Tell Me :
Talk
No cologne detected, but he sure LOOKED good!
Nice catch! I didn't noticed those three stripes painted on the wall.
The color scheme too.
Honestly, I really don't understand (a) the difference between the music and "act", and (b) the idea of having some sort of conditionals for being a 'fan' (or whatever one calls it) - how is that a problem? . Even less I don't understand what it means "as long it doesn't impact" the music Jagger does with the Stones... How possibly could, for example what Jagger does with Miss Swift, to impact? "Satisfaction" does not sound so good any longer, loses its power, historical significance, etc?
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 06:03 by Doxa.
hmm wires got badly crossed here i'm not sure how you misunderstood so mightily what i wrote.
1. regarding "music" vs "act":
there is the myth, the legend, the visual aspect of the stones - their style, etc. that's part of the "act".
the music is what you hear.
most of us "fans" appreciate all of these things, which implies understanding and accepting mick as the showman he is. however i think that some people are able to separate the two; there are some people who truly just care about the music. and i think that's a valid perspective.
2. regarding how possibly could what Jagger does with Swift have impact :
you simply restated my point, so i don't see what you misunderstood. my point was that if you only care about the stones' music (and not the act, see above), then you might not understand what he did but you certainly would have no reason to care either.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 06:52 by Turner68.
Good points, but I think it is beyond us to really to distinguish the pure musical aspect from the 'whole thing', from the 'act'. With the Stones those two things stick so tightly together. I think this is especially true with Keith Richards - his personhood, whatever he is, is deeply connected to his music that I claim it is impossible for his fans to really seperate the two. When people hear his guitar people hear more than just the music - they hear the man they love. With Mick is probably easier (theoretically) to seperate those two things, since Jagger is a rather distant, odd figure - who seemingly loves to keep that distance. And his 'act' is so clearly an act, wheras Keith 'act' more easily seen more 'genuine', 'natural' or something like that.
But honestly, I think any Rolling Stones fan who claims that he or she can actually separate these two things is actually dishonest to him/herself. I have never met one...
- Doxa
I thought having Jovan's musk for men sponsor the 1981 tour was far more of a sell-out.
Seriously, these guys sold out a long time ago. All of them.
><
You know how much alcohol and toxic waste these guys are sweating out during a show, right? This was probably the only necessary sponsor they've had.
For the most part Doxa, I agree with much of what you've added to this discussion. Much ado about nothing in my book. Mick's being Mick and I'm glad he's happy doing it!
The one thing I have to disagree with you on is the quote I saved above. One of the things that has always amazed me about this board is how a few of the "Taylorites" ARE able to separate the music from the spectacle. Although I don't agree with them and can't understand them placing that limitation on themselves, trying to understand that and respect that has actually allowed me to develop a bit of respect for their position. kleermaker would be my first example of such an individual. Based on his writings here, there is no way I would ever think that he was being dishonest with himself or anyone else. While I can't make my mind fully understand the position that he and a few others take regarding music vs. show, I have come to respect the point of view and "agree to disagree".
Peace,
Mr DJA
PS -> kleermaker, I do hope you realize that I'm not attempting to criticize you in any way. Just using what I've come to understand as your thoughts to illustrate a point from my point of view. If you'd like me to remove any of the above post, let me know and it's gone. I think and I'm hoping you'll be OK with what I wrote but just felt that I should add this note in case I'm wrong.
Or Mick's plotting a B2B pt.II : he'll work with White on several songs while Keef will prefer to work with his usual "posse" (Was + Fabroni?).
M&K will both meet at the mixing stage : 7 songs + 7 songs = a new Stones album.
An excellent observation! And you are absolutely right. 'Taylorites' really are an exception, and they really have a point in their 'music is all that matters' claim. Taylor himself, their hero, is an 'odd' Rolling Stone in that sense not having that kind of 'rock star' charisma, personhood, x-factor or whatever show aspect factor (and probably for someone for that reason not a fitting member for the band, a real 'Rolling Stone' imagewise, etc). He really is 'just' a splendid musician and that's all he got. (And I guess for that reason, his a bit forced showman moves and routines during his cameo with the Stones 2012-14 looked a bit anomaly like for many).
I am sure Kleermaker will not have anything to complain about with what you said.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 18:06 by Doxa.
Separating the music from the act and performance? Piece of cake for this fan. Every time I listen to a Stones record I am only responding to and listening to the music. I doubt Mick or Keith are performing for anything beside the pure musical aspects which are captured on the tape when they are in the studio.
I of course take in the whole show when at a Stones concert and while friggin' great, it often does detract from the pure musical aspects of the performance, especially in Mick's case. I've many times seen him cut musical phrases short, let the B/G vocalists carry parts or just plain sing worse because he was so busy running around. It's obviously what Mick does when trying to entertain a large crowd and I'm never disappointed because it's part of the show and I expect it. To a lesser extent Keith's guitar playing isn't as good when he's moving around and kicking his leg out and posing for the crowd. The best part of the act for me IS JUST the singing and playing guitar.
Some people like myself would sacrifice the show for better music, wouldn't mind if Mick stood at the mic and just sang his heart out instead of all that dancing and gesturing. I can be entertained purely by the sight of seeing great artists performing live, getting the music as it's made, none of which requires anything resembling what Jagger does on the stage, really.
Obviously some folks revel in the whole dancer Mick routine but to tell the truth I can't think of a single instance where it has ever improved the music. I tend to thing almost all the Stones recorded music is better that their live recordings (a few exceptions). So yes separating a recording artist from what he or she does on the stage is easy for me. Performing and making/recording music are two very different things, great when they come together but so much great music has been made by artist in studios and artist who just stand and play their instruments it makes the jumping around, dancing and gesturing much less important for this music lover.
With respect to the Taylor Swift/ Mick Jagger performance, could the music have been better if neither artist was concentration on the act? Probably so, just close your eyes and listen to both singers, can't imagine that was either singers best take of Satisfaction, neither would have been considered as one to make the final mix of a song going on an album. This was 80% about the act and 20% about the music, imo. As such it was fun to watch, but I'm not rushing to make a recording of it for my iPod. lol
Keith has already worked with JW, results still unheard, and is a friend. No way JW is a party to pitting those two against each other.
Probably the results are still unheard for good reason.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 21:50 by HMS.
That would make sense, I can't see those 2 exactly bringing out the best in one another :-)
Indeed Keith doesn't need to work with other people like him, he needs someone super disciplined - like Mick or, apparently, Steve Jordan. I felt the energy he and Steve showed in "Under the Influence" was very positive.
I don't know that they were ever intended for public consumption. (He just played in JW's home studio.)
Sorry for the multiple spelling edits!
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 22:44 by Aquamarine.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
35love
()
Date: October 2, 2015 02:47
And the TV monitor picture/ reflection.
Aquamarine I am trying really hard not to ask you if MJ smelled good that close, detect cologne/ what kind/ you must have inhaled deep as he walked by, or held your breath. I'd probably have fainted. Jokin' around/ no need to answer.
ETA: unless you want to ;-)
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 02:48 by 35love.
Aquamarine I am trying really hard not to ask you if MJ smelled good that close, detect cologne/ what kind/ you must have inhaled deep as he walked by, or held your breath. I'd probably have fainted. Jokin' around/ no need to answer.
ETA: unless you want to ;-)
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 02:48 by 35love.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Aquamarine
()
Date: October 2, 2015 02:49
Quote
35love
And the TV monitor picture/ reflection.
Aquamarine I am trying really hard not to ask you if MJ smelled good that close, detect cologne/ what kind/ you must have inhaled deep as he walked by, or held your breath. I'd probably have fainted. Jokin' around/ no need to answer.
ETA: unless you want to ;-)
No cologne detected, but he sure LOOKED good!
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
35love
()
Date: October 2, 2015 02:50
Quote
AquamarineQuote
35love
And the TV monitor picture/ reflection.
Aquamarine I am trying really hard not to ask you if MJ smelled good that close, detect cologne/ what kind/ you must have inhaled deep as he walked by, or held your breath. I'd probably have fainted. Jokin' around/ no need to answer.
ETA: unless you want to ;-)
No cologne detected, but he sure LOOKED good!
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Cristiano Radtke
()
Date: October 2, 2015 03:02
Quote
Aquamarine
It looks (from the decor) very much like Jack White's bowling alley in his house.
Nice catch! I didn't noticed those three stripes painted on the wall.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Aquamarine
()
Date: October 2, 2015 03:20
Quote
Cristiano RadtkeQuote
Aquamarine
It looks (from the decor) very much like Jack White's bowling alley in his house.
Nice catch! I didn't noticed those three stripes painted on the wall.
The color scheme too.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: October 2, 2015 04:16
Okay, since this thread seems to live on and on...
Listening all these Keithette boys whinings about the 'lecacy is destroyed', and 'the whole Jagger's generation of musicians are now put into shame', etc. makes
one wonder certain things.
The argument of of none of his contemporqries (Plant, Towhnshead, Keith, Charie, Young, Clapton, Buddy Guy, etc, etc,) would not have done the same- Hah!!!!!!!!
None of them have EVER done what Mick Jagger have done. Not in 1964, 1969, or 1973 or 1975 or whatever. All these mentioned names are cool, but none of them been any Mick Jagger. EVER. Had any of those try to do what mr. Jagger did those whatever times, would be laughable. Like Lennon said back in 1970, Jagger was "dancing fag", confusing all the 'straight' down to earth rock and roll fans, the ones mostly masturbating to a guitar or whatever heroes, you know, all those fans of 'real musicians'. Mick always back then and ever since has been controversial for certain rock folks. But the question today is more like: would Miss Swift ever even ask any of those people to join the stage with her... Would that been cool?... Most likely, not... For some reason, Mick Jagger, the most iconist rock star ever, the very MICK JAGGER the kids had even recenly known for the hit songs named after him (and the guy is some damn 70 years old!), is the one jumping and singing there, and I am sure any of his contemporaries would be still as thrilled/amazed/jealous like they always have been. They never been like him, and never will be. Swift knows that, Clapton knows that, Richards know that.
My point, actually, is that the people ("Rolling Stones"= Keith Richards fans) who criticize Jagger now here so loudly have never really understand who and what Mick Jagger - or The Rolling Stones - really is or ever have been. The Stones is much bigger than Keith Richards and and some purist-minded idea of rock and roll have ever been. And thank god.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 04:31 by Doxa.
Listening all these Keithette boys whinings about the 'lecacy is destroyed', and 'the whole Jagger's generation of musicians are now put into shame', etc. makes
one wonder certain things.
The argument of of none of his contemporqries (Plant, Towhnshead, Keith, Charie, Young, Clapton, Buddy Guy, etc, etc,) would not have done the same- Hah!!!!!!!!
None of them have EVER done what Mick Jagger have done. Not in 1964, 1969, or 1973 or 1975 or whatever. All these mentioned names are cool, but none of them been any Mick Jagger. EVER. Had any of those try to do what mr. Jagger did those whatever times, would be laughable. Like Lennon said back in 1970, Jagger was "dancing fag", confusing all the 'straight' down to earth rock and roll fans, the ones mostly masturbating to a guitar or whatever heroes, you know, all those fans of 'real musicians'. Mick always back then and ever since has been controversial for certain rock folks. But the question today is more like: would Miss Swift ever even ask any of those people to join the stage with her... Would that been cool?... Most likely, not... For some reason, Mick Jagger, the most iconist rock star ever, the very MICK JAGGER the kids had even recenly known for the hit songs named after him (and the guy is some damn 70 years old!), is the one jumping and singing there, and I am sure any of his contemporaries would be still as thrilled/amazed/jealous like they always have been. They never been like him, and never will be. Swift knows that, Clapton knows that, Richards know that.
My point, actually, is that the people ("Rolling Stones"= Keith Richards fans) who criticize Jagger now here so loudly have never really understand who and what Mick Jagger - or The Rolling Stones - really is or ever have been. The Stones is much bigger than Keith Richards and and some purist-minded idea of rock and roll have ever been. And thank god.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 04:31 by Doxa.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Turner68
()
Date: October 2, 2015 04:40
Mick is famous first and foremost for being famous and outrageous. By definition his appearance was part of "being mick" since it received a lot of attention and was perceived as outrageous by swift and stones fans alike. To this extent I agree with Doxa.
I do think it is possible to be a fan of the stones' music and not "the act" and therefore not get why mick would do this; however by definition this point of view implies you shouldn't care what he does as long as it doesn't impact the music he makes with the stones.
In general I think they should do what makes them happy, and I believe that's what they do. Take it or leave it.
I do think it is possible to be a fan of the stones' music and not "the act" and therefore not get why mick would do this; however by definition this point of view implies you shouldn't care what he does as long as it doesn't impact the music he makes with the stones.
In general I think they should do what makes them happy, and I believe that's what they do. Take it or leave it.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: October 2, 2015 06:00
Quote
Turner68
I do think it is possible to be a fan of the stones' music and not "the act" and therefore not get why mick would do this; however by definition this point of view implies you shouldn't care what he does as long as it doesn't impact the music he makes with the stones.
Honestly, I really don't understand (a) the difference between the music and "act", and (b) the idea of having some sort of conditionals for being a 'fan' (or whatever one calls it) - how is that a problem? . Even less I don't understand what it means "as long it doesn't impact" the music Jagger does with the Stones... How possibly could, for example what Jagger does with Miss Swift, to impact? "Satisfaction" does not sound so good any longer, loses its power, historical significance, etc?
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 06:03 by Doxa.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Turner68
()
Date: October 2, 2015 06:51
Quote
DoxaQuote
Turner68
I do think it is possible to be a fan of the stones' music and not "the act" and therefore not get why mick would do this; however by definition this point of view implies you shouldn't care what he does as long as it doesn't impact the music he makes with the stones.
Honestly, I really don't understand (a) the difference between the music and "act", and (b) the idea of having some sort of conditionals for being a 'fan' (or whatever one calls it) - how is that a problem? . Even less I don't understand what it means "as long it doesn't impact" the music Jagger does with the Stones... How possibly could, for example what Jagger does with Miss Swift, to impact? "Satisfaction" does not sound so good any longer, loses its power, historical significance, etc?
- Doxa
hmm wires got badly crossed here i'm not sure how you misunderstood so mightily what i wrote.
1. regarding "music" vs "act":
there is the myth, the legend, the visual aspect of the stones - their style, etc. that's part of the "act".
the music is what you hear.
most of us "fans" appreciate all of these things, which implies understanding and accepting mick as the showman he is. however i think that some people are able to separate the two; there are some people who truly just care about the music. and i think that's a valid perspective.
2. regarding how possibly could what Jagger does with Swift have impact :
you simply restated my point, so i don't see what you misunderstood. my point was that if you only care about the stones' music (and not the act, see above), then you might not understand what he did but you certainly would have no reason to care either.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 06:52 by Turner68.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: October 2, 2015 07:38
Quote
Turner68Quote
DoxaQuote
Turner68
I do think it is possible to be a fan of the stones' music and not "the act" and therefore not get why mick would do this; however by definition this point of view implies you shouldn't care what he does as long as it doesn't impact the music he makes with the stones.
Honestly, I really don't understand (a) the difference between the music and "act", and (b) the idea of having some sort of conditionals for being a 'fan' (or whatever one calls it) - how is that a problem? . Even less I don't understand what it means "as long it doesn't impact" the music Jagger does with the Stones... How possibly could, for example what Jagger does with Miss Swift, to impact? "Satisfaction" does not sound so good any longer, loses its power, historical significance, etc?
- Doxa
hmm wires got badly crossed here i'm not sure how you misunderstood so mightily what i wrote.
1. regarding "music" vs "act":
there is the myth, the legend, the visual aspect of the stones - their style, etc. that's part of the "act".
the music is what you hear.
most of us "fans" appreciate all of these things, which implies understanding and accepting mick as the showman he is. however i think that some people are able to separate the two; there are some people who truly just care about the music. and i think that's a valid perspective.
2. regarding how possibly could what Jagger does with Swift have impact :
you simply restated my point, so i don't see what you misunderstood. my point was that if you only care about the stones' music (and not the act, see above), then you might not understand what he did but you certainly would have no reason to care either.
Good points, but I think it is beyond us to really to distinguish the pure musical aspect from the 'whole thing', from the 'act'. With the Stones those two things stick so tightly together. I think this is especially true with Keith Richards - his personhood, whatever he is, is deeply connected to his music that I claim it is impossible for his fans to really seperate the two. When people hear his guitar people hear more than just the music - they hear the man they love. With Mick is probably easier (theoretically) to seperate those two things, since Jagger is a rather distant, odd figure - who seemingly loves to keep that distance. And his 'act' is so clearly an act, wheras Keith 'act' more easily seen more 'genuine', 'natural' or something like that.
But honestly, I think any Rolling Stones fan who claims that he or she can actually separate these two things is actually dishonest to him/herself. I have never met one...
- Doxa
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Straycat13
()
Date: October 2, 2015 09:36
He's visiting with Jack White, Sheryl Crow, and maybe Keith Urban and Nicole Kidman. (shrugs shoulders, raises eyebrow, tilts head...) Music is being made, one way or another!
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
HMS
()
Date: October 2, 2015 11:50
He´s going to record a new solo-album containing duets with world´s current top selling but most untalented artists, produced by Jack White. It´s the only way for Mick having a chart-topping album and to beat Keith.
Sheryl Crow will be on board just like Taylor Swift, Leona Lewis, Joss Stone, Keith Urban, Miley Cyrus, Rihanna and a few bugs I´ve probably never heard of but are selling like crazy. Maybe this list of horror will even include Justin Bieber.
This is exactly what Sinatra and Tony Bennett did, ridiculous and musical senseless albums with unfitting partners only for the love of money. I honestly wonder that Mick hasnt done that some time ago. Now he is going to do it, folks beware, rough times are coming. The humiliating duet with TS will be nothing compared to the amount of misery we are going to face. Like I said, there´s a storm a coming... oh Lord gimme shelter, a storm is threatning the RnR-world today, total sell-out is just a shot away. Run for cover, you music-lovers, run for cover! A mad bull has lost it´s way.
Sheryl Crow will be on board just like Taylor Swift, Leona Lewis, Joss Stone, Keith Urban, Miley Cyrus, Rihanna and a few bugs I´ve probably never heard of but are selling like crazy. Maybe this list of horror will even include Justin Bieber.
This is exactly what Sinatra and Tony Bennett did, ridiculous and musical senseless albums with unfitting partners only for the love of money. I honestly wonder that Mick hasnt done that some time ago. Now he is going to do it, folks beware, rough times are coming. The humiliating duet with TS will be nothing compared to the amount of misery we are going to face. Like I said, there´s a storm a coming... oh Lord gimme shelter, a storm is threatning the RnR-world today, total sell-out is just a shot away. Run for cover, you music-lovers, run for cover! A mad bull has lost it´s way.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Turner68
()
Date: October 2, 2015 11:56
Quote
HMS
He´s going to record a new solo-album containing duets with world´s current top selling but most untalented artists, produced by Jack White. It´s the only way for Mick having a chart-topping album and to beat Keith.
Sheryl Crow will be on board just like Taylor Swift, Leona Lewis, Joss Stone, Keith Urban, Miley Cyrus, Rihanna and a few bugs I´ve probably never heard of but are selling like crazy. Maybe this list of horror will even include Justin Bieber.
This is exactly what Sinatra and Tony Bennett did, ridiculous and musical senseless albums with unfitting partners only for the love of money. I honestly wonder that Mick hasnt done that some time ago. Now he is going to do it, folks beware, rough times are coming. The humiliating duet with TS will be nothing compared to the amount of misery we are going to face. Like I said, there´s a storm a coming... oh Lord gimme shelter, a storm is threatning the RnR-world today, total sell-out is just a shot away. Run for cover, you music-lovers, run for cover! A mad bull has lost it´s way.
I thought having Jovan's musk for men sponsor the 1981 tour was far more of a sell-out.
Seriously, these guys sold out a long time ago. All of them.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: October 2, 2015 11:56
Quote
HMS
He´s going to record a new solo-album containing duets with world´s current top selling but most untalented artists, produced by Jack White. It´s the only way for Mick having a chart-topping album and to beat Keith.
Sheryl Crow will be on board just like Taylor Swift, Leona Lewis, Joss Stone, Keith Urban, Miley Cyrus, Rihanna and a few bugs I´ve probably never heard of but are selling like crazy. Maybe this list of horror will even include Justin Bieber.
This is exactly what Sinatra and Tony Bennett did, ridiculous and musical senseless albums with unfitting partners only for the love of money. I honestly wonder that Mick hasnt done that some time ago. Now he is going to do it, folks beware, rough times are coming. The humiliating duet with TS will be nothing compared to the amount of misery we are going to face. Like I said, there´s a storm a coming... oh Lord gimme shelter, a storm is threatning the RnR-world today, total sell-out is just a shot away. Run for cover, you music-lovers, run for cover! A mad bull has lost it´s way.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
undertheradar
()
Date: October 2, 2015 13:39
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
HMS
He´s going to record a new solo-album containing duets with world´s current top selling but most untalented artists, produced by Jack White. It´s the only way for Mick having a chart-topping album and to beat Keith.
Sheryl Crow will be on board just like Taylor Swift, Leona Lewis, Joss Stone, Keith Urban, Miley Cyrus, Rihanna and a few bugs I´ve probably never heard of but are selling like crazy. Maybe this list of horror will even include Justin Bieber.
This is exactly what Sinatra and Tony Bennett did, ridiculous and musical senseless albums with unfitting partners only for the love of money. I honestly wonder that Mick hasnt done that some time ago. Now he is going to do it, folks beware, rough times are coming. The humiliating duet with TS will be nothing compared to the amount of misery we are going to face. Like I said, there´s a storm a coming... oh Lord gimme shelter, a storm is threatning the RnR-world today, total sell-out is just a shot away. Run for cover, you music-lovers, run for cover! A mad bull has lost it´s way.
>
<Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: October 2, 2015 13:43
Quote
Turner68Quote
HMS
He´s going to record a new solo-album containing duets with world´s current top selling but most untalented artists, produced by Jack White. It´s the only way for Mick having a chart-topping album and to beat Keith.
Sheryl Crow will be on board just like Taylor Swift, Leona Lewis, Joss Stone, Keith Urban, Miley Cyrus, Rihanna and a few bugs I´ve probably never heard of but are selling like crazy. Maybe this list of horror will even include Justin Bieber.
This is exactly what Sinatra and Tony Bennett did, ridiculous and musical senseless albums with unfitting partners only for the love of money. I honestly wonder that Mick hasnt done that some time ago. Now he is going to do it, folks beware, rough times are coming. The humiliating duet with TS will be nothing compared to the amount of misery we are going to face. Like I said, there´s a storm a coming... oh Lord gimme shelter, a storm is threatning the RnR-world today, total sell-out is just a shot away. Run for cover, you music-lovers, run for cover! A mad bull has lost it´s way.
I thought having Jovan's musk for men sponsor the 1981 tour was far more of a sell-out.
Seriously, these guys sold out a long time ago. All of them.
You know how much alcohol and toxic waste these guys are sweating out during a show, right? This was probably the only necessary sponsor they've had.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
35love
()
Date: October 2, 2015 15:10
As much as those of us who 'grew up' (used loosely) in the 80's would like to forget all the cringe-worthy activities, fashion (horrific), large hair, excessive partying (which has blotted out some)
Jovan musk
was popular back in the day. Sold in your local 5 n dime (chain drugstore)
Would have been more appropriate for Rod Stewart Do You Think I'm Sexy tour.
Wait, who are we making fun of again? Oh yeah, Taylor Swift. Gorgeous, arena selling, keeps her clothes on no sex tape real estate mogul TS.
Jovan musk
was popular back in the day. Sold in your local 5 n dime (chain drugstore)
Would have been more appropriate for Rod Stewart Do You Think I'm Sexy tour.
Wait, who are we making fun of again? Oh yeah, Taylor Swift. Gorgeous, arena selling, keeps her clothes on no sex tape real estate mogul TS.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
jammingedward
()
Date: October 2, 2015 15:31
I don't think it is that far fetched to imagine that Jagger is hanging out with Jack White to suss him out as a possible producer for the next Stones LP. He's business savvy enough to know that a new record produced by JW will generate far more interest than another produced by Don Was.
It doesn't mean it will happen though, but I'm sure the thought has crossed his mind more than once...
It doesn't mean it will happen though, but I'm sure the thought has crossed his mind more than once...
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
bv
()
Date: October 2, 2015 16:00
Give people alcohol and they will say and do many stupid things. Give some fans a Mick Jagger solo album or solo guest appearance and WW III is on in some camps. No wonder there is so much war and hate around.
Bjornulf
Bjornulf
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
mr_dja
()
Date: October 2, 2015 16:00
Quote
Doxa
But honestly, I think any Rolling Stones fan who claims that he or she can actually separate these two things is actually dishonest to him/herself. I have never met one...
- Doxa
For the most part Doxa, I agree with much of what you've added to this discussion. Much ado about nothing in my book. Mick's being Mick and I'm glad he's happy doing it!
The one thing I have to disagree with you on is the quote I saved above. One of the things that has always amazed me about this board is how a few of the "Taylorites" ARE able to separate the music from the spectacle. Although I don't agree with them and can't understand them placing that limitation on themselves, trying to understand that and respect that has actually allowed me to develop a bit of respect for their position. kleermaker would be my first example of such an individual. Based on his writings here, there is no way I would ever think that he was being dishonest with himself or anyone else. While I can't make my mind fully understand the position that he and a few others take regarding music vs. show, I have come to respect the point of view and "agree to disagree".
Peace,
Mr DJA
PS -> kleermaker, I do hope you realize that I'm not attempting to criticize you in any way. Just using what I've come to understand as your thoughts to illustrate a point from my point of view. If you'd like me to remove any of the above post, let me know and it's gone. I think and I'm hoping you'll be OK with what I wrote but just felt that I should add this note in case I'm wrong.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: October 2, 2015 17:39
Quote
jammingedward
I don't think it is that far fetched to imagine that Jagger is hanging out with Jack White to suss him out as a possible producer for the next Stones LP. He's business savvy enough to know that a new record produced by JW will generate far more interest than another produced by Don Was.
It doesn't mean it will happen though, but I'm sure the thought has crossed his mind more than once...
Or Mick's plotting a B2B pt.II : he'll work with White on several songs while Keef will prefer to work with his usual "posse" (Was + Fabroni?).
M&K will both meet at the mixing stage : 7 songs + 7 songs = a new Stones album.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: October 2, 2015 18:04
Quote
mr_djaQuote
Doxa
But honestly, I think any Rolling Stones fan who claims that he or she can actually separate these two things is actually dishonest to him/herself. I have never met one...
- Doxa
For the most part Doxa, I agree with much of what you've added to this discussion. Much ado about nothing in my book. Mick's being Mick and I'm glad he's happy doing it!
The one thing I have to disagree with you on is the quote I saved above. One of the things that has always amazed me about this board is how a few of the "Taylorites" ARE able to separate the music from the spectacle. Although I don't agree with them and can't understand them placing that limitation on themselves, trying to understand that and respect that has actually allowed me to develop a bit of respect for their position. kleermaker would be my first example of such an individual. Based on his writings here, there is no way I would ever think that he was being dishonest with himself or anyone else. While I can't make my mind fully understand the position that he and a few others take regarding music vs. show, I have come to respect the point of view and "agree to disagree".
Peace,
Mr DJA
PS -> kleermaker, I do hope you realize that I'm not attempting to criticize you in any way. Just using what I've come to understand as your thoughts to illustrate a point from my point of view. If you'd like me to remove any of the above post, let me know and it's gone. I think and I'm hoping you'll be OK with what I wrote but just felt that I should add this note in case I'm wrong.
An excellent observation! And you are absolutely right. 'Taylorites' really are an exception, and they really have a point in their 'music is all that matters' claim. Taylor himself, their hero, is an 'odd' Rolling Stone in that sense not having that kind of 'rock star' charisma, personhood, x-factor or whatever show aspect factor (and probably for someone for that reason not a fitting member for the band, a real 'Rolling Stone' imagewise, etc). He really is 'just' a splendid musician and that's all he got. (And I guess for that reason, his a bit forced showman moves and routines during his cameo with the Stones 2012-14 looked a bit anomaly like for many).
I am sure Kleermaker will not have anything to complain about with what you said.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 18:06 by Doxa.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
angee
()
Date: October 2, 2015 18:28
Aqua, three inches away!!!
That's a distance to which I can only aspire. ><
~"Love is Strong"~
That's a distance to which I can only aspire. >
<~"Love is Strong"~
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: October 2, 2015 20:56
Quote
DoxaQuote
Turner68Quote
DoxaQuote
Turner68
I do think it is possible to be a fan of the stones' music and not "the act" and therefore not get why mick would do this; however by definition this point of view implies you shouldn't care what he does as long as it doesn't impact the music he makes with the stones.
Honestly, I really don't understand (a) the difference between the music and "act", and (b) the idea of having some sort of conditionals for being a 'fan' (or whatever one calls it) - how is that a problem? . Even less I don't understand what it means "as long it doesn't impact" the music Jagger does with the Stones... How possibly could, for example what Jagger does with Miss Swift, to impact? "Satisfaction" does not sound so good any longer, loses its power, historical significance, etc?
- Doxa
hmm wires got badly crossed here i'm not sure how you misunderstood so mightily what i wrote.
1. regarding "music" vs "act":
there is the myth, the legend, the visual aspect of the stones - their style, etc. that's part of the "act".
the music is what you hear.
most of us "fans" appreciate all of these things, which implies understanding and accepting mick as the showman he is. however i think that some people are able to separate the two; there are some people who truly just care about the music. and i think that's a valid perspective.
2. regarding how possibly could what Jagger does with Swift have impact :
you simply restated my point, so i don't see what you misunderstood. my point was that if you only care about the stones' music (and not the act, see above), then you might not understand what he did but you certainly would have no reason to care either.
Good points, but I think it is beyond us to really to distinguish the pure musical aspect from the 'whole thing', from the 'act'. With the Stones those two things stick so tightly together. I think this is especially true with Keith Richards - his personhood, whatever he is, is deeply connected to his music that I claim it is impossible for his fans to really seperate the two. When people hear his guitar people hear more than just the music - they hear the man they love. With Mick is probably easier (theoretically) to seperate those two things, since Jagger is a rather distant, odd figure - who seemingly loves to keep that distance. And his 'act' is so clearly an act, wheras Keith 'act' more easily seen more 'genuine', 'natural' or something like that.
But honestly, I think any Rolling Stones fan who claims that he or she can actually separate these two things is actually dishonest to him/herself. I have never met one...
- Doxa
Separating the music from the act and performance? Piece of cake for this fan. Every time I listen to a Stones record I am only responding to and listening to the music. I doubt Mick or Keith are performing for anything beside the pure musical aspects which are captured on the tape when they are in the studio.
I of course take in the whole show when at a Stones concert and while friggin' great, it often does detract from the pure musical aspects of the performance, especially in Mick's case. I've many times seen him cut musical phrases short, let the B/G vocalists carry parts or just plain sing worse because he was so busy running around. It's obviously what Mick does when trying to entertain a large crowd and I'm never disappointed because it's part of the show and I expect it. To a lesser extent Keith's guitar playing isn't as good when he's moving around and kicking his leg out and posing for the crowd. The best part of the act for me IS JUST the singing and playing guitar.
Some people like myself would sacrifice the show for better music, wouldn't mind if Mick stood at the mic and just sang his heart out instead of all that dancing and gesturing. I can be entertained purely by the sight of seeing great artists performing live, getting the music as it's made, none of which requires anything resembling what Jagger does on the stage, really.
Obviously some folks revel in the whole dancer Mick routine but to tell the truth I can't think of a single instance where it has ever improved the music. I tend to thing almost all the Stones recorded music is better that their live recordings (a few exceptions). So yes separating a recording artist from what he or she does on the stage is easy for me. Performing and making/recording music are two very different things, great when they come together but so much great music has been made by artist in studios and artist who just stand and play their instruments it makes the jumping around, dancing and gesturing much less important for this music lover.
With respect to the Taylor Swift/ Mick Jagger performance, could the music have been better if neither artist was concentration on the act? Probably so, just close your eyes and listen to both singers, can't imagine that was either singers best take of Satisfaction, neither would have been considered as one to make the final mix of a song going on an album. This was 80% about the act and 20% about the music, imo. As such it was fun to watch, but I'm not rushing to make a recording of it for my iPod. lol
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Aquamarine
()
Date: October 2, 2015 21:19
Quote
dcbaQuote
jammingedward
I don't think it is that far fetched to imagine that Jagger is hanging out with Jack White to suss him out as a possible producer for the next Stones LP. He's business savvy enough to know that a new record produced by JW will generate far more interest than another produced by Don Was.
It doesn't mean it will happen though, but I'm sure the thought has crossed his mind more than once...
Or Mick's plotting a B2B pt.II : he'll work with White on several songs while Keef will prefer to work with his usual "posse" (Was + Fabroni?).
M&K will both meet at the mixing stage : 7 songs + 7 songs = a new Stones album.
Keith has already worked with JW, results still unheard, and is a friend. No way JW is a party to pitting those two against each other.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
HMS
()
Date: October 2, 2015 21:49
Quote
Aquamarine
Keith has already worked with JW, results still unheard, and is a friend.
Probably the results are still unheard for good reason.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 21:50 by HMS.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
mgguy
()
Date: October 2, 2015 22:04
All this talk about singing and dancing reminded me of just how great Bowie could put that whole package together.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Turner68
()
Date: October 2, 2015 22:07
Quote
HMSQuote
Aquamarine
Keith has already worked with JW, results still unheard, and is a friend.
Probably the results are still unheard for good reason.
That would make sense, I can't see those 2 exactly bringing out the best in one another :-)
Indeed Keith doesn't need to work with other people like him, he needs someone super disciplined - like Mick or, apparently, Steve Jordan. I felt the energy he and Steve showed in "Under the Influence" was very positive.
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
angee
()
Date: October 2, 2015 22:14
Hey, Naturalust, which tunes are the rare exceptions for you that are better live than in the studio?
Thx.
~"Love is Strong"~
Thx.
~"Love is Strong"~
Re: Mick guests with Taylor Swift - Nashville, September 26
Posted by:
Aquamarine
()
Date: October 2, 2015 22:40
Quote
HMSQuote
Aquamarine
Keith has already worked with JW, results still unheard, and is a friend.
Probably the results are still unheard for good reason.
I don't know that they were ever intended for public consumption. (He just played in JW's home studio.)
Sorry for the multiple spelling edits!
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-02 22:44 by Aquamarine.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
1087
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10