For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Thommie
A "Miss Amanda Jones" for the 90's. Not one their most important songs but a quick rocker you just love for a period.
Quote
with sssoul
It has a great intro!
Interesting comments from a lot of y'all up there. I don't think about lyrics that much as a rule -
the guitars and the beat are the main things I respond to. But GetYerAngie's interpretation really made me laugh - thank you! -
and I do wonder how Swayed1967 feels about Dance Little Sister, which I think has the title phrase repeated more times than any song ever.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I'm not a big fan of Too Tight, but I would never call the fans who really love it "apologists". Why don't you just accept that there are people who really likes it?
Quote
Swayed1967Quote
DandelionPowderman
I'm not a big fan of Too Tight, but I would never call the fans who really love it "apologists". Why don't you just accept that there are people who really likes it?
I recognize that there are fans of this song but I refuse to accept them just as I refuse to accept poverty or, in the case of the Stones post-1990, poverty of invention. I don’t know if I can alleviate poverty but when I encounter it I must rail against it if nothing else. My cause is noble I assure you. Please see my post above yours on the importance of lyrics and tell me if there is any difference to you between Pay Your Dues and Street Fighting Man.
Quote
Come On
I never Heard any complainings over the lyrics in for example 'Shake your moneymaker'...I think the lyrics to Too Tight is very suitable for a pop tune.
Quote
Blueranger
The intro is great and the way Keith slashes the chords until the band comes in, is a magic moment. Unfortunately, the rest of the song is boring.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Blueranger
The intro is great and the way Keith slashes the chords until the band comes in, is a magic moment. Unfortunately, the rest of the song is boring.
The rather unusual Keith-solo is good as well, imo, but I agree – it gets a bit boring after a while.
Quote
Swayed1967
Hmmm, the lyrics are what make Jumping Jack Flash, Brown Sugar and Gimme Shelter etc. truly great, even though they sound like guitar-driven songs.
Quote
Big AlQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Blueranger
The intro is great and the way Keith slashes the chords until the band comes in, is a magic moment. Unfortunately, the rest of the song is boring.
The rather unusual Keith-solo is good as well, imo, but I agree – it gets a bit boring after a while.
I'll take your word that it's Keith, but I've always had it in my head as being Ronnie.
Quote
with sssoulQuote
Swayed1967
I don't think about lyrics that much as a rule - the guitars and the beat are the main things I respond to.
But GetYerAngie's interpretation really made me laugh - thank you! -
and I do wonder how Swayed1967 feels about Dance Little Sister, which I think has the title phrase repeated more times than any song ever.
Hmmm, the lyrics are what make Jumping Jack Flash, Brown Sugar and Gimme Shelter etc. truly great, even though they sound like guitar-driven songs.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Sometimes the lyrics matter most, sometimes it don't, imo. Depends on the song, depends on the lyrics
Quote
DandelionPowderman
The band LIVE had a hit called Selling The Drama. When Too Tight came, I couldn't listen to it, since the melody it starts with is so similar. And LIVE isn't exactly my favourite band...
Here's a little comparison:
[www.youtube.com]
Quote
Fernandobsas
it is interesting how among people who likes the Stones to death, one song can be excelent for somebody and a bad filler to others.
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
DandelionPowderman
The band LIVE had a hit called Selling The Drama. When Too Tight came, I couldn't listen to it, since the melody it starts with is so similar. And LIVE isn't exactly my favourite band...
Here's a little comparison:
[www.youtube.com]
That is so far beyond a stretch. There is nothing in common. That moaning singer dude sucks anyway. That band is terrible.
Quote
LeonidPQuote
Fernandobsas
it is interesting how among people who likes the Stones to death, one song can be excelent for somebody and a bad filler to others.
Yes, funny to me, it's become a catch phrase ... some pretty much describe every song as either filler, or stones-by-numbers. I guess they can't think of anything else to say. In actuality, all songs are filler.
Quote
matxilQuote
LeonidPQuote
Fernandobsas
it is interesting how among people who likes the Stones to death, one song can be excelent for somebody and a bad filler to others.
Yes, funny to me, it's become a catch phrase ... some pretty much describe every song as either filler, or stones-by-numbers. I guess they can't think of anything else to say. In actuality, all songs are filler.
It might be hard to come up with a full-proof definition of "filler", but I think most people know what they mean when they say it, and not for lack of "anything else to say".
When you hold a guitar in your hand and strum some chords and then shout something on top: "hold me baby", "I want you", "all night long", it will most probably sound like filler. Rock can be very predictable, based on three basic chords, a pentatonic scale and some shouting in a mike. There are literally millions of songs, all interchangeable, which are all rock and all sound the bloody same.
The art (and difficulty) of rock is to make a song stand-out, give it something special, even though it's still based on such rather basic ingredients (basically the blues, plus some). This is where the Stones often are masters and why Jumping Jack Flash, Brown Sugar, Gimme Shelter, Tumbling Dice are much better rock songs (classics) than the entire works of e.g. Chris Rea, Tom Petty, Status Quo or Bryan Adams. Note that I even mention Tumbling Dice, which does not have an outstanding riff or anything particular outstanding: still there is some "magic" to it, which makes it special. It's often hard to pinpoint what it is, and it might be occasionally subjective too, but certain not entirely. But even the Stones create songs that sound like so many other standard rock songs, which you could create in 10 minutes without even thinking. These are called "filler".
Additionally, since the Stones through the years developed their own special kind of rock music, with a particular feel, type of rhythm, melody etc..., it's now possible for certain Stones songs not only to resemble "any other rock song", but also "a number of other Stones songs". Hence: "Stones by numbers".
Even people who like, say, Hang Fire, Too Tight, I Go Wild, to name a few, will agree that they don't have anything special, and sound like so much other Stones songs. That doesn't mean you cannot like them, but certainly, one would hear they are less special than Jumping Jack Flash. Of course, on the other hand, this forum is an excellent place for people to point out why certain songs which might seem filler, in fact are full of hidden treasures.
Quote
with sssoul
Hm well but if we call anything that isn't the same calibre as Flash, Shelter and Sugar and Dice "filler"
then the term just means "a track somewhere between mediocre and mighty fine".
Quote
LeonidPQuote
matxilQuote
LeonidPQuote
Fernandobsas
it is interesting how among people who likes the Stones to death, one song can be excelent for somebody and a bad filler to others.
Yes, funny to me, it's become a catch phrase ... some pretty much describe every song as either filler, or stones-by-numbers. I guess they can't think of anything else to say. In actuality, all songs are filler.
It might be hard to come up with a full-proof definition of "filler", but I think most people know what they mean when they say it, and not for lack of "anything else to say".
When you hold a guitar in your hand and strum some chords and then shout something on top: "hold me baby", "I want you", "all night long", it will most probably sound like filler. Rock can be very predictable, based on three basic chords, a pentatonic scale and some shouting in a mike. There are literally millions of songs, all interchangeable, which are all rock and all sound the bloody same.
The art (and difficulty) of rock is to make a song stand-out, give it something special, even though it's still based on such rather basic ingredients (basically the blues, plus some). This is where the Stones often are masters and why Jumping Jack Flash, Brown Sugar, Gimme Shelter, Tumbling Dice are much better rock songs (classics) than the entire works of e.g. Chris Rea, Tom Petty, Status Quo or Bryan Adams. Note that I even mention Tumbling Dice, which does not have an outstanding riff or anything particular outstanding: still there is some "magic" to it, which makes it special. It's often hard to pinpoint what it is, and it might be occasionally subjective too, but certain not entirely. But even the Stones create songs that sound like so many other standard rock songs, which you could create in 10 minutes without even thinking. These are called "filler".
Additionally, since the Stones through the years developed their own special kind of rock music, with a particular feel, type of rhythm, melody etc..., it's now possible for certain Stones songs not only to resemble "any other rock song", but also "a number of other Stones songs". Hence: "Stones by numbers".
Even people who like, say, Hang Fire, Too Tight, I Go Wild, to name a few, will agree that they don't have anything special, and sound like so much other Stones songs. That doesn't mean you cannot like them, but certainly, one would hear they are less special than Jumping Jack Flash. Of course, on the other hand, this forum is an excellent place for people to point out why certain songs which might seem filler, in fact are full of hidden treasures.
yeah, or more likely, people can't think of anything else to say.