Tell Me :
Talk
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Or maybe "schmaltzy and sentimental"? No disrespect, I think it's a very good song, very well produced and one of the few highlights of GHS. But of course, there is a definite element of kitsch in it. But it works. Only Mick Jagger can pull that off (in this case, obviously we can all think of examples where his intents at tongue-in-cheek kitsch do not work). I think it works because actually it's ambiguous. It's part tongue-in-cheek but it also partly feels real. Mick Jagger is at his best when he somehow balances between those two extremes.
It's like Picasso painting a gypsy with a teary eye (I'm sorry, that's an absurd comparison, but I had fun coming up with it).
They key to succeeding is indeed the brilliant vocals, imo. Just like it was on tracks like As Tears Go By and Back Street Girl.
The vocals are simply wonderful.
Yes, that's a good observation, As Tears Go By, is similar in that way. (BSG I don't like so much)
No. That's got zero relevance, just like HMS. Comparing the 20teens to the 1970s is only a matter of the culture of sales, not the culture of albums being made. Plus the Stones are 300 years old now compared to then. They obviously don't have the urge to record a new album.
They could toss off 20 blues albums in their sleep. ABB was touted as their last album when it came out in the cover story of Billboard magazine. In essence it's still true - they've yet to release a new studio album of originals.
A crybaby whines about cheating, something the Stones have never done. You're a crybaby. You pose as a Stones fan. A real Stones fan knows good music from bad.
You're not a real Stones fan. You're a poseur.
Wanting to know about how an album was created is simply that - it has nothing to do with when or who.
.... Exactly, the Stones were completely up front about the origins of TY right from the start, (although I can see why Mick Taylor might have spluttered into his morning tea to suddenly find his takes on some tracks) .......just as they were when they told us last year that although they completed Blue & Lonesome in two days, they didn't actually write the songs..........
..........
Spot on.
I disagree. Imo crybabies are the ones who seemingly can't handle criticism of Sticky Fingers or Keith Richards.
That's pathetic. How could you disagree about HMS being a crybaby?
Can't we get back to the soup .......
ROCKMAN
I always thought the simple acoustic guitar playing along with the subtle chord changes and overall structure were the key to this songs success, while Mick's vocals were the icing on the cake.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-02-21 20:37 by Hairball.
Those songs have strings and accordions, which do a lot for the dynamics like for Angie.
However, all those songs start out stripped-down and could still have remained good had they stayed that way, because of strong songwriting, imo.
If unclear, I was referring specifically to Angie.
My point was it is the simple acoustic guitar, subtle chord changes, and overall structure of the studio version which are it's strength - Micks vocals are nice and the strings actually add something to the vibe imo.
But strip away all the strings from the studio version (as you say), and it would still be great without a doubt - maybe just not as majestic. Same goes for As Tears Go by imo.
The there's Angie in a live setting - specifically '73 MT versions (but others after that also), there's no strings to be heard anywhere - add some little electric guitar and keyboard embellishment, and it's still great - some say the best versions ever.
Angie- Brussels, 1973
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
I think we're agreeing regarding the studio version being superior.
And even without the strings and Micks studio vocals, it's still a great song.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Dynamic Sound Studios - Kingston Jamaica 1972
ROCKMAN
................................................................................................................................... Keith Richards - According To The Rolling Stones
ROCKMAN
I don't see "Angie" and "As Tears Go By" in a similar vein at all. Besides them being ballads; and to feature some strings. And to have a lead vocal.
Bu they both succedd for completely different reasons.
'Angie' is a brilliant, beautiful lead vocal. IMO it is one of Jagger's very best. It pulls it off. Because it comes off as so heart felt and true.. I mean "I hate that sadness in your eyes" in that voice, in that melody. But 'Angie' has a lot of soul in it too. There's that Hi-Hat. The guitar part, I think never plays the same thing twice.
So, by '73, the Stones had found their own voice; ( one could say they had found it, and already forgotten it = that is how far along they were). Their own production style; their own strings.
"As Tears Go By" is a tribute. A nod. The guitar part is Keith's version of a very straight, stiff collar part. Jagger sings it in mock old style accent. The strings are a nod to chamber type arrangement. I think, at that early stage, on a song this naked, they had to find a way to deliver it. And their own voice was not strong enough yet.
Now that I think of it "Back Street Girl" is halfway between those two.
Do any Stones' songs have an accordion?
"No Anchovies, Please"
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 21, 2017 11:34
Quote
Swayed1967Quote
Redhotcarpet
Goat's is a better album thank Sticky. There. I said it.
"Angie" - great ballad. Yes it's sleazy and vulgar but Mick is great on it.
Angie is 'sleazy and vulgar?' Hmmm, I’d like to think that you meant to describe Star Star but picked on Angie by mistake. But judging from your above reviews you’re rather prone to making lunatic statements so I don’t know what to think....
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
matxil
()
Date: February 21, 2017 12:09
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Swayed1967Quote
Redhotcarpet
Goat's is a better album thank Sticky. There. I said it.
"Angie" - great ballad. Yes it's sleazy and vulgar but Mick is great on it.
Angie is 'sleazy and vulgar?' Hmmm, I’d like to think that you meant to describe Star Star but picked on Angie by mistake. But judging from your above reviews you’re rather prone to making lunatic statements so I don’t know what to think....
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Or maybe "schmaltzy and sentimental"? No disrespect, I think it's a very good song, very well produced and one of the few highlights of GHS. But of course, there is a definite element of kitsch in it. But it works. Only Mick Jagger can pull that off (in this case, obviously we can all think of examples where his intents at tongue-in-cheek kitsch do not work). I think it works because actually it's ambiguous. It's part tongue-in-cheek but it also partly feels real. Mick Jagger is at his best when he somehow balances between those two extremes.
It's like Picasso painting a gypsy with a teary eye (I'm sorry, that's an absurd comparison, but I had fun coming up with it).
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 21, 2017 12:18
Quote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Swayed1967Quote
Redhotcarpet
Goat's is a better album thank Sticky. There. I said it.
"Angie" - great ballad. Yes it's sleazy and vulgar but Mick is great on it.
Angie is 'sleazy and vulgar?' Hmmm, I’d like to think that you meant to describe Star Star but picked on Angie by mistake. But judging from your above reviews you’re rather prone to making lunatic statements so I don’t know what to think....
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Or maybe "schmaltzy and sentimental"? No disrespect, I think it's a very good song, very well produced and one of the few highlights of GHS. But of course, there is a definite element of kitsch in it. But it works. Only Mick Jagger can pull that off (in this case, obviously we can all think of examples where his intents at tongue-in-cheek kitsch do not work). I think it works because actually it's ambiguous. It's part tongue-in-cheek but it also partly feels real. Mick Jagger is at his best when he somehow balances between those two extremes.
It's like Picasso painting a gypsy with a teary eye (I'm sorry, that's an absurd comparison, but I had fun coming up with it).
They key to succeeding is indeed the brilliant vocals, imo. Just like it was on tracks like As Tears Go By and Back Street Girl.
The vocals are simply wonderful.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
matxil
()
Date: February 21, 2017 12:27
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Swayed1967Quote
Redhotcarpet
Goat's is a better album thank Sticky. There. I said it.
"Angie" - great ballad. Yes it's sleazy and vulgar but Mick is great on it.
Angie is 'sleazy and vulgar?' Hmmm, I’d like to think that you meant to describe Star Star but picked on Angie by mistake. But judging from your above reviews you’re rather prone to making lunatic statements so I don’t know what to think....
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Or maybe "schmaltzy and sentimental"? No disrespect, I think it's a very good song, very well produced and one of the few highlights of GHS. But of course, there is a definite element of kitsch in it. But it works. Only Mick Jagger can pull that off (in this case, obviously we can all think of examples where his intents at tongue-in-cheek kitsch do not work). I think it works because actually it's ambiguous. It's part tongue-in-cheek but it also partly feels real. Mick Jagger is at his best when he somehow balances between those two extremes.
It's like Picasso painting a gypsy with a teary eye (I'm sorry, that's an absurd comparison, but I had fun coming up with it).
They key to succeeding is indeed the brilliant vocals, imo. Just like it was on tracks like As Tears Go By and Back Street Girl.
The vocals are simply wonderful.
Yes, that's a good observation, As Tears Go By, is similar in that way. (BSG I don't like so much)
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: February 21, 2017 14:46
Quote
Redhotcarpet
But i think HMS is onto something, the LP-era sucked many artists dry. Compare airplay and general positive reviews of Doom and Gloom to Bigger Bang. Blue and lonesome is a coveralbum
No. That's got zero relevance, just like HMS. Comparing the 20teens to the 1970s is only a matter of the culture of sales, not the culture of albums being made. Plus the Stones are 300 years old now compared to then. They obviously don't have the urge to record a new album.
They could toss off 20 blues albums in their sleep. ABB was touted as their last album when it came out in the cover story of Billboard magazine. In essence it's still true - they've yet to release a new studio album of originals.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
HMS
()
Date: February 21, 2017 16:33
GLS it seems the only "poseur" around here is YOU.
If the Stones would assemble an album of old songs recorded from 1972-2012 and sell it to us this christmas as "a new studio album" without telling us the real recording dates you wouldn´t even care, for you it would be the same as if they had recorded it live in a two-days-session last summer.
"True fans don´t care" What a hell of a rubbish. I just can´t believe that you mean what you are saying... Any true fan would want to know as much as possible about the way a new album is created. True fans do not have to tolerate cheating.
If the Stones would assemble an album of old songs recorded from 1972-2012 and sell it to us this christmas as "a new studio album" without telling us the real recording dates you wouldn´t even care, for you it would be the same as if they had recorded it live in a two-days-session last summer.
"True fans don´t care" What a hell of a rubbish. I just can´t believe that you mean what you are saying... Any true fan would want to know as much as possible about the way a new album is created. True fans do not have to tolerate cheating.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: February 21, 2017 16:42
Quote
HMS
GLS it seems the only "poseur" around here is YOU.
If the Stones would assemble an album of old songs recorded from 1972-2012 and sell it to us this christmas as "a new studio album" without telling us the real recording dates you wouldn´t even care, for you it would be the same as if they had recorded it live in a two-days-session last summer.
"True fans don´t care" What a hell of a rubbish. I just can´t believe that you mean what you are saying... Any true fan would want to know as much as possible about the way a new album is created. True fans do not have to tolerate cheating.
A crybaby whines about cheating, something the Stones have never done. You're a crybaby. You pose as a Stones fan. A real Stones fan knows good music from bad.
You're not a real Stones fan. You're a poseur.
Wanting to know about how an album was created is simply that - it has nothing to do with when or who.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
EddieByword
()
Date: February 21, 2017 16:52
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
HMS
GLS it seems the only "poseur" around here is YOU.
If the Stones would assemble an album of old songs recorded from 1972-2012 and sell it to us this christmas as "a new studio album" without telling us the real recording dates you wouldn´t even care, for you it would be the same as if they had recorded it live in a two-days-session last summer.
"True fans don´t care" What a hell of a rubbish. I just can´t believe that you mean what you are saying... Any true fan would want to know as much as possible about the way a new album is created. True fans do not have to tolerate cheating.
A crybaby whines about cheating, something the Stones have never done. You're a crybaby. You pose as a Stones fan. A real Stones fan knows good music from bad.
You're not a real Stones fan. You're a poseur.
Wanting to know about how an album was created is simply that - it has nothing to do with when or who.
.... Exactly, the Stones were completely up front about the origins of TY right from the start, (although I can see why Mick Taylor might have spluttered into his morning tea to suddenly find his takes on some tracks) .......just as they were when they told us last year that although they completed Blue & Lonesome in two days, they didn't actually write the songs.......... ..........Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: February 21, 2017 16:55
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Swayed1967Quote
Redhotcarpet
Goat's is a better album thank Sticky. There. I said it.
"Angie" - great ballad. Yes it's sleazy and vulgar but Mick is great on it.
Angie is 'sleazy and vulgar?' Hmmm, I’d like to think that you meant to describe Star Star but picked on Angie by mistake. But judging from your above reviews you’re rather prone to making lunatic statements so I don’t know what to think....
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Or maybe "schmaltzy and sentimental"? No disrespect, I think it's a very good song, very well produced and one of the few highlights of GHS. But of course, there is a definite element of kitsch in it. But it works. Only Mick Jagger can pull that off (in this case, obviously we can all think of examples where his intents at tongue-in-cheek kitsch do not work). I think it works because actually it's ambiguous. It's part tongue-in-cheek but it also partly feels real. Mick Jagger is at his best when he somehow balances between those two extremes.
It's like Picasso painting a gypsy with a teary eye (I'm sorry, that's an absurd comparison, but I had fun coming up with it).
They key to succeeding is indeed the brilliant vocals, imo. Just like it was on tracks like As Tears Go By and Back Street Girl.
The vocals are simply wonderful.
Spot on.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: February 21, 2017 16:57
Quote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Swayed1967Quote
Redhotcarpet
Goat's is a better album thank Sticky. There. I said it.
"Angie" - great ballad. Yes it's sleazy and vulgar but Mick is great on it.
Angie is 'sleazy and vulgar?' Hmmm, I’d like to think that you meant to describe Star Star but picked on Angie by mistake. But judging from your above reviews you’re rather prone to making lunatic statements so I don’t know what to think....
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Or maybe "schmaltzy and sentimental"? No disrespect, I think it's a very good song, very well produced and one of the few highlights of GHS. But of course, there is a definite element of kitsch in it. But it works. Only Mick Jagger can pull that off (in this case, obviously we can all think of examples where his intents at tongue-in-cheek kitsch do not work). I think it works because actually it's ambiguous. It's part tongue-in-cheek but it also partly feels real. Mick Jagger is at his best when he somehow balances between those two extremes.
It's like Picasso painting a gypsy with a teary eye (I'm sorry, that's an absurd comparison, but I had fun coming up with it).
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: February 21, 2017 17:00
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
HMS
GLS it seems the only "poseur" around here is YOU.
If the Stones would assemble an album of old songs recorded from 1972-2012 and sell it to us this christmas as "a new studio album" without telling us the real recording dates you wouldn´t even care, for you it would be the same as if they had recorded it live in a two-days-session last summer.
"True fans don´t care" What a hell of a rubbish. I just can´t believe that you mean what you are saying... Any true fan would want to know as much as possible about the way a new album is created. True fans do not have to tolerate cheating.
A crybaby whines about cheating, something the Stones have never done. You're a crybaby. You pose as a Stones fan. A real Stones fan knows good music from bad.
You're not a real Stones fan. You're a poseur.
Wanting to know about how an album was created is simply that - it has nothing to do with when or who.
I disagree. Imo crybabies are the ones who seemingly can't handle criticism of Sticky Fingers or Keith Richards.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: February 21, 2017 17:11
Quote
Redhotcarpet
I disagree. Imo crybabies are the ones who seemingly can't handle criticism of Sticky Fingers or Keith Richards.
That's pathetic. How could you disagree about HMS being a crybaby?
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: February 21, 2017 20:27
Can't we get back to the soup .......
ROCKMAN
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: February 21, 2017 20:36
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Swayed1967Quote
Redhotcarpet
Goat's is a better album thank Sticky. There. I said it.
"Angie" - great ballad. Yes it's sleazy and vulgar but Mick is great on it.
Angie is 'sleazy and vulgar?' Hmmm, I’d like to think that you meant to describe Star Star but picked on Angie by mistake. But judging from your above reviews you’re rather prone to making lunatic statements so I don’t know what to think....
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Or maybe "schmaltzy and sentimental"? No disrespect, I think it's a very good song, very well produced and one of the few highlights of GHS. But of course, there is a definite element of kitsch in it. But it works. Only Mick Jagger can pull that off (in this case, obviously we can all think of examples where his intents at tongue-in-cheek kitsch do not work). I think it works because actually it's ambiguous. It's part tongue-in-cheek but it also partly feels real. Mick Jagger is at his best when he somehow balances between those two extremes.
It's like Picasso painting a gypsy with a teary eye (I'm sorry, that's an absurd comparison, but I had fun coming up with it).
They key to succeeding is indeed the brilliant vocals, imo. Just like it was on tracks like As Tears Go By and Back Street Girl.
The vocals are simply wonderful.
I always thought the simple acoustic guitar playing along with the subtle chord changes and overall structure were the key to this songs success, while Mick's vocals were the icing on the cake.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-02-21 20:37 by Hairball.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: February 21, 2017 22:51
It's a sad day when HMS is finally fed up with GasLightStreet. If they can't make it last, what hope for happiness can any of us have?
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 22, 2017 00:41
Quote
HairballQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Swayed1967Quote
Redhotcarpet
Goat's is a better album thank Sticky. There. I said it.
"Angie" - great ballad. Yes it's sleazy and vulgar but Mick is great on it.
Angie is 'sleazy and vulgar?' Hmmm, I’d like to think that you meant to describe Star Star but picked on Angie by mistake. But judging from your above reviews you’re rather prone to making lunatic statements so I don’t know what to think....
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Or maybe "schmaltzy and sentimental"? No disrespect, I think it's a very good song, very well produced and one of the few highlights of GHS. But of course, there is a definite element of kitsch in it. But it works. Only Mick Jagger can pull that off (in this case, obviously we can all think of examples where his intents at tongue-in-cheek kitsch do not work). I think it works because actually it's ambiguous. It's part tongue-in-cheek but it also partly feels real. Mick Jagger is at his best when he somehow balances between those two extremes.
It's like Picasso painting a gypsy with a teary eye (I'm sorry, that's an absurd comparison, but I had fun coming up with it).
They key to succeeding is indeed the brilliant vocals, imo. Just like it was on tracks like As Tears Go By and Back Street Girl.
The vocals are simply wonderful.
I always thought the simple acoustic guitar playing along with the subtle chord changes and overall structure were the key to this songs success, while Mick's vocals were the icing on the cake.
Those songs have strings and accordions, which do a lot for the dynamics like for Angie.
However, all those songs start out stripped-down and could still have remained good had they stayed that way, because of strong songwriting, imo.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: February 22, 2017 01:11
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
HairballQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Swayed1967Quote
Redhotcarpet
Goat's is a better album thank Sticky. There. I said it.
"Angie" - great ballad. Yes it's sleazy and vulgar but Mick is great on it.
Angie is 'sleazy and vulgar?' Hmmm, I’d like to think that you meant to describe Star Star but picked on Angie by mistake. But judging from your above reviews you’re rather prone to making lunatic statements so I don’t know what to think....
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Or maybe "schmaltzy and sentimental"? No disrespect, I think it's a very good song, very well produced and one of the few highlights of GHS. But of course, there is a definite element of kitsch in it. But it works. Only Mick Jagger can pull that off (in this case, obviously we can all think of examples where his intents at tongue-in-cheek kitsch do not work). I think it works because actually it's ambiguous. It's part tongue-in-cheek but it also partly feels real. Mick Jagger is at his best when he somehow balances between those two extremes.
It's like Picasso painting a gypsy with a teary eye (I'm sorry, that's an absurd comparison, but I had fun coming up with it).
They key to succeeding is indeed the brilliant vocals, imo. Just like it was on tracks like As Tears Go By and Back Street Girl.
The vocals are simply wonderful.
I always thought the simple acoustic guitar playing along with the subtle chord changes and overall structure were the key to this songs success, while Mick's vocals were the icing on the cake.
Those songs have strings and accordions, which do a lot for the dynamics like for Angie.
However, all those songs start out stripped-down and could still have remained good had they stayed that way, because of strong songwriting, imo.
If unclear, I was referring specifically to Angie.
My point was it is the simple acoustic guitar, subtle chord changes, and overall structure of the studio version which are it's strength - Micks vocals are nice and the strings actually add something to the vibe imo.
But strip away all the strings from the studio version (as you say), and it would still be great without a doubt - maybe just not as majestic. Same goes for As Tears Go by imo.
The there's Angie in a live setting - specifically '73 MT versions (but others after that also), there's no strings to be heard anywhere - add some little electric guitar and keyboard embellishment, and it's still great - some say the best versions ever.
Angie- Brussels, 1973
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 22, 2017 01:25
Love the live versions, but it's just not the same piece of art, imo.
Jagger's vocals are mesmerising on the studio version.
Billy is not up there with Nicky, either.
But by all means, the live versions are great, just like YCAGWYW in the 70s. But they're different.
Jagger's vocals are mesmerising on the studio version.
Billy is not up there with Nicky, either.
But by all means, the live versions are great, just like YCAGWYW in the 70s. But they're different.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: February 22, 2017 01:33
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Love the live versions, but it's just not the same piece of art, imo.
Jagger's vocals are mesmerising on the studio version.
Billy is not up there with Nicky, either.
But by all means, the live versions are great, just like YCAGWYW in the 70s. But they're different.
I think we're agreeing regarding the studio version being superior.
And even without the strings and Micks studio vocals, it's still a great song.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: February 22, 2017 10:00
Dynamic Sound Studios - Kingston Jamaica 1972
ROCKMAN
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: February 22, 2017 10:12
................................................................................................................................... Keith Richards - According To The Rolling Stones
ROCKMAN
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Palace Revolution 2000
()
Date: February 22, 2017 10:41
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Swayed1967Quote
Redhotcarpet
Goat's is a better album thank Sticky. There. I said it.
"Angie" - great ballad. Yes it's sleazy and vulgar but Mick is great on it.
Angie is 'sleazy and vulgar?' Hmmm, I’d like to think that you meant to describe Star Star but picked on Angie by mistake. But judging from your above reviews you’re rather prone to making lunatic statements so I don’t know what to think....
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Or maybe "schmaltzy and sentimental"? No disrespect, I think it's a very good song, very well produced and one of the few highlights of GHS. But of course, there is a definite element of kitsch in it. But it works. Only Mick Jagger can pull that off (in this case, obviously we can all think of examples where his intents at tongue-in-cheek kitsch do not work). I think it works because actually it's ambiguous. It's part tongue-in-cheek but it also partly feels real. Mick Jagger is at his best when he somehow balances between those two extremes.
It's like Picasso painting a gypsy with a teary eye (I'm sorry, that's an absurd comparison, but I had fun coming up with it).
They key to succeeding is indeed the brilliant vocals, imo. Just like it was on tracks like As Tears Go By and Back Street Girl.
The vocals are simply wonderful.
I don't see "Angie" and "As Tears Go By" in a similar vein at all. Besides them being ballads; and to feature some strings. And to have a lead vocal.
Bu they both succedd for completely different reasons.
'Angie' is a brilliant, beautiful lead vocal. IMO it is one of Jagger's very best. It pulls it off. Because it comes off as so heart felt and true.. I mean "I hate that sadness in your eyes" in that voice, in that melody. But 'Angie' has a lot of soul in it too. There's that Hi-Hat. The guitar part, I think never plays the same thing twice.
So, by '73, the Stones had found their own voice; ( one could say they had found it, and already forgotten it = that is how far along they were). Their own production style; their own strings.
"As Tears Go By" is a tribute. A nod. The guitar part is Keith's version of a very straight, stiff collar part. Jagger sings it in mock old style accent. The strings are a nod to chamber type arrangement. I think, at that early stage, on a song this naked, they had to find a way to deliver it. And their own voice was not strong enough yet.
Now that I think of it "Back Street Girl" is halfway between those two.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 22, 2017 11:23
I meant the «angelic» side of Mick's voice is present in both of those songs.
Many friends who don't like the Stones have asked me who is singing those numbers, and refuse to believe it's Jagger.
I agree about the great stuff that come with Angie, that you pointed out. Let's not forget Taylor's 12 string. It's not very audible, but it's very important to the wholeness. The newer remasters have actually brought it a bit closer to the front of the soundscape (by panning it a bit EQ-wise, I believe).
However, Mick's very naked and «clean» singing-style make those two songs have a lot in common, imo. And there aren't many tracks where he sang like that.
Many friends who don't like the Stones have asked me who is singing those numbers, and refuse to believe it's Jagger.
I agree about the great stuff that come with Angie, that you pointed out. Let's not forget Taylor's 12 string. It's not very audible, but it's very important to the wholeness. The newer remasters have actually brought it a bit closer to the front of the soundscape (by panning it a bit EQ-wise, I believe).
However, Mick's very naked and «clean» singing-style make those two songs have a lot in common, imo. And there aren't many tracks where he sang like that.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Elmo Lewis
()
Date: February 22, 2017 17:15
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
HairballQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Swayed1967Quote
Redhotcarpet
Goat's is a better album thank Sticky. There. I said it.
"Angie" - great ballad. Yes it's sleazy and vulgar but Mick is great on it.
Angie is 'sleazy and vulgar?' Hmmm, I’d like to think that you meant to describe Star Star but picked on Angie by mistake. But judging from your above reviews you’re rather prone to making lunatic statements so I don’t know what to think....
He probably meant «Cheesy and vinegar»...
Or maybe "schmaltzy and sentimental"? No disrespect, I think it's a very good song, very well produced and one of the few highlights of GHS. But of course, there is a definite element of kitsch in it. But it works. Only Mick Jagger can pull that off (in this case, obviously we can all think of examples where his intents at tongue-in-cheek kitsch do not work). I think it works because actually it's ambiguous. It's part tongue-in-cheek but it also partly feels real. Mick Jagger is at his best when he somehow balances between those two extremes.
It's like Picasso painting a gypsy with a teary eye (I'm sorry, that's an absurd comparison, but I had fun coming up with it).
They key to succeeding is indeed the brilliant vocals, imo. Just like it was on tracks like As Tears Go By and Back Street Girl.
The vocals are simply wonderful.
I always thought the simple acoustic guitar playing along with the subtle chord changes and overall structure were the key to this songs success, while Mick's vocals were the icing on the cake.
Those songs have strings and accordions, which do a lot for the dynamics like for Angie.
However, all those songs start out stripped-down and could still have remained good had they stayed that way, because of strong songwriting, imo.
Do any Stones' songs have an accordion?
"No Anchovies, Please"
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: February 22, 2017 17:22
Apart from "Backstreet Girl" I'm guessing you mean. "Sweethearts Together" for one. There's some accordion on TALK IS CHEAP as well if you count solo stuff.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Elmo Lewis
()
Date: February 22, 2017 18:02
Thanks, Rocky, for refreshing my memory!
"No Anchovies, Please"
"No Anchovies, Please"
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
soulsurvivor1
()
Date: February 22, 2017 18:25
This is a good Stones album with tracks that range from exceptional to mediocre.
Albums like Dirty Work, Undercover, Emotional Rescue are examples of albums that in my opinion are far more disappointing than Goat's Head Soup. Dancing With Mr. D, Heartbreaker, Angie, Silver Train, and Star Star are standout tracks. In my opinion, the other album tracks are a cut below these, they still have redeeming qualities about them.
100 Years ago- Great Wah Wah guitar solo by Mick Taylor
Coming Down Again- Good vocal by Keith- interesting subject matter!
Hide Your Love - Great solos by Mick Taylor - Very Bar - Room Bluesy Sound
Winter- Great Solos by Mick Taylor - Good Lyrics and very heartfelt vocal by Mick Jagger- Charlie's drumming hits the spot
Can You Hear The Music- interesting song-in my opinion a strange addition to the album - Save Me (Criss Cross Man) would have worked much better on this album.
Albums like Dirty Work, Undercover, Emotional Rescue are examples of albums that in my opinion are far more disappointing than Goat's Head Soup. Dancing With Mr. D, Heartbreaker, Angie, Silver Train, and Star Star are standout tracks. In my opinion, the other album tracks are a cut below these, they still have redeeming qualities about them.
100 Years ago- Great Wah Wah guitar solo by Mick Taylor
Coming Down Again- Good vocal by Keith- interesting subject matter!
Hide Your Love - Great solos by Mick Taylor - Very Bar - Room Bluesy Sound
Winter- Great Solos by Mick Taylor - Good Lyrics and very heartfelt vocal by Mick Jagger- Charlie's drumming hits the spot
Can You Hear The Music- interesting song-in my opinion a strange addition to the album - Save Me (Criss Cross Man) would have worked much better on this album.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: February 22, 2017 18:37
I withdraw my comment about Angie - a great pop ballad by Keith and Mick and sung beautifully by Mick. The studio version is perhaps kitsch (thanks to that easy route through the E7 chord and the name Angie) yet great. The live versions from 1973 are amazing but dont miss the 1975 or 1976 versions.
Re: Goat's Head Soup opinions
Posted by:
Ross
()
Date: February 22, 2017 19:34
Who all remembers what a WTF moment it was when you heard Angie for the first time as the single off the new Stones album? I was 15 and continually trying to convince my non-Stones friends what a bad-ass band the Stones were...then they release a schmaltzy ballad!
After a few listens, I adjusted and love the song. Great arrangement (in spite of the strings), Nicky is at the top of his game, and Jagger's vocals are heartfelt. To these ears, it is one of their finest ballads.
After a few listens, I adjusted and love the song. Great arrangement (in spite of the strings), Nicky is at the top of his game, and Jagger's vocals are heartfelt. To these ears, it is one of their finest ballads.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
charlystone , ChrisL , daspyknows , django , FoolToCry , GAFF , GJB , hockenheim95 , hot stuff , imthemastah , Irix , JDSAM1994 , keefmick , marclaff , Milan , MJAGGER123 , rastakeith , riccardo99 , rogerriffin , sepi , spunky , SS , stonenut356 , StonyRoad
Guests:
1146
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10