

Can you please explain what you are referencing in this post?

IIRC?

And this song was rehearsed somewhere??

Quote
bitusa2012
Nice enough track I guess. But like the rest of the album, has all awful dull sound to it. There is just no snap to the record, production wise, just too sterile and muted.

GOD yes!

This album sounds like it was recorded under a blanket! Can never get any SOUND out of it. I can't believe this is so rarely pointed out.

What on earth causes this album to sound so muffled/flat?
I would seriously like a technical explanation if anyone can offer help.

It is probably the album most in need of a SUBSTANTIAL, RADICAL remastering.

Is there actually a version that sounds 'crisp' or 'defined'?
I am convinced this album would have a much better reputation if the quality of sound were better.

As soon as the drums on "If You Can't Rock Me" kick in I am frustrated. Probably the instrument that suffers the most from WHATEVER the engineers were doing (or not!) in Munich.

J

Quote
JMARKO

Quote
StonesCat
Not a huge, huge fan but after seeing it (IIRC) in the Sweet Summer Sun close, I appreciated it more. Got a glimmer at the rehearsals last year, would have been interesting.

Can you please explain what you are referencing in this post?

IIRC?

And this song was rehearsed somewhere??

Yeah... what is that?

Quote
JMARKO
This album sounds like it was recorded under a blanket! Can never get any SOUND out of it. I can't believe this is so rarely pointed out.

Yeah, the production is horrible on IORR. It sounds like they muffled everything with that netting they were wearing on the Goat's Head Soup pictures. If it only had the stunning crystal clear sound of Black and Blue (the very next album!), I'm sure people would rate it higher.

EDIT: I was thinking of some other standouts as far as production goes (this might be a good topic):

Good: Bridges to Babylon
Bad: Some Girls (but not as bad as IORR)
Ugly: Gimme Some Neck (RW--OK, I couldn't find a Stones album in that category).


It's of course hard to separate the confounders. Whether or not you like the material is the big one. And then there is the separate issue of compression/brickwalling, which has plagued recent releases and reissues. I don't know what to think of A Bigger Bang; it's like, disqualified from study because of these confounders.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-07-24 06:17 by SharksWillCry.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
JMARKO

Quote
StonesCat
Not a huge, huge fan but after seeing it (IIRC) in the Sweet Summer Sun close, I appreciated it more. Got a glimmer at the rehearsals last year, would have been interesting.

Can you please explain what you are referencing in this post?

IIRC?

And this song was rehearsed somewhere??

Yeah... what is that?

IIRC is Internet-speak for "If I Recall Correctly".

Drew

Quote
SharksWillCry

Yeah, the production is horrible on IORR. It sounds like they muffled everything with that netting they were wearing on the Goat's Head Soup pictures.

Good: Bridges to Babylon


It's of course hard to separate the confounders. Whether or not you like the material is the big one.....I don't know what to think of A Bigger Bang; it's like, disqualified from study because of these confounders.

On the three points I have quoted:

1. YES! Brilliant analogy. Very "gauzy" sounding.

2. Also totally agree - the production on BTB is outstanding. Highlighted even more on the vinyl. And I mean the sounds on the album. It's not as singular sounding as Some Girls, for instance - most of that record sounds the same, the tracks vary since so many producers had a hand in them, but it thoroughly works.

3. Fraboni gave me a copy of Bigger Bang that had been re-done with his BobCat. Much more listenable, but, in my opinion, there is so much extra/mediocre material on that album it's hard to rescue it completely. Or even allow it to be evaluated without bias.

J