For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
with sssoul
I especially love the 1981 versions with Keith's raggedy but melodic backing vocals.
Keith keeps holding this piece of music up for us to admire from all angles.
On the Honeymoon Tapes he says "I wish I'd written that one"
Quote
Silver Dagger
Thinking about this track brought it home that the major difference between the Stones and The Beatles in their early days
is that the Stones relied on covers to propel them into the charts.
Quote
with sssoulQuote
Silver Dagger
Thinking about this track brought it home that the major difference between the Stones and The Beatles in their early days
is that the Stones relied on covers to propel them into the charts.
Actually the difference is that in their early days the Beatles (not called that yet) didn't have a record contract;
if they had they would've been recording covers too. That's how musicians start out.
The Beatles had been together for 5+ years when they got their first record contract,
and I strongly recommend a close look at the list of tunes they auditioned with. They were desperate!
The Stones hadn't even been together for a year yet when they got their first contract; of course they were still playing covers.
And they weren't desperate, so they were playing covers they really loved.
But I digress, sort of. The young Rolling Stones sure knew worthwhile music. We kind of take that for granted but it's a great wonder.
They didn't cover a piece of slop. They covered Time Is On My Side. And look at 'em go :E
Quote
DandelionPowderman
But they did record covers. Their first albums consisted of a mix of covers and own compositions.
Quote
with sssoulQuote
Silver Dagger
Thinking about this track brought it home that the major difference between the Stones and The Beatles in their early days
is that the Stones relied on covers to propel them into the charts.
Actually the difference is that in their early days the Beatles (not called that yet) didn't have a record contract;
if they had they would've been recording covers too. That's how musicians start out.
The Beatles had been together for 5+ years when they got their first record contract,
and I strongly recommend a close look at the list of tunes they auditioned with. They were desperate!
The Stones hadn't even been together for a year yet when they got their first contract; of course they were still playing covers.
And they weren't desperate, so they were playing covers they really loved.
But I digress, sort of. The young Rolling Stones sure knew worthwhile music. We kind of take that for granted but it's a great wonder.
They didn't cover a piece of slop. They covered Time Is On My Side. And look at 'em go :E
Quote
with sssoulQuote
DandelionPowderman
But they did record covers. Their first albums consisted of a mix of covers and own compositions.
Yes. My point was that in the first 18 months of their existence that band was also "relying on covers" -
not to "propel them into the charts", however, because they weren't making records and had no hope of charting.
This is getting too far off a very worth topic, though.
The Winos' renditions of this number were also brilliant, hot and beautiful.
Quote
Silver Dagger
Nicos - thank you for getting the much loved Track Talk up and running again. And here's to Rene for getting it started in the first place.
Quote
Turner68Quote
with sssoul
I especially love the 1981 versions with Keith's raggedy but melodic backing vocals.
Keith keeps holding this piece of music up for us to admire from all angles.
On the Honeymoon Tapes he says "I wish I'd written that one"
I love that version too.
This song to me is the sound of the Rolling Stones 1.0