Tell Me :
Talk
It was great in 1989/90.
But the original is damn slow. And sounds irrestible. In 1981/82 they played it very fast, but with not very good results I think. In 1989 they slowed it down and I think it worked much better (best live versions ever).
It could be that it is best as an opening number (if Keef doesn't @#$%& up the intro too much...) . They concenrate on it more. When among the last numbers of the show, they seem to play it autopilot-like. But in that context it doesn't matter: it is one of those numbers everyone in audience is just partying and having a good time. The Stones just throw oil to the fire with it. One of their signature songs anyone knows by heart. How they play it doesn't matter.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-06-02 15:10 by Doxa.
Agreed. But in latter years not even Charlie could save it, imo. Mick needs to sing it properly, too.
This.
Listen to the original recording. Charlie almost never repeats himself. And he is *busy*.
SMU is exhibit A in my case for why, contrary to popular myth, he was NOT a minimalist.
I sometimes feel that the song altogether has that archaic simplicity in it, even by Stones standards, that it is difficult to any of them to recreate the original magic or feel. I mean, all of its elements are just so primitive and raw, each guy like making a sort of caricature of their signature sound and style. And the song itself is nothing but a riff. It all that just clicked so damn well in the original recording. Actually one of their best moments in the studio ever - them able to come up with something so personal and unique-sounding as it ever can be. 'Kids, don't try this at home'.
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2022-06-02 16:12 by Doxa.
Haha, they have NEVER sounded like a normal live band. Thankfully, they've always been abnormal... That it takes for being the most distinguished rock band ever...
- Doxa
In their prime… I agree.
It's too slow...you're right
Mick's vocals are good since it's the first song and he's not fatigued. Still a pretty lame version compared to prior years.
For instance this 2003 version is way cooler with more powerful drumming by Charlie:
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-06-03 01:26 by yeababyyea.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
guyrachel
()
Date: June 2, 2022 13:58
I have listened to almost all the videos from the concert last night in Madrid and it looks and sounds spectacular and I can’t wait to see Hyde Park two on July 3!
Love Love Love Out Of Time, hope it becomes a staple not a rotation, really really really begging for mother‘s Little helper at Hyde Park 2, Heard the rehearsals and it sounds like they’re really on top of it!
Why does start me up, have to sound so sluggish and dead? It’s not my favourite warhorse, however I just don’t feel it justifies its place! Please Mick if you’re reading this inject some pace into this number, I suspect that means Rehearsal, because it’s probably dependent on Keith attacking chord sequences as opposed to Steve is more than capable of delivering enough energy… Any thoughts?
Love Love Love Out Of Time, hope it becomes a staple not a rotation, really really really begging for mother‘s Little helper at Hyde Park 2, Heard the rehearsals and it sounds like they’re really on top of it!
Why does start me up, have to sound so sluggish and dead? It’s not my favourite warhorse, however I just don’t feel it justifies its place! Please Mick if you’re reading this inject some pace into this number, I suspect that means Rehearsal, because it’s probably dependent on Keith attacking chord sequences as opposed to Steve is more than capable of delivering enough energy… Any thoughts?
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: June 2, 2022 14:18
Start Me Up has never been good on stage. It is , by far, their biggest hit since 1981. I don't know why they not have been able to make more out of it live. The studio version still is miles ahead.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
PaintMonkeyManBlack
()
Date: June 2, 2022 14:25
Because it's to slow. 1989 was great.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: June 2, 2022 15:03
Quote
Stoneage
Start Me Up has never been good on stage. It is , by far, their biggest hit since 1981. I don't know why they not have been able to make more out of it live. The studio version still is miles ahead.
It was great in 1989/90.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: June 2, 2022 15:09
Quote
PaintMonkeyManBlack
Because it's to slow. 1989 was great.
But the original is damn slow. And sounds irrestible. In 1981/82 they played it very fast, but with not very good results I think. In 1989 they slowed it down and I think it worked much better (best live versions ever).
It could be that it is best as an opening number (if Keef doesn't @#$%& up the intro too much...) . They concenrate on it more. When among the last numbers of the show, they seem to play it autopilot-like. But in that context it doesn't matter: it is one of those numbers everyone in audience is just partying and having a good time. The Stones just throw oil to the fire with it. One of their signature songs anyone knows by heart. How they play it doesn't matter.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-06-02 15:10 by Doxa.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
z
()
Date: June 2, 2022 15:55
Start Me Up is one of those songs that suffer most from Charlie Watts absence, imo. I don't know what exactly he does there, I guess it's just his touch....it seems so simple, but no other drummer can do it right.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: June 2, 2022 16:00
Quote
z
Start Me Up is one of those songs that suffer most from Charlie Watts absence, imo. I don't know what exactly he does there, I guess it's just his touch....it seems so simple, but no other drummer can do it right.
Agreed. But in latter years not even Charlie could save it, imo. Mick needs to sing it properly, too.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
MelBelli
()
Date: June 2, 2022 16:00
Quote
z
Start Me Up is one of those songs that suffer most from Charlie Watts absence, imo. I don't know what exactly he does there, I guess it's just his touch....it seems so simple, but no other drummer can do it right.
This.
Listen to the original recording. Charlie almost never repeats himself. And he is *busy*.
SMU is exhibit A in my case for why, contrary to popular myth, he was NOT a minimalist.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: June 2, 2022 16:05
Quote
z
Start Me Up is one of those songs that suffer most from Charlie Watts absence, imo. I don't know what exactly he does there, I guess it's just his touch....it seems so simple, but no other drummer can do it right.
I sometimes feel that the song altogether has that archaic simplicity in it, even by Stones standards, that it is difficult to any of them to recreate the original magic or feel. I mean, all of its elements are just so primitive and raw, each guy like making a sort of caricature of their signature sound and style. And the song itself is nothing but a riff. It all that just clicked so damn well in the original recording. Actually one of their best moments in the studio ever - them able to come up with something so personal and unique-sounding as it ever can be. 'Kids, don't try this at home'.
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2022-06-02 16:12 by Doxa.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: June 2, 2022 16:15
Just look at Charlie doing SMU at Glastonbury. The sheer amount of fills he does is crazy. To me that is latter years.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
Oriongalaxy
()
Date: June 2, 2022 16:18
I don't agree. It sounded absolutely great! So as the the other warhorses. Keep your loosy comments for yourself please.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
guyrachel
()
Date: June 2, 2022 16:45
Don’t be rude, I’m not being rude, I’m being critical and to my ears, when so much else is RIGHT with the show, it’s a shame that SMU, the home run, let’s it down.
My observations are that I think it could be played slightly faster… I would agree that 1989/90 is the ideal live versions of SMU, ultimately I think it’s down to how Keith plays the rhythm, and if he doesn’t attack and then as it were, come off, then the song doesn’t really work, there’s no dynamic in it. If you listen to the original recording you can hear very clearly that partly what makes it a successful studio recording is a strange contrast of a fantastic riff that is offset… It feels like it comes and it goes… Whereas in this live version, and the versions we’ve had for the last few years it just feels like a grind and a sluggish one at that…
My observations are that I think it could be played slightly faster… I would agree that 1989/90 is the ideal live versions of SMU, ultimately I think it’s down to how Keith plays the rhythm, and if he doesn’t attack and then as it were, come off, then the song doesn’t really work, there’s no dynamic in it. If you listen to the original recording you can hear very clearly that partly what makes it a successful studio recording is a strange contrast of a fantastic riff that is offset… It feels like it comes and it goes… Whereas in this live version, and the versions we’ve had for the last few years it just feels like a grind and a sluggish one at that…
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
yeababyyea
()
Date: June 2, 2022 17:01
I think it was pretty good last night compared to some versions from last year. Steve does his best to inject some energy with his fills.
The problem is Mick is totally flat when singing it, sounds pretty bad to be honest. Keith also was a bit sloppy last night when playing it.
Last time it sounded great in my opinion was on ABB-tour.
The problem is Mick is totally flat when singing it, sounds pretty bad to be honest. Keith also was a bit sloppy last night when playing it.
Last time it sounded great in my opinion was on ABB-tour.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
jstanek
()
Date: June 2, 2022 17:19
some goes to with satisfaction - these two songs are not what they used to be - specially satisfaction sounds now like from some spaghetti western movie... it just does not have that drive anymore
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
StonedRambler
()
Date: June 2, 2022 17:43
Totally. It's about the subtleties in Charlie's playing. Steve's playing is just too simplified and heavy on the song. It has more of a march rhythm now. Listen to this one from 2018 in Prague, great groove from Charlie: [www.youtube.com] Even though Mick's voice is rough on this one the whole groove is just floating and rolling.Quote
z
Start Me Up is one of those songs that suffer most from Charlie Watts absence, imo. I don't know what exactly he does there, I guess it's just his touch....it seems so simple, but no other drummer can do it right.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
Rik
()
Date: June 2, 2022 17:48
I think they found a great groove in 97/99 top. st. Louis 1997 had a great feel
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
Bastion
()
Date: June 2, 2022 17:49
Because these are old men almost in their 80s and obviously don’t sound like a normal live band should.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: June 2, 2022 17:59
Quote
Bastion
Because these are old men almost in their 80s and obviously don’t sound like a normal live band should.
Haha, they have NEVER sounded like a normal live band. Thankfully, they've always been abnormal... That it takes for being the most distinguished rock band ever...
- Doxa
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
Bastion
()
Date: June 2, 2022 18:04
Quote
DoxaQuote
Bastion
Because these are old men almost in their 80s and obviously don’t sound like a normal live band should.
Haha, they have NEVER sounded like a normal live band. Thankfully, they've always been abnormal... That it takes for being the most distinguished rock band ever...
- Doxa
In their prime… I agree.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
KRiffhard
()
Date: June 2, 2022 20:13
Quote
PaintMonkeyManBlack
Because it's to slow. 1989 was great.
It's too slow...you're right
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: June 2, 2022 22:02
Whether it's played good live or not is not really an issue for me as I grew tired of the studio version soon after it was released, and admittedly probably in the minority on that.
The opening riff is iconic no doubt, but the rest is clunky and goes on and on. Never heard a live version I loved, and it's one of those tunes where my mind drifts off in anticipation of the next song.
Some feel the same about Miss You, or even Satisfaction, or Keith's set...for me the low point is usually Start Me Up.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
The opening riff is iconic no doubt, but the rest is clunky and goes on and on. Never heard a live version I loved, and it's one of those tunes where my mind drifts off in anticipation of the next song.
Some feel the same about Miss You, or even Satisfaction, or Keith's set...for me the low point is usually Start Me Up.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
Steen G
()
Date: June 2, 2022 22:56
Play an instrumental Brown Sugar instead with MJ on harp
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
StonedRambler
()
Date: June 2, 2022 22:58
That's how it's supposed to groove.Quote
NilsHolgersson
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
DEmerson
()
Date: June 3, 2022 00:07
Quote; .for me the low point is usually Start Me Up.
I once again find myself in agreement with Hairball. SMU is the one warhorse I'd like to see them drop. It's just a plodding song IMO. BUT - the crowd always seems to love so I don't see them dropping it.
I once again find myself in agreement with Hairball. SMU is the one warhorse I'd like to see them drop. It's just a plodding song IMO. BUT - the crowd always seems to love so I don't see them dropping it.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
KRiffhard
()
Date: June 3, 2022 00:10
Quote
StonedRamblerThat's how it's supposed to groove.Quote
NilsHolgersson
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
georgemcdonnell314
()
Date: June 3, 2022 00:14
The opening riff is great (usually) and from there is just goes downhill.
I think the MSG version from 81 hits it the way it is supposed to be played.
I think the MSG version from 81 hits it the way it is supposed to be played.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
daspyknows
()
Date: June 3, 2022 00:18
Not one of my favs but not going to make a big stink about it. A song that should be played a few times a tour IMHO.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
yeababyyea
()
Date: June 3, 2022 01:20
Quote
NilsHolgersson
Mick's vocals are good since it's the first song and he's not fatigued. Still a pretty lame version compared to prior years.
For instance this 2003 version is way cooler with more powerful drumming by Charlie:
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-06-03 01:26 by yeababyyea.
Re: Why does START ME UP sound SO SLUGGISH?
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: June 3, 2022 01:38
Maybe when he kicked on the starter he didn't actually give it all he got?
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Big Al , Domonkos , franzk , joguema , MelBelli , micha063 , PaintMonkeyManBlack , RisingStone , snarf2014 , sonnystitt , SoulSurvivor1990 , stevem1950 , toomanycds
Guests:
1664
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10