Tell Me :
Talk
There's been several almost, could have been, maybe, not quite hit type songs that were truly almost, could have been, maybe, but not quite hit songs from the last few decades, and none were ever able to match the familiarity and anthemic quality of Start Me Up. Personally, I grew a bit tired of the studio version Start Me Up a few months after it was released after the massive exposure on the radio, yet there's no denying the signature riff, the great Jagger lyrics and vocals, and the all-around Stonesy vibe - a live Stones show in a massive stadium or arena wouldn't quite feel the same without it in the latter era. I love Harlem Shuffle, yet it's a cover and they never played it enough live to give it the warhorse status. I'm not a fan of You Got Me Rocking, yet they play it quite often - almost forcing the issue that it's a "great" tune, but even with that type of live presence, the song is basically unknown as far as radio play and the general masses. There's other examples of almost, could have been, maybe, not quite hit type songs that just haven't left the same impression as the indelible Start Me Up, and in many cases thankfully so - imagine if the wimpish Don't Stop had become a warhorse and was played at every show? It's basically a mediocre tune, and for many it would have been a perfect time to sneak off to the restrooms or the bar for a drink. Still though, whenever they did play some of those new songs while they were still new such as Don't Stop during Licks or even Doom and Gloom and One More Shot during 50 and Counting, it was a breath of fresh air...maybe not the most pleasant fresh air, but at least something contemporary. Would have loved to hear more of the blues covers live from Blue and Lonesome as those tunes were far better when played live, but again they were simply covers that could never reach the status of Start Me Up simply because they're covers. Rambling on here, but guess this is what the future will be when the Stones are a thing of the past...the would have, should have, could have, almost, maybe, not quite type of speculation that will continue on and on for years to come. Maybe they'll have one more gigantic hit, and will play it at every show during the 60th anniversary tour, and one way or another it will end up there in the pantheon of other Stones greats...right alongside Satisfaction, Start Me Up, Sympathy, Gimme Shelter...wishful thinking maybe, but ya never know........
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 00:26 by Hairball.
These are the numbers for the current hits on the Billboard Hot 100:
#1 Polo G's "Rapstar"
"Rapstar," released on Columbia Records, drew 40.3 million U.S. streams (down 25%) and sold 2,400 downloads (down 55%) in the week ending April 22, according to MRC Data. It also attracted 3 million radio airplay audience impressions (up 254%) in the week ending April 25.
Silk Sonic's "Leave the Door Open" rebounds 3-2 on the Hot 100, two weeks after reaching No. 1. It adds a second week at No. 1 on Radio Songs (71.3 million, up 9%), as it tops the multi-metric Hot R&B Songs chart for a fifth frame.
Dua Lipa's "Levitating," featuring DaBaby, returns to its No. 5 Hot 100 high, first reached two months ago, on the charts dated Feb. 6 and 13. "Levitating" ascends 9-6 on Streaming Songs (20.7 million, up 13%), a new best rank, and 13-6 on Digital Song Sales (9,600, up 34%).
Last week's top rock song in the Billboard Hot 100 was Follow You by Imagine Dragons which ranks at #84 (!), it had 4.5 million streams and 4.1 million radio audience impresions, anemic numbers in comparison to the real hits nowadays, sadly rock music is a cult genre by general audience.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 01:22 by georgelicks.
Actually, it did make it to number 5 on Billboard Hot 100, Number 1 in Canada, and after which a mixed bag of success around the rest of the world:
[en.wikipedia.org])
I have to agree with you. Much as I liked Mixed Emotions when it came out, it was a bit 'neutered', safe, though still a decent enough song, could have been better.
A precursor to Don't Stop which is just 'stones lite'.
The beginning of the Vegas era seemed to create two things. A bad creatively challenged (though not completely bereft as there have been some excellent moments) but an absolute machine on the road.
Yeah, a precursor to Don't Stop and other generic pablum, and as much as I tried to like Mixed Emotions, well...I'll just say it was a thrill leading up to the release of Steel Wheels - the anticipation, the thrill of the chase,
but then it was all sort of anticlimactic. Best tracks for me were (and still are) Terrifying, Almost Hear You Sigh, and Slipping Away, but honestly the best part of the album for me was the coinciding tour announcement.
Alot had changed since the previous tour, not only with them, but me as well (I'd aged from 18 to 25), but it was still exciting to get to see the Stones again, despite it being the beginning of the Vegas era.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
I stand corrected. My memory isn't what it used to be apparently
Yeah, if it is true that "Don't Stop" is a left-over from GODDESS IN A DOORWAY sessions, I am afraid that it exactly is that kind of song Mick has in mind when he talks about "hmm, I leave that to the Stones" meaning that it sounds like 'Stones-by-numbers' or something - having that certain formula of how they songs should sound like. That possibly is not the best way to be creative. I think that the secret of the Stones have been that they truely are pretty artistic-minded people in the first place - their stuff, be it good or bad, comes out of inspiration. The muse needs to be there, otherwise, forget it. That's why I think they very rarely manage to make very inspired versions of their old hit receipts - they pretty much nailed their style and sound, 'formula' if you like, in Big Four when they were in the height of their creativity and energy. There is not much to add what is stated there. Been there, done that, an artist says and goes on to do something else. If you don't, you end up sounding like a lame, uninspired copy of yourself.
Another thing to notice is that the idea of certain 'genre' The Stones supposed to represent is a myth in itself. They are pretty organic and ecletic band by nature. I mean, just listening the Big Four - there is so much different stuff there - the 'blues-based' can mean almost anything. Also, if you look at ten pieces they are nowadays most known for (top ten on Spotify):
1. Paint It Black
2. Satisfaction
3. Gimme Shelter
4. Sympathy For The Devil
5. Start Me Up
6. Beast of Burden
7. Angie
8. Brown Sugar
9. Wild Horses
10. You Can't Always Get What You Want
What exactly is the formula or genre or signature sound there? I mean, if they suddenly decide that 'hey, let's do another "Paint It Black", "Sympathy For The devil" or "Gimme Shelter"', what could that even mean in practise? All of those are pretty unique-sounding pieces pretty hard to 'copy'.
Unlike the 70's rock bands, like AC/DC, Aerosmith, etc. there never was any rock band to define what a rock band is and supposed to sound like - and use as a basic model against which to create own unique sounding version of it. I mean, for the Stones there were no The Stones, The Who, Zeppelin - No, the Stones took their musical inspiration from folks like Muddy Waters; Jimmy Reed and Chuck Berry, the idea of making own songs from The Beatles, and then, like any other 60's band were experimenting and doing something no one else have done before. The whole musical ethos of the 60's and what rock supposed to mean was pretty different that it started to be like during the 70's when the 'genre' and 'formula' and 'signature style' started to define rock music. The mature Stones sound - something that the Big Four, with the big singles, as a collective represents - was a result of many things (like the learned experience from doing many other things before 'returning to blues roots', Mick and Keith's development as song-writers, Keith's experiments with open tunings, a new guitarist) but basically just a one phase in their career. I don't think they were thinking at the time that 'yes, that's how we should like to sound like the rest of our career'. However, as it turned out to be, they've been struggling with that phase ever since - doing something else or to develop to different directions has been hard for them. Probably only in SOME GIRLS they managed to sound different/reinvent themselves convincingly.
Those today listening to EXILE and thinking 'wow, that's a definition of how a rock band should sound' - I guess the Stones might reply something like 'oh dear, you don't know how much it took to get there, and even we don't know how we did it... There was no model, no any bloody receipt'. There is no way to that kind of organic music can be created by a formula. Probably that can work as an inspiration for some other people, like the Stones were inspired by listening Muddy Waters from a distance, but if you are looking it inside - from the creator's perspective - it's a whole different ball game.
I mean if you try, you end up sounding like VOODOO LOUNGE...
- Doxa
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 11:04 by Doxa.
Yeah, "Satisfaction" surely is the original receipt for the many things to come and associated to the Stones (although, of course, the riff model we have alraedy in "The Last Time"). Its incredible success changed everything.
Funny think about it, the idea of "Satisfaction" was interestingly recicled in "Let's Spend The Night Together" but put into such different clothing that almost hides it. Not just to make the sexual message more explicit, but the famous and catchy guitar riff was reinterpreted by a piano/back up vocals... I think that was an intentional move after the disappointment of "Have You Seen Your Mother, Baby?" (making fiasco-like only #5 in charts...).
Then, the riff idea was, more explicitly, recicled in "Jumpin' Jack Flash", heralded at the time 'The Stones going back to basics'.
I think "Honky Tonk Women" and "Brown Sugar" are the singles that most shaped the understanding of a certain Stones signature sound. Those are the songs Keith intruduced his Open G tuning worldwide audience, and in any Stones song ever since where Open G is used there is a reminscant of those two songs - and when people want to 'sound like Keith' - those two songs are the ones we can hear the original idea of hitting chords/riffs in an open G tuning with a dramatic timing and tempo that gives enough room for silence. In "Start Me Up" - years later - Keith himself made almost 'Stones Sound For Dummies' version of it (like the whole bloody song is in its pure, archaic genius). And ironically that not only welcomed the Stones sounding like the Stones for a long time, it cemented the signature. That's the Stones. Even "Honky Tonk Women" or "Brown Sugar" sound that pure Stones-y as it does...
But, the roots are in "Satisfaction"...
- Doxa
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 11:48 by Doxa.
Funnily, I was watching a few weeks back this movie in which old dudes - deNiro and Stallone - were boxing (the shit out of themselves). Nothing to remember about it as a movie (forgot the title already), but in the very last scene there started to play, first pretty queitly, this cool sounding tune that made me go 'shit that sounds familiar - someone do damn good Stonesian stuff there'. And yeah, it turned to be "One More Shot".
The song didn't impress me at all when it was released and I haven't listened it ever since, but oh boy did sound great and distinctive there.
There is something in that sound that simply works for me...
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 12:07 by Doxa.
That's a risky business always when you try to introduce new sounds...
Considering the Big Four era, and how hailed it is now by anyone, anywhere knowing anything about rock, it is funny to look at those contemporary reviews now. Surely there are lots of praising ones, but surprisingly many rather critical ones too. EXILE is a famous case, but, for example, what ROLLING STONE wrote about STICKY FINGERS that's funny too... ("Brown Sugar" and "Moonlight Mile" were okay, but the rest of it more or less disappointment... they were not energetic like they were at the time of THE ROLLING STONES NOW! or something).
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 14:06 by Doxa.
Which I guess is why an album like Undercover for me is so great, because here they've again ventured into some new territory after two albums in the Dance/Punk mold, in particular with the title cut.
It didn't quite make the mark in terms of sales which when coupled with the general decay in the band relationships, leads us to an album without much inspiration, Dirty Work. The realization by Mick that he couldn't 'go it alone' and would need the Stones leads us through the next 30+ years.
I'm sure that is overly simplistic and there are flashes of creativity along the way, (though Continental Drift is the only one that immediately comes to mind) but for the most part 'the formula' is the safe place (which is also the approach to the song selection in the shows) to reside.
One can argue that approach cemented their legacy as a touring band but I suspect they wouldn't have lost too many audience members if they had been a bit more daring in setlist choice.
All Norwegians eat one spoon of this everyday. And in this nation of fishermen their favorite dish is...pizza.
One pizza is about $100 there. Which they can afford since they are all oil millionaires. Everyone of them...
The Stones (Mick) have had odd taste over the years regarding a single. The first single. The trailer. That hasn't quite changed back to 2016 with BLUE AND LONESOME.
Aside from whoever here bitching and complaining about 'it's not Start Me Up', well, as any musician would tell you, go listen to it then. There's a pretty good reason nothing beyond 1981 gets played much. Is it their fault they've extended their legacy? It doesn't matter. No matter what, Mick knows that nothing past 1981 wants to be heard in general.
What a problem to have.
Lead singles since Start Me Up:
1982: Goin' to a Go-Go
1983: Undercover of the Night
1986: Harlem Shuffle
1989: Mixed Emotions
1991: High Wire/Sex Drive
1994: Love is Strong
1997: Anybody Seen My Baby
2002: Don't Stop
2006: Streets of Love/Rough Justice
2012: Doom and Gloom/One More Shot
2016: Just Your Fool
2020: Living in a Ghost Town (included but not actually a lead single)
That's a pretty weak lineup. I think Undercover of the Night knocks it out of the park but maybe not the 'anthemic' quality you like to see to help sell an album. After that...I mean maybe Doom and Gloom, but come on. That's the last 40 years. Also interesting side note, 30% of their lead singles are covers.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-05-01 19:27 by treaclefingers.
Yes weak, and aside from Undercover, and maybe Love is Strong, the best lead singles are covers imo. Ghost Town would have ranked right up there with Undercover if it was an actual lead single.
And don't forget that the weak *Anybody Seen My Baby owed alot to KD Lange which she received credit for (along w/another co-writer), so not sure if that can be considered completely original.
Still hard to fathom how Streets of Love was a lead single, or even a Rolling Stones song at all; nothing about it except Micks vocals says Rolling Stones - not the studio version, nor any live version.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Agreed, missed that.
OK...and so here's taking it one step further, what were the alternative choices for lead single? I've left off the live albums/greatest hits.
1983: Undercover of the Night - hard because this is a great song, and probably best cut on the album but clearly not a strong lead single. She Was Hot or Too Tough maybe?
1986: Harlem Shuffle .... One Hit to the Body (easy choice)
1989: Mixed Emotions .... Rock and a Hard Place
1994: Love is Strong ... as is?
1997: Anybody Seen My Baby ... Saint of Me
2006: Streets of Love/Rough Justice ... She Saw Me Coming
For different trailers:
1983: Tie You Up - In 1991 U2 released The Fly as their trailer for ACHTUNG BABY. It was a radical move. Such a bizarre song to release first. That's how I'm looking at Tie You Up.
1986: One Hit. It's the only other song that makes any sense. If they'd released the title track as the trailer, it might've seen a bit cheeky, although it's kind of a revisit to some of the SOME GIRLS energy if you really think about it, even though what it could be lined up with wasn't released as singles.
1989: Sad Sad Sad. In the status of a throwback culture to Start Me Up/Brown Sugar etc, it has some signature things: the clanging opening riff, and the chorus, which can be yelled forever. And what's probably an inside joke, or it should be - musically it's an almost inverted Brown Sugar. Not exactly recycled but, yeah, recycled.
1994: VOODOO doesn't really have anything that charges and says "I'm a single!" Love Is Strong and I Go Wild are a bit too laid back. YGMR has the most energy of the four that were, I guess, worthy. For that sake... You Got Me Rocking.
Imagine if they'd done that. The press would've been all over them: With a nod to AC/DC and The Stones release another rock single with their first since It's Only Rock'N'Roll... etc.
1997: Flip The Switch - imagine hearing that for the first time. POW! It's not the greatest song by any means in comparison to past big singles but it has a great sound and it moves and that lick is fantastically nasty.
2005: She Saw Me Coming - big lurching riff with a bit of a humorous lyric.
Just remember: the success of Start Me Up is absurd and The Rolling Stones' biggest outlier ever. The only reason it is a success is because of Chris Kimsey.
I don't exactly buy into the 'we don't know what we're doing' crap that the Stones have tossed off about their single choices. With SMU, Keith was just lazy in his 'It reminds me of something I've heard, bin it' and Kimsey was wise enough to not bin it. How many versions of that song did they do? And Keith's attitude was 'Nahhhh.' Listen to Mick's original Never Stop vowel movements, then listen to what appears to be his first go round of Start Me Up vocals before the finished version - holy crap did he make it into something.
I dunno. Of course, there are loads of songs they did over and over and never released. They're too close, perhaps, and don't exactly hear it. Listening to TATTOO YOU it might make sense why Kimsey didn't pull much more of the leftovers from SG and ER because, based on those boots, they don't exactly fit the vibe of TY. But that's pure convenience of the sake of it. And another thing is - maybe he did and they just didn't use them.
The Stones have been precisely calculating about some singles, generally in regard to being trendy. Whether fans agree or not, a lot of those decisions were good ones (Miss You, Emotional Rescue, UOTN). Maybe where they missed more so was when they released singles because of the technology (ASMB, Saint Of Me are perfect examples) and not for the sake of the song and or the band really doing it like the previous mentions (or the recent excellent LIAGT). Two completely different ways of doing things between UOTN and Saint Of Me.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: April 29, 2021 00:22
Quote
NilsHolgersson
Well there's One More Shot
There's been several almost, could have been, maybe, not quite hit type songs that were truly almost, could have been, maybe, but not quite hit songs from the last few decades, and none were ever able to match the familiarity and anthemic quality of Start Me Up. Personally, I grew a bit tired of the studio version Start Me Up a few months after it was released after the massive exposure on the radio, yet there's no denying the signature riff, the great Jagger lyrics and vocals, and the all-around Stonesy vibe - a live Stones show in a massive stadium or arena wouldn't quite feel the same without it in the latter era. I love Harlem Shuffle, yet it's a cover and they never played it enough live to give it the warhorse status. I'm not a fan of You Got Me Rocking, yet they play it quite often - almost forcing the issue that it's a "great" tune, but even with that type of live presence, the song is basically unknown as far as radio play and the general masses. There's other examples of almost, could have been, maybe, not quite hit type songs that just haven't left the same impression as the indelible Start Me Up, and in many cases thankfully so - imagine if the wimpish Don't Stop had become a warhorse and was played at every show? It's basically a mediocre tune, and for many it would have been a perfect time to sneak off to the restrooms or the bar for a drink. Still though, whenever they did play some of those new songs while they were still new such as Don't Stop during Licks or even Doom and Gloom and One More Shot during 50 and Counting, it was a breath of fresh air...maybe not the most pleasant fresh air, but at least something contemporary. Would have loved to hear more of the blues covers live from Blue and Lonesome as those tunes were far better when played live, but again they were simply covers that could never reach the status of Start Me Up simply because they're covers. Rambling on here, but guess this is what the future will be when the Stones are a thing of the past...the would have, should have, could have, almost, maybe, not quite type of speculation that will continue on and on for years to come. Maybe they'll have one more gigantic hit, and will play it at every show during the 60th anniversary tour, and one way or another it will end up there in the pantheon of other Stones greats...right alongside Satisfaction, Start Me Up, Sympathy, Gimme Shelter...wishful thinking maybe, but ya never know........
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 00:26 by Hairball.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
georgelicks
()
Date: April 29, 2021 01:21
Quote
Here are Spotify stats for the songs you mentioned:
"Shot In The Dark" ": 35 million streams
"Ghosts": 7 million streams
"Living In A Ghost Town": 35 million streams
Looking at those numbers all one can say is that (a) none of them are any real hits by the criterion of topping any major charts (except some special/artificial 'rock chart', like the one Dylan topped last year with "Murder Most Foul", etc.); their chart history tells that too; (b) AC/DC and Stones tunes are clearly more popular than Bruce's song.
These are the numbers for the current hits on the Billboard Hot 100:
#1 Polo G's "Rapstar"
"Rapstar," released on Columbia Records, drew 40.3 million U.S. streams (down 25%) and sold 2,400 downloads (down 55%) in the week ending April 22, according to MRC Data. It also attracted 3 million radio airplay audience impressions (up 254%) in the week ending April 25.
Silk Sonic's "Leave the Door Open" rebounds 3-2 on the Hot 100, two weeks after reaching No. 1. It adds a second week at No. 1 on Radio Songs (71.3 million, up 9%), as it tops the multi-metric Hot R&B Songs chart for a fifth frame.
Dua Lipa's "Levitating," featuring DaBaby, returns to its No. 5 Hot 100 high, first reached two months ago, on the charts dated Feb. 6 and 13. "Levitating" ascends 9-6 on Streaming Songs (20.7 million, up 13%), a new best rank, and 13-6 on Digital Song Sales (9,600, up 34%).
Last week's top rock song in the Billboard Hot 100 was Follow You by Imagine Dragons which ranks at #84 (!), it had 4.5 million streams and 4.1 million radio audience impresions, anemic numbers in comparison to the real hits nowadays, sadly rock music is a cult genre by general audience.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 01:22 by georgelicks.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: April 29, 2021 02:33
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Big AlQuote
DandelionPowderman
Well put, Doxa.
And by the old "hit-criteria", Harlem Shuffle was their last big hit, not Start Me Up
Well, Start Me Up was their last global hit, surely? They've had numerous top-ten placing's in select nations, including the U.S., where I suspect their last 'hit' was Mixed Emotions.
I don't think Mixed Emotions made it to number 5 on the Billboard Hot 100, topped the charts in New Zealand and got several second, third and fourth positions (Finland, Euopean single charts, Belgium) + several other top 10 positions (Canada, Netherlands, Norway, Australia, Spain, Ireland).
Actually, it did make it to number 5 on Billboard Hot 100, Number 1 in Canada, and after which a mixed bag of success around the rest of the world:
[en.wikipedia.org])
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: April 29, 2021 03:18
Imagine if Mixed Emotions had more of an emphasis on a signature riff similar to Start Me Up, it might have been a contender?
As an experiment, in your head try inserting the riff and the SMU beat in to Mixed Emotions ...
'da da da!... Button Your lip, baby....da da da, da da da, da da da....
Button your coat...da da da!...Let's go out dancing...da da da, da da da, da da da"
Seems a bit of a stretch to imagine, but it actually works better...
As it stands, it's a bit mechanical...might have to do with the overall beat and steady drumming that makes the tune a bit monotonous (no offense to Charlie)...
sounds like he's playing to closely along with a metronome...and the backup vocals are a bit too much...actually way too much imo...and the overall sterile sound...
Never did like that tune much studio or live, but with a bit of imagination it actually sounds OK.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 03:19 by Hairball.
As an experiment, in your head try inserting the riff and the SMU beat in to Mixed Emotions ...
'da da da!... Button Your lip, baby....da da da, da da da, da da da....
Button your coat...da da da!...Let's go out dancing...da da da, da da da, da da da"
Seems a bit of a stretch to imagine, but it actually works better...
As it stands, it's a bit mechanical...might have to do with the overall beat and steady drumming that makes the tune a bit monotonous (no offense to Charlie)...
sounds like he's playing to closely along with a metronome...and the backup vocals are a bit too much...actually way too much imo...and the overall sterile sound...
Never did like that tune much studio or live, but with a bit of imagination it actually sounds OK.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 03:19 by Hairball.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: April 29, 2021 03:53
Quote
Hairball
Imagine if Mixed Emotions had more of an emphasis on a signature riff similar to Start Me Up, it might have been a contender?
As an experiment, in your head try inserting the riff and the SMU beat in to Mixed Emotions ...
'da da da!... Button Your lip, baby....da da da, da da da, da da da....
Button your coat...da da da!...Let's go out dancing...da da da, da da da, da da da"
Seems a bit of a stretch to imagine, but it actually works better...
As it stands, it's a bit mechanical...might have to do with the overall beat and steady drumming that makes the tune a bit monotonous (no offense to Charlie)...
sounds like he's playing to closely along with a metronome...and the backup vocals are a bit too much...actually way too much imo...and the overall sterile sound...
Never did like that tune much studio or live, but with a bit of imagination it actually sounds OK.
I have to agree with you. Much as I liked Mixed Emotions when it came out, it was a bit 'neutered', safe, though still a decent enough song, could have been better.
A precursor to Don't Stop which is just 'stones lite'.
The beginning of the Vegas era seemed to create two things. A bad creatively challenged (though not completely bereft as there have been some excellent moments) but an absolute machine on the road.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: April 29, 2021 04:33
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
Hairball
Imagine if Mixed Emotions had more of an emphasis on a signature riff similar to Start Me Up, it might have been a contender?
As an experiment, in your head try inserting the riff and the SMU beat in to Mixed Emotions ...
'da da da!... Button Your lip, baby....da da da, da da da, da da da....
Button your coat...da da da!...Let's go out dancing...da da da, da da da, da da da"
Seems a bit of a stretch to imagine, but it actually works better...
As it stands, it's a bit mechanical...might have to do with the overall beat and steady drumming that makes the tune a bit monotonous (no offense to Charlie)...
sounds like he's playing to closely along with a metronome...and the backup vocals are a bit too much...actually way too much imo...and the overall sterile sound...
Never did like that tune much studio or live, but with a bit of imagination it actually sounds OK.
I have to agree with you. Much as I liked Mixed Emotions when it came out, it was a bit 'neutered', safe, though still a decent enough song, could have been better.
A precursor to Don't Stop which is just 'stones lite'.
The beginning of the Vegas era seemed to create two things. A bad creatively challenged (though not completely bereft as there have been some excellent moments) but an absolute machine on the road.
Yeah, a precursor to Don't Stop and other generic pablum, and as much as I tried to like Mixed Emotions, well...I'll just say it was a thrill leading up to the release of Steel Wheels - the anticipation, the thrill of the chase,
but then it was all sort of anticlimactic. Best tracks for me were (and still are) Terrifying, Almost Hear You Sigh, and Slipping Away, but honestly the best part of the album for me was the coinciding tour announcement.
Alot had changed since the previous tour, not only with them, but me as well (I'd aged from 18 to 25), but it was still exciting to get to see the Stones again, despite it being the beginning of the Vegas era.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 29, 2021 09:05
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Big AlQuote
DandelionPowderman
Well put, Doxa.
And by the old "hit-criteria", Harlem Shuffle was their last big hit, not Start Me Up
Well, Start Me Up was their last global hit, surely? They've had numerous top-ten placing's in select nations, including the U.S., where I suspect their last 'hit' was Mixed Emotions.
I don't think Mixed Emotions made it to number 5 on the Billboard Hot 100, topped the charts in New Zealand and got several second, third and fourth positions (Finland, Euopean single charts, Belgium) + several other top 10 positions (Canada, Netherlands, Norway, Australia, Spain, Ireland).
Actually, it did make it to number 5 on Billboard Hot 100, Number 1 in Canada, and after which a mixed bag of success around the rest of the world:
[en.wikipedia.org])
I stand corrected. My memory isn't what it used to be apparently
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: April 29, 2021 09:08
.... eat more sardines Bard .....
ROCKMAN
ROCKMAN
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 29, 2021 10:34
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
Stoneage
To me it's a bit strange that the Stones have never been able to, sort of, clone SMU into another hit or semi-hit. Although one may argue that "Don't Stop" is close to that.
It (Don't Stop) never really took off though.
Don't Stop is an amazing example of trying to use the formula when creating. Generic, boring, formulaic (by design), completely uninspiring and uninteresting. Glad they generally haven't used this approach, though I agree would love to see an archetypal SMU-type song again, but only if it comes organically.
Yeah, if it is true that "Don't Stop" is a left-over from GODDESS IN A DOORWAY sessions, I am afraid that it exactly is that kind of song Mick has in mind when he talks about "hmm, I leave that to the Stones" meaning that it sounds like 'Stones-by-numbers' or something - having that certain formula of how they songs should sound like. That possibly is not the best way to be creative. I think that the secret of the Stones have been that they truely are pretty artistic-minded people in the first place - their stuff, be it good or bad, comes out of inspiration. The muse needs to be there, otherwise, forget it. That's why I think they very rarely manage to make very inspired versions of their old hit receipts - they pretty much nailed their style and sound, 'formula' if you like, in Big Four when they were in the height of their creativity and energy. There is not much to add what is stated there. Been there, done that, an artist says and goes on to do something else. If you don't, you end up sounding like a lame, uninspired copy of yourself.
Another thing to notice is that the idea of certain 'genre' The Stones supposed to represent is a myth in itself. They are pretty organic and ecletic band by nature. I mean, just listening the Big Four - there is so much different stuff there - the 'blues-based' can mean almost anything. Also, if you look at ten pieces they are nowadays most known for (top ten on Spotify):
1. Paint It Black
2. Satisfaction
3. Gimme Shelter
4. Sympathy For The Devil
5. Start Me Up
6. Beast of Burden
7. Angie
8. Brown Sugar
9. Wild Horses
10. You Can't Always Get What You Want
What exactly is the formula or genre or signature sound there? I mean, if they suddenly decide that 'hey, let's do another "Paint It Black", "Sympathy For The devil" or "Gimme Shelter"', what could that even mean in practise? All of those are pretty unique-sounding pieces pretty hard to 'copy'.
Unlike the 70's rock bands, like AC/DC, Aerosmith, etc. there never was any rock band to define what a rock band is and supposed to sound like - and use as a basic model against which to create own unique sounding version of it. I mean, for the Stones there were no The Stones, The Who, Zeppelin - No, the Stones took their musical inspiration from folks like Muddy Waters; Jimmy Reed and Chuck Berry, the idea of making own songs from The Beatles, and then, like any other 60's band were experimenting and doing something no one else have done before. The whole musical ethos of the 60's and what rock supposed to mean was pretty different that it started to be like during the 70's when the 'genre' and 'formula' and 'signature style' started to define rock music. The mature Stones sound - something that the Big Four, with the big singles, as a collective represents - was a result of many things (like the learned experience from doing many other things before 'returning to blues roots', Mick and Keith's development as song-writers, Keith's experiments with open tunings, a new guitarist) but basically just a one phase in their career. I don't think they were thinking at the time that 'yes, that's how we should like to sound like the rest of our career'. However, as it turned out to be, they've been struggling with that phase ever since - doing something else or to develop to different directions has been hard for them. Probably only in SOME GIRLS they managed to sound different/reinvent themselves convincingly.
Those today listening to EXILE and thinking 'wow, that's a definition of how a rock band should sound' - I guess the Stones might reply something like 'oh dear, you don't know how much it took to get there, and even we don't know how we did it... There was no model, no any bloody receipt'. There is no way to that kind of organic music can be created by a formula. Probably that can work as an inspiration for some other people, like the Stones were inspired by listening Muddy Waters from a distance, but if you are looking it inside - from the creator's perspective - it's a whole different ball game.
I mean if you try, you end up sounding like VOODOO LOUNGE...
- Doxa
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 11:04 by Doxa.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 29, 2021 10:57
<Having that certain formula of how they songs should sound like>
I think one of the reasons they made many successful singles was to avoid that formula. There are some exceptions, of course, like HTW, BS and SMU.
Satisfaction gets a pass, since the relying on big riffs hadn't really become their signature style yet by then.
I think one of the reasons they made many successful singles was to avoid that formula. There are some exceptions, of course, like HTW, BS and SMU.
Satisfaction gets a pass, since the relying on big riffs hadn't really become their signature style yet by then.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 29, 2021 11:38
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I think one of the reasons they made many successful singles was to avoid that formula. There are some exceptions, of course, like HTW, BS and SMU.
Satisfaction gets a pass, since the relying on big riffs hadn't really become their signature style yet by then.
Yeah, "Satisfaction" surely is the original receipt for the many things to come and associated to the Stones (although, of course, the riff model we have alraedy in "The Last Time"). Its incredible success changed everything.
Funny think about it, the idea of "Satisfaction" was interestingly recicled in "Let's Spend The Night Together" but put into such different clothing that almost hides it. Not just to make the sexual message more explicit, but the famous and catchy guitar riff was reinterpreted by a piano/back up vocals... I think that was an intentional move after the disappointment of "Have You Seen Your Mother, Baby?" (making fiasco-like only #5 in charts...).
Then, the riff idea was, more explicitly, recicled in "Jumpin' Jack Flash", heralded at the time 'The Stones going back to basics'.
I think "Honky Tonk Women" and "Brown Sugar" are the singles that most shaped the understanding of a certain Stones signature sound. Those are the songs Keith intruduced his Open G tuning worldwide audience, and in any Stones song ever since where Open G is used there is a reminscant of those two songs - and when people want to 'sound like Keith' - those two songs are the ones we can hear the original idea of hitting chords/riffs in an open G tuning with a dramatic timing and tempo that gives enough room for silence. In "Start Me Up" - years later - Keith himself made almost 'Stones Sound For Dummies' version of it (like the whole bloody song is in its pure, archaic genius). And ironically that not only welcomed the Stones sounding like the Stones for a long time, it cemented the signature. That's the Stones. Even "Honky Tonk Women" or "Brown Sugar" sound that pure Stones-y as it does...
But, the roots are in "Satisfaction"...
- Doxa
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 11:48 by Doxa.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 29, 2021 11:56
Not all reviewers were convinced about their new sound...
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 29, 2021 12:06
Quote
NilsHolgersson
Well there's One More Shot
Funnily, I was watching a few weeks back this movie in which old dudes - deNiro and Stallone - were boxing (the shit out of themselves). Nothing to remember about it as a movie (forgot the title already), but in the very last scene there started to play, first pretty queitly, this cool sounding tune that made me go 'shit that sounds familiar - someone do damn good Stonesian stuff there'. And yeah, it turned to be "One More Shot".
The song didn't impress me at all when it was released and I haven't listened it ever since, but oh boy did sound great and distinctive there.
There is something in that sound that simply works for me...
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 12:07 by Doxa.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 29, 2021 14:01
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Not all reviewers were convinced about their new sound...
That's a risky business always when you try to introduce new sounds...
Considering the Big Four era, and how hailed it is now by anyone, anywhere knowing anything about rock, it is funny to look at those contemporary reviews now. Surely there are lots of praising ones, but surprisingly many rather critical ones too. EXILE is a famous case, but, for example, what ROLLING STONE wrote about STICKY FINGERS that's funny too... ("Brown Sugar" and "Moonlight Mile" were okay, but the rest of it more or less disappointment... they were not energetic like they were at the time of THE ROLLING STONES NOW! or something).
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2021-04-29 14:06 by Doxa.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: April 29, 2021 14:15
Hey YEAH youre right Doxa .....
One More Shot is in Grudge Match ..... never knew that ... thanks man
ROCKMAN
One More Shot is in Grudge Match ..... never knew that ... thanks man
ROCKMAN
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: April 29, 2021 15:49
Quote
DoxaQuote
treaclefingersQuote
Stoneage
To me it's a bit strange that the Stones have never been able to, sort of, clone SMU into another hit or semi-hit. Although one may argue that "Don't Stop" is close to that.
It (Don't Stop) never really took off though.
Don't Stop is an amazing example of trying to use the formula when creating. Generic, boring, formulaic (by design), completely uninspiring and uninteresting. Glad they generally haven't used this approach, though I agree would love to see an archetypal SMU-type song again, but only if it comes organically.
Yeah, if it is true that "Don't Stop" is a left-over from GODDESS IN A DOORWAY sessions, I am afraid that it exactly is that kind of song Mick has in mind when he talks about "hmm, I leave that to the Stones" meaning that it sounds like 'Stones-by-numbers' or something - having that certain formula of how they songs should sound like. That possibly is not the best way to be creative. I think that the secret of the Stones have been that they truely are pretty artistic-minded people in the first place - their stuff, be it good or bad, comes out of inspiration. The muse needs to be there, otherwise, forget it. That's why I think they very rarely manage to make very inspired versions of their old hit receipts - they pretty much nailed their style and sound, 'formula' if you like, in Big Four when they were in the height of their creativity and energy. There is not much to add what is stated there. Been there, done that, an artist says and goes on to do something else. If you don't, you end up sounding like a lame, uninspired copy of yourself.
Another thing to notice is that the idea of certain 'genre' The Stones supposed to represent is a myth in itself. They are pretty organic and ecletic band by nature. I mean, just listening the Big Four - there is so much different stuff there - the 'blues-based' can mean almost anything. Also, if you look at ten pieces they are nowadays most known for (top ten on Spotify):
1. Paint It Black
2. Satisfaction
3. Gimme Shelter
4. Sympathy For The Devil
5. Start Me Up
6. Beast of Burden
7. Angie
8. Brown Sugar
9. Wild Horses
10. You Can't Always Get What You Want
What exactly is the formula or genre or signature sound there? I mean, if they suddenly decide that 'hey, let's do another "Paint It Black", "Sympathy For The devil" or "Gimme Shelter"', what could that even mean in practise? All of those are pretty unique-sounding pieces pretty hard to 'copy'.
Unlike the 70's rock bands, like AC/DC, Aerosmith, etc. there never was any rock band to define what a rock band is and supposed to sound like - and use as a basic model against which to create own unique sounding version of it. I mean, for the Stones there were no The Stones, The Who, Zeppelin - No, the Stones took their musical inspiration from folks like Muddy Waters; Jimmy Reed and Chuck Berry, the idea of making own songs from The Beatles, and then, like any other 60's band were experimenting and doing something no one else have done before. The whole musical ethos of the 60's and what rock supposed to mean was pretty different that it started to be like during the 70's when the 'genre' and 'formula' and 'signature style' started to define rock music. The mature Stones sound - something that the Big Four, with the big singles, as a collective represents - was a result of many things (like the learned experience from doing many other things before 'returning to blues roots', Mick and Keith's development as song-writers, Keith's experiments with open tunings, a new guitarist) but basically just a one phase in their career. I don't think they were thinking at the time that 'yes, that's how we should like to sound like the rest of our career'. However, as it turned out to be, they've been struggling with that phase ever since - doing something else or to develop to different directions has been hard for them. Probably only in SOME GIRLS they managed to sound different/reinvent themselves convincingly.
Those today listening to EXILE and thinking 'wow, that's a definition of how a rock band should sound' - I guess the Stones might reply something like 'oh dear, you don't know how much it took to get there, and even we don't know how we did it... There was no model, no any bloody receipt'. There is no way to that kind of organic music can be created by a formula. Probably that can work as an inspiration for some other people, like the Stones were inspired by listening Muddy Waters from a distance, but if you are looking it inside - from the creator's perspective - it's a whole different ball game.
I mean if you try, you end up sounding like VOODOO LOUNGE...
- Doxa
Which I guess is why an album like Undercover for me is so great, because here they've again ventured into some new territory after two albums in the Dance/Punk mold, in particular with the title cut.
It didn't quite make the mark in terms of sales which when coupled with the general decay in the band relationships, leads us to an album without much inspiration, Dirty Work. The realization by Mick that he couldn't 'go it alone' and would need the Stones leads us through the next 30+ years.
I'm sure that is overly simplistic and there are flashes of creativity along the way, (though Continental Drift is the only one that immediately comes to mind) but for the most part 'the formula' is the safe place (which is also the approach to the song selection in the shows) to reside.
One can argue that approach cemented their legacy as a touring band but I suspect they wouldn't have lost too many audience members if they had been a bit more daring in setlist choice.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Natlanta
()
Date: April 29, 2021 15:54
to me he should stop using pluralized nouns in lyrics because groups are boring.
individuals are interesting.
individuals are interesting.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: April 29, 2021 18:16
Quote
Rockman
.... eat more sardines Bard .....
All Norwegians eat one spoon of this everyday. And in this nation of fishermen their favorite dish is...pizza.
One pizza is about $100 there. Which they can afford since they are all oil millionaires. Everyone of them...
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 29, 2021 21:04
Quote
StoneageQuote
Rockman
.... eat more sardines Bard .....
All Norwegians eat one spoon of this everyday. And in this nation of fishermen their favorite dish is...pizza.
One pizza is about $100 there. Which they can afford since they are all oil millionaires. Everyone of them...
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: April 29, 2021 22:54
Cod Liver oil millionaires ??????
ROCKMAN
ROCKMAN
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: April 30, 2021 09:21
Quote
HairballQuote
NilsHolgersson
Well there's One More Shot
There's been several almost, could have been, maybe, not quite hit type songs that were truly almost, could have been, maybe, but not quite hit songs from the last few decades, and none were ever able to match the familiarity and anthemic quality of Start Me Up. Personally, I grew a bit tired of the studio version Start Me Up a few months after it was released after the massive exposure on the radio, yet there's no denying the signature riff, the great Jagger lyrics and vocals, and the all-around Stonesy vibe - a live Stones show in a massive stadium or arena wouldn't quite feel the same without it in the latter era. I love Harlem Shuffle, yet it's a cover and they never played it enough live to give it the warhorse status. I'm not a fan of You Got Me Rocking, yet they play it quite often - almost forcing the issue that it's a "great" tune, but even with that type of live presence, the song is basically unknown as far as radio play and the general masses. There's other examples of almost, could have been, maybe, not quite hit type songs that just haven't left the same impression as the indelible Start Me Up, and in many cases thankfully so - imagine if the wimpish Don't Stop had become a warhorse and was played at every show? It's basically a mediocre tune, and for many it would have been a perfect time to sneak off to the restrooms or the bar for a drink. Still though, whenever they did play some of those new songs while they were still new such as Don't Stop during Licks or even Doom and Gloom and One More Shot during 50 and Counting, it was a breath of fresh air...maybe not the most pleasant fresh air, but at least something contemporary. Would have loved to hear more of the blues covers live from Blue and Lonesome as those tunes were far better when played live, but again they were simply covers that could never reach the status of Start Me Up simply because they're covers. Rambling on here, but guess this is what the future will be when the Stones are a thing of the past...the would have, should have, could have, almost, maybe, not quite type of speculation that will continue on and on for years to come. Maybe they'll have one more gigantic hit, and will play it at every show during the 60th anniversary tour, and one way or another it will end up there in the pantheon of other Stones greats...right alongside Satisfaction, Start Me Up, Sympathy, Gimme Shelter...wishful thinking maybe, but ya never know........
The Stones (Mick) have had odd taste over the years regarding a single. The first single. The trailer. That hasn't quite changed back to 2016 with BLUE AND LONESOME.
Aside from whoever here bitching and complaining about 'it's not Start Me Up', well, as any musician would tell you, go listen to it then. There's a pretty good reason nothing beyond 1981 gets played much. Is it their fault they've extended their legacy? It doesn't matter. No matter what, Mick knows that nothing past 1981 wants to be heard in general.
What a problem to have.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 1, 2021 17:31
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
HairballQuote
NilsHolgersson
Well there's One More Shot
There's been several almost, could have been, maybe, not quite hit type songs that were truly almost, could have been, maybe, but not quite hit songs from the last few decades, and none were ever able to match the familiarity and anthemic quality of Start Me Up. Personally, I grew a bit tired of the studio version Start Me Up a few months after it was released after the massive exposure on the radio, yet there's no denying the signature riff, the great Jagger lyrics and vocals, and the all-around Stonesy vibe - a live Stones show in a massive stadium or arena wouldn't quite feel the same without it in the latter era. I love Harlem Shuffle, yet it's a cover and they never played it enough live to give it the warhorse status. I'm not a fan of You Got Me Rocking, yet they play it quite often - almost forcing the issue that it's a "great" tune, but even with that type of live presence, the song is basically unknown as far as radio play and the general masses. There's other examples of almost, could have been, maybe, not quite hit type songs that just haven't left the same impression as the indelible Start Me Up, and in many cases thankfully so - imagine if the wimpish Don't Stop had become a warhorse and was played at every show? It's basically a mediocre tune, and for many it would have been a perfect time to sneak off to the restrooms or the bar for a drink. Still though, whenever they did play some of those new songs while they were still new such as Don't Stop during Licks or even Doom and Gloom and One More Shot during 50 and Counting, it was a breath of fresh air...maybe not the most pleasant fresh air, but at least something contemporary. Would have loved to hear more of the blues covers live from Blue and Lonesome as those tunes were far better when played live, but again they were simply covers that could never reach the status of Start Me Up simply because they're covers. Rambling on here, but guess this is what the future will be when the Stones are a thing of the past...the would have, should have, could have, almost, maybe, not quite type of speculation that will continue on and on for years to come. Maybe they'll have one more gigantic hit, and will play it at every show during the 60th anniversary tour, and one way or another it will end up there in the pantheon of other Stones greats...right alongside Satisfaction, Start Me Up, Sympathy, Gimme Shelter...wishful thinking maybe, but ya never know........
The Stones (Mick) have had odd taste over the years regarding a single. The first single. The trailer. That hasn't quite changed back to 2016 with BLUE AND LONESOME.
Aside from whoever here bitching and complaining about 'it's not Start Me Up', well, as any musician would tell you, go listen to it then. There's a pretty good reason nothing beyond 1981 gets played much. Is it their fault they've extended their legacy? It doesn't matter. No matter what, Mick knows that nothing past 1981 wants to be heard in general.
What a problem to have.
Lead singles since Start Me Up:
1982: Goin' to a Go-Go
1983: Undercover of the Night
1986: Harlem Shuffle
1989: Mixed Emotions
1991: High Wire/Sex Drive
1994: Love is Strong
1997: Anybody Seen My Baby
2002: Don't Stop
2006: Streets of Love/Rough Justice
2012: Doom and Gloom/One More Shot
2016: Just Your Fool
2020: Living in a Ghost Town (included but not actually a lead single)
That's a pretty weak lineup. I think Undercover of the Night knocks it out of the park but maybe not the 'anthemic' quality you like to see to help sell an album. After that...I mean maybe Doom and Gloom, but come on. That's the last 40 years. Also interesting side note, 30% of their lead singles are covers.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-05-01 19:27 by treaclefingers.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 1, 2021 17:45
Maybe Highwire / Sex Drive (1991) also qualify as lead singles?
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
walkingthedog
()
Date: May 1, 2021 18:02
I would remove Going To A Go-Go and add Highwire to the list. And I actually think these singles are all quite strong, except Don't Stop.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: May 1, 2021 18:25
Quote
treaclefingers
Lead singles since Start Me Up:
1982: Goin' to a Go-Go
1983: Undercover of the Night
1986: Harlem Shuffle
1989: Mixed Emotions
1994: Love is Strong
1997: Anybody Seen My Baby
2002: Don't Stop
2006: Streets of Love/Rough Justice
2012: Doom and Gloom/One More Shot
2016: Just Your Fool
2020: Living in a Ghost Town (included but not actually a lead single)
That's a pretty weak lineup. I think Undercover of the Night knocks it out of the park but maybe not the 'anthemic' quality you like to see to help sell an album. After that...I mean maybe Doom and Gloom, but come on. That's the last 40 years. Also interesting side note, 30% of their lead singles are covers.
Yes weak, and aside from Undercover, and maybe Love is Strong, the best lead singles are covers imo. Ghost Town would have ranked right up there with Undercover if it was an actual lead single.
And don't forget that the weak *Anybody Seen My Baby owed alot to KD Lange which she received credit for (along w/another co-writer), so not sure if that can be considered completely original.
Still hard to fathom how Streets of Love was a lead single, or even a Rolling Stones song at all; nothing about it except Micks vocals says Rolling Stones - not the studio version, nor any live version.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 1, 2021 19:27
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Maybe Highwire / Sex Drive (1991) also qualify as lead singles?
Agreed, missed that.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 1, 2021 19:34
Quote
HairballQuote
treaclefingers
Lead singles since Start Me Up:
1982: Goin' to a Go-Go
1983: Undercover of the Night
1986: Harlem Shuffle
1989: Mixed Emotions
1994: Love is Strong
1997: Anybody Seen My Baby
2002: Don't Stop
2006: Streets of Love/Rough Justice
2012: Doom and Gloom/One More Shot
2016: Just Your Fool
2020: Living in a Ghost Town (included but not actually a lead single)
That's a pretty weak lineup. I think Undercover of the Night knocks it out of the park but maybe not the 'anthemic' quality you like to see to help sell an album. After that...I mean maybe Doom and Gloom, but come on. That's the last 40 years. Also interesting side note, 30% of their lead singles are covers.
Yes weak, and aside from Undercover, and maybe Love is Strong, the best lead singles are covers imo. Ghost Town would have ranked right up there with Undercover if it was an actual lead single.
And don't forget that the weak *Anybody Seen My Baby owed alot to KD Lange which she received credit for (along w/another co-writer), so not sure if that can be considered completely original.
Still hard to fathom how Streets of Love was a lead single, or even a Rolling Stones song at all; nothing about it except Micks vocals says Rolling Stones - not the studio version, nor any live version.
OK...and so here's taking it one step further, what were the alternative choices for lead single? I've left off the live albums/greatest hits.
1983: Undercover of the Night - hard because this is a great song, and probably best cut on the album but clearly not a strong lead single. She Was Hot or Too Tough maybe?
1986: Harlem Shuffle .... One Hit to the Body (easy choice)
1989: Mixed Emotions .... Rock and a Hard Place
1994: Love is Strong ... as is?
1997: Anybody Seen My Baby ... Saint of Me
2006: Streets of Love/Rough Justice ... She Saw Me Coming
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
wonderboy
()
Date: May 1, 2021 22:23
Back in the 80s, the songwriting partnership completely broke down and their audience aged out of buying records.
It's been pretty remarkable they've continued for 40 years as their own cover band. They put on good shows and have kept the mythology alive.
It's been pretty remarkable they've continued for 40 years as their own cover band. They put on good shows and have kept the mythology alive.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: May 2, 2021 19:12
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
HairballQuote
treaclefingers
Lead singles since Start Me Up:
1982: Goin' to a Go-Go
1983: Undercover of the Night
1986: Harlem Shuffle
1989: Mixed Emotions
1994: Love is Strong
1997: Anybody Seen My Baby
2002: Don't Stop
2006: Streets of Love/Rough Justice
2012: Doom and Gloom/One More Shot
2016: Just Your Fool
2020: Living in a Ghost Town (included but not actually a lead single)
That's a pretty weak lineup. I think Undercover of the Night knocks it out of the park but maybe not the 'anthemic' quality you like to see to help sell an album. After that...I mean maybe Doom and Gloom, but come on. That's the last 40 years. Also interesting side note, 30% of their lead singles are covers.
Yes weak, and aside from Undercover, and maybe Love is Strong, the best lead singles are covers imo. Ghost Town would have ranked right up there with Undercover if it was an actual lead single.
And don't forget that the weak *Anybody Seen My Baby owed alot to KD Lange which she received credit for (along w/another co-writer), so not sure if that can be considered completely original.
Still hard to fathom how Streets of Love was a lead single, or even a Rolling Stones song at all; nothing about it except Micks vocals says Rolling Stones - not the studio version, nor any live version.
OK...and so here's taking it one step further, what were the alternative choices for lead single? I've left off the live albums/greatest hits.
1983: Undercover of the Night - hard because this is a great song, and probably best cut on the album but clearly not a strong lead single. She Was Hot or Too Tough maybe?
1986: Harlem Shuffle .... One Hit to the Body (easy choice)
1989: Mixed Emotions .... Rock and a Hard Place
1994: Love is Strong ... as is?
1997: Anybody Seen My Baby ... Saint of Me
2006: Streets of Love/Rough Justice ... She Saw Me Coming
For different trailers:
1983: Tie You Up - In 1991 U2 released The Fly as their trailer for ACHTUNG BABY. It was a radical move. Such a bizarre song to release first. That's how I'm looking at Tie You Up.
1986: One Hit. It's the only other song that makes any sense. If they'd released the title track as the trailer, it might've seen a bit cheeky, although it's kind of a revisit to some of the SOME GIRLS energy if you really think about it, even though what it could be lined up with wasn't released as singles.
1989: Sad Sad Sad. In the status of a throwback culture to Start Me Up/Brown Sugar etc, it has some signature things: the clanging opening riff, and the chorus, which can be yelled forever. And what's probably an inside joke, or it should be - musically it's an almost inverted Brown Sugar. Not exactly recycled but, yeah, recycled.
1994: VOODOO doesn't really have anything that charges and says "I'm a single!" Love Is Strong and I Go Wild are a bit too laid back. YGMR has the most energy of the four that were, I guess, worthy. For that sake... You Got Me Rocking.
Imagine if they'd done that. The press would've been all over them: With a nod to AC/DC and The Stones release another rock single with their first since It's Only Rock'N'Roll... etc.
1997: Flip The Switch - imagine hearing that for the first time. POW! It's not the greatest song by any means in comparison to past big singles but it has a great sound and it moves and that lick is fantastically nasty.
2005: She Saw Me Coming - big lurching riff with a bit of a humorous lyric.
Re: NEW!- EAZY SLEAZY — Mick Jagger with Dave Grohl
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: May 2, 2021 19:29
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
I think one of the reasons they made many successful singles was to avoid that formula. There are some exceptions, of course, like HTW, BS and SMU.
I think "Honky Tonk Women" and "Brown Sugar" are the singles that most shaped the understanding of a certain Stones signature sound. Those are the songs Keith intruduced his Open G tuning worldwide audience, and in any Stones song ever since where Open G is used there is a reminscant of those two songs - and when people want to 'sound like Keith' - those two songs are the ones we can hear the original idea of hitting chords/riffs in an open G tuning with a dramatic timing and tempo that gives enough room for silence. In "Start Me Up" - years later - Keith himself made almost 'Stones Sound For Dummies' version of it (like the whole bloody song is in its pure, archaic genius). And ironically that not only welcomed the Stones sounding like the Stones for a long time, it cemented the signature. That's the Stones. Even "Honky Tonk Women" or "Brown Sugar" sound that pure Stones-y as it does...
- Doxa
Just remember: the success of Start Me Up is absurd and The Rolling Stones' biggest outlier ever. The only reason it is a success is because of Chris Kimsey.
I don't exactly buy into the 'we don't know what we're doing' crap that the Stones have tossed off about their single choices. With SMU, Keith was just lazy in his 'It reminds me of something I've heard, bin it' and Kimsey was wise enough to not bin it. How many versions of that song did they do? And Keith's attitude was 'Nahhhh.' Listen to Mick's original Never Stop vowel movements, then listen to what appears to be his first go round of Start Me Up vocals before the finished version - holy crap did he make it into something.
I dunno. Of course, there are loads of songs they did over and over and never released. They're too close, perhaps, and don't exactly hear it. Listening to TATTOO YOU it might make sense why Kimsey didn't pull much more of the leftovers from SG and ER because, based on those boots, they don't exactly fit the vibe of TY. But that's pure convenience of the sake of it. And another thing is - maybe he did and they just didn't use them.
The Stones have been precisely calculating about some singles, generally in regard to being trendy. Whether fans agree or not, a lot of those decisions were good ones (Miss You, Emotional Rescue, UOTN). Maybe where they missed more so was when they released singles because of the technology (ASMB, Saint Of Me are perfect examples) and not for the sake of the song and or the band really doing it like the previous mentions (or the recent excellent LIAGT). Two completely different ways of doing things between UOTN and Saint Of Me.
This Thread has been closed
Online Users
Andrea82 , bv , Dan , esqcjh , FredMichmershuizen , IsakSun , JamesBond , JMoisica , loog droog , mickjagger1009 , no stone unturned , thecitadel , wolundamo
Guests:
1487
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10