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: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2
Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Rockman ()
Date: December 20, 2015 02:31

well there's worse things to be called than lizard balls

............



ROCKMAN



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-12-21 10:02 by Rockman.

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Swayed1967 ()
Date: December 21, 2015 09:32

Quote
Turner68
He did not to my ears audibly impact their sound in a meaningful way until GHS and that is where the period starts in my mind, and I am guessing Kennedy's too. Since you mention two tracks from GHS perhaps you also agree. I don't think either song should have ever been released.

Saying this does not mean that Preston is to blame. The blame lies with the stones. Mick's addiction to fame and Keith's to heroin are leading suspects.

That's a bold statement. 100 Years Ago and Doo Doo Doo Doo are solid cuts IMO altho I agree with everyone who says the former runs out of steam (Mick, I'm calling you lazy bones).

I agree with the sentiment though. After 'I Got The Blues' he and the Stones should've parted ways. Goat's Head soup would've suffered as a result - it would've sounded bland and uninspired like It's Only Rock 'N Roll. But then the boys would've been forced to lift their game and the IORR that we know and B&B would've probably have been as strong as Some Girls. Maybe. Just thinking out loud.

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: December 21, 2015 09:57

Quote
Swayed1967
Quote
Turner68
He did not to my ears audibly impact their sound in a meaningful way until GHS and that is where the period starts in my mind, and I am guessing Kennedy's too. Since you mention two tracks from GHS perhaps you also agree. I don't think either song should have ever been released.

Saying this does not mean that Preston is to blame. The blame lies with the stones. Mick's addiction to fame and Keith's to heroin are leading suspects.

That's a bold statement. 100 Years Ago and Doo Doo Doo Doo are solid cuts IMO altho I agree with everyone who says the former runs out of steam (Mick, I'm calling you lazy bones).

I agree with the sentiment though. After 'I Got The Blues' he and the Stones should've parted ways. Goat's Head soup would've suffered as a result - it would've sounded bland and uninspired like It's Only Rock 'N Roll. But then the boys would've been forced to lift their game and the IORR that we know and B&B would've probably have been as strong as Some Girls. Maybe. Just thinking out loud.

Arguably the best two cuts on that record. Of course they should have been released! I think Preston was a monster player and an genius and did nothing but good for the Stones. Some obviously think he started becoming to prominent and took away from the guitar based band they were but I always thought he blended in pretty damn well. Besides, what did they expect when they brought him aboard that he would become Mick's boy like Chuck has become? Preston was a bright star man, one even the Stones couldn't dim.

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: December 21, 2015 17:55

I agree with how good Preston is, but I don't think he was right for the Stones.

However, like I said, I don't blame the much lower quality of GHS and IORR on anyone but the glimmer twins.

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: HMS ()
Date: December 21, 2015 23:20

Maybe also Mick Taylor is partly to blame. His boring and at the same time haughty persona maybe took away the inspiration from the Glimmers. With Ronnie around these albums wouldn´t be so lame and boring, I guess.

Re: 100 Years Ago
Date: December 21, 2015 23:34

Quote
HMS
Maybe also Mick Taylor is partly to blame. His boring and at the same time haughty persona maybe took away the inspiration from the Glimmers. With Ronnie around these albums wouldn´t be so lame and boring, I guess.

Yeah, 100 Years Ago proves it.winking smiley

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: December 22, 2015 00:05

Quote
HMS
Maybe also Mick Taylor is partly to blame. His boring and at the same time haughty persona maybe took away the inspiration from the Glimmers. With Ronnie around these albums wouldn´t be so lame and boring, I guess.

No they would likely be much more lame and boring. Listen to Charlie talking about the lyrical musicality and inspiration MT brought to the Stones. I think he knows what he was talking about. You are confusing personalities for musical contributions. Taylor might have been quiet shy and reserved off stage but when he strapped on a guitar he was anything but lame and boring. But muses are indeed a strange and often intangible thing. I've seen groups of musicians being amazingly cohesive and creative and then one person walks in the room and all the juju goes out the window. Perhaps we can blame this on Bianca. lol

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Hairball ()
Date: December 22, 2015 01:19

Not to knock Ronnie, but he couldn't play the lead on 100 Years Ago if his life depended on it. In fact, he can't come close to playing any Mick Taylor lead properly- it's simply not his style.
Sure he makes a valiant effort on certain CYHMK live versions, but it's a million miles away from the quality of Mick Taylor as seen during 50 & Counting.
It's like asking Ronnie to replicate a Jimi Hendrix lead - it just can't be done.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: December 22, 2015 01:21

Quote
Naturalust
Quote
HMS
Maybe also Mick Taylor is partly to blame. His boring and at the same time haughty persona maybe took away the inspiration from the Glimmers. With Ronnie around these albums wouldn´t be so lame and boring, I guess.

No they would likely be much more lame and boring. Listen to Charlie talking about the lyrical musicality and inspiration MT brought to the Stones. I think he knows what he was talking about. You are confusing personalities for musical contributions. Taylor might have been quiet shy and reserved off stage but when he strapped on a guitar he was anything but lame and boring. But muses are indeed a strange and often intangible thing. I've seen groups of musicians being amazingly cohesive and creative and then one person walks in the room and all the juju goes out the window. Perhaps we can blame this on Bianca. lol

Keith and Mick must bear the responsibility. They each had their addictions - smack and fame respectively - that seem to have superseded their love for music, at least for a time.

I think they didn't know how to use Mick Taylor properly in the studio, and that Billy Preston was a band aid who didn't fit in particularly well either.

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: December 22, 2015 01:32

Quote
Turner68
Quote
Naturalust
Quote
HMS
Maybe also Mick Taylor is partly to blame. His boring and at the same time haughty persona maybe took away the inspiration from the Glimmers. With Ronnie around these albums wouldn´t be so lame and boring, I guess.

No they would likely be much more lame and boring. Listen to Charlie talking about the lyrical musicality and inspiration MT brought to the Stones. I think he knows what he was talking about. You are confusing personalities for musical contributions. Taylor might have been quiet shy and reserved off stage but when he strapped on a guitar he was anything but lame and boring. But muses are indeed a strange and often intangible thing. I've seen groups of musicians being amazingly cohesive and creative and then one person walks in the room and all the juju goes out the window. Perhaps we can blame this on Bianca. lol

Keith and Mick must bear the responsibility. They each had their addictions - smack and fame respectively - that seem to have superseded their love for music, at least for a time.

I think they didn't know how to use Mick Taylor properly in the studio, and that Billy Preston was a band aid who didn't fit in particularly well either.

Not sure how much an addiction to fame would effect the studio work since he wasn't trying to be famous in the studio but who knows...let's just put that into the Bianca category. lol

But there is a another factor that certainly effected the process and that was the reduced influence and effectiveness Jimmy Miller started having. Whether due to the Glimmers reduced reliance on him or his own reduced capabilities due to his own heroin dependence it's hard to say but I suspect the effect was more than we realize. Andy Johns being strung out probably didn't help matters either.

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Natlanta ()
Date: December 22, 2015 03:14

Quote
Rockman
well there's worse things to be called than lizard balls

............

i was going to suggest they name the new album LP but i guess i won't now.

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Tops ()
Date: December 22, 2015 09:42

Quote
Turner68
I think they didn't know how to use Mick Taylor properly in the studio, and that Billy Preston was a band aid who didn't fit in particularly well either.

I actually think Billy Preston was a oood choice. He did a lot for the band. And they had to try for something new. The couldnt go for another Exile.


Concerning Mick T. Mick and Keith didn't know how to use Mick T in the studio ?? Maybe on Exile. I think his best contributions to the band are found on Sticky and GHS.

ON IORR. He seems to have already given it up. Realising that he wasnt going to get any songwriting credits and that "his songs" were not going to be played (allowed to be played) in Concert. (Sway, Winter, Moonlight Mile, Can't You Hear Me Knocking, 100 Years Ago)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-12-22 10:10 by Tops.

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: marcovandereijk ()
Date: December 22, 2015 10:01

If put in perspective of the early 70s, it's not as strange as it seems now that they
came up with a song like 100 Years Ago.

It was the year of Quadrophenia, Selling England by the Pound, Dark Side of the Moon,
even Tubular Bells can be mentioned in this list.
All rock bands were expanding their horizon. More complexity, ingenious crafted songs
with multiple parts and inventive instumentation were hot at the time.

And there is certainly one influentual member in the band who's always trying to venture
what is hot at the time.

Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: NICOS ()
Date: December 23, 2015 16:34

Today it's 100 years ago my mother was born 23-12-1915.........she reached the 91 which a great age thumbs up

__________________________

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: December 23, 2015 17:12

Quote
Naturalust
Quote
HMS
Maybe also Mick Taylor is partly to blame. His boring and at the same time haughty persona maybe took away the inspiration from the Glimmers. With Ronnie around these albums wouldn´t be so lame and boring, I guess.

No they would likely be much more lame and boring. Listen to Charlie talking about the lyrical musicality and inspiration MT brought to the Stones. I think he knows what he was talking about. You are confusing personalities for musical contributions. Taylor might have been quiet shy and reserved off stage but when he strapped on a guitar he was anything but lame and boring. But muses are indeed a strange and often intangible thing. I've seen groups of musicians being amazingly cohesive and creative and then one person walks in the room and all the juju goes out the window. Perhaps we can blame this on Bianca. lol

Naturalust, you shouldn't waste time making sense of things to HMS: it doesn't matter. While he's guessing that Mick Taylor is boring everyone else knows he's not.

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Turner68 ()
Date: December 23, 2015 17:23

Quote
NICOS
Today it's 100 years ago my mother was born 23-12-1915.........she reached the 91 which a great age thumbs up

Cheers! You some have great DNA!

Re: 100 Years Ago
Posted by: Reagan ()
Date: December 24, 2015 00:32

Quote
NICOS
Today it's 100 years ago my mother was born 23-12-1915.........she reached the 91 which a great age thumbs up

Hats off to her and to you!

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1603
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