I know I've only just joined, so I don't know yet whether this is a 'tell it like it is' kind of forum, or a 'everything they've ever done is fantastic' kind of forum.
Anyway, I like to tell it as I see it. I don't expect everyone to agree. The 'Bigger Bang' album is superb, however- many of the gigs I've heard or bought have been embarassingly bad. I think Ronnie is the culprit & (even though I have my ticket for Berlin)- I'd rather see them stop these huge tours, before they embarrass themselves or their fans any further.
Wouldn't it be great (as no-one can fight off old age & death), if they spent their last years doing some more great records, or 'tying up loose ends' in the form of some kind of 'Anthology' type release?. God knows- there's enough great stuff out there on boots!
Any thoughts?.

It's a bash-the-setlist-for-every-penny-you've-got forum. LOL.
Tell it like it is matey.

JumpingKentFlash

the long-held belief, is that the fabled 'vaults', won't be opened
for public consumption, until after the band has ceased to be.

Having said that, we had the much-maligned (utter,insulting crap)
'Rarities' cd, at the back end of last year, so who knows for sure?

You can tell it like it is, but I have to agree otherwise it doesn't count.

Rarities wasn't that bad at all. There's some killer songs (Most of them) on it that I never found on CD. So in that respect it was a good rarities CD. Of course we, as fans, expected something digging insanely deep into the vaults.

JumpingKentFlash

Well, since you are new here, please share your thoughts about the question VIBRATO vs. WEAVERS. It's the Official Exam...

[There'll be no wedding today...]

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rarities wasn't that bad at all. There's some
> killer songs (Most of them) on it that I never
> found on CD. So in that respect it was a good
> rarities CD.

And there were several songs that shouldn't have been on it, like Dance II, Wild Horses and Mannish Boy. BTW: all songs were released in some way, so Rarities doesn't count as "opening vaults", which wasn't the purpose of the release anyway.

I'm still hoping for another Rarities that has only real rarities (and no remixes on it).

Anthology? Good idea, but unlikely to happen as long as the Stones are a trouring and recording act.

I have heard that they play very well and Ronnie makes it better nowdays.Isn't it true?

I think we agree on an opening of the vault. I'd prefer it when they're done sometime. I know Dance pt. II, Wild Horses and Mannish Boy was out on releases that the general public has access to. But did you have Let It Rock or the 12" single of Mixed Emotions on a release before that? Maybe you did because you're a fan, but most people didn't.

JumpingKentFlash

No, I didn't have Let It Rock, which was worth the purchase alone. Great song, though I allready had Get Your Leeds Lungs Out.

Not sure a casual rock fan is really interested in Mixed Emotions remixes. I say, leave off the mixes and allready available songs and put some great stuff as The Storm, Cook Cook Blues etc on Rarities II. BTW: are there enough 'real' rarities left to release another Rarities album?

I agree that the picks was weird. But it doesn't mean that it was a bad one. Artistically it had no right whatsoever, but musicallyit was VERY good.

JumpingKentFlash

As a "rarities" compilation. it is bad, strictly musically speaking, it is a good record, great stuff on it.

Yeah. But there was some rarities on it still. Let It Rock was one of them (Which BTW ,if you want a recommendation, is way better on Gorgeous Girls Redux).

JumpingKentFlash

Doolittle, I don't agree that one can say palinly that Ronnie is the culprit for embarrassingly bad shows. I guess it depends on what "embarrassingly bad: means to you.
In a way it is weird that so many desire these rarities released. beacsue they are already out there for all intents and purposes. In excellent audio too. Do we really just want Jagger and Keith to acknowledge them by relasing them officially?

"...no longer shall you trudge 'cross my peaceful mind."

ChelseaDrugstore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Doolittle, I don't agree that one can say palinly
> that Ronnie is the culprit for embarrassingly bad
> shows. I guess it depends on what "embarrassingly
> bad: means to you.
> In a way it is weird that so many desire these
> rarities released. beacsue they are already out
> there for all intents and purposes. In excellent
> audio too. Do we really just want Jagger and Keith
> to acknowledge them by relasing them officially?

As I said- that's fine. We all have our own opinions & I respect that. But, when listening to a show from the current tour, wherever a guitar solo is coming up- I hold my breath- as Ron's solos have been truely terrible. He can still do good slide work, but otherwise his playing has deteriorated to the extent that it ruins entire shows IMO.

Doolittle:

I agree in general, especially about the slide comment. I've written extensively on the subject here and elsewhere. Paperback due in the fall. I refer you to Exhibit A for further edification on the subject:

[iorr.org]

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah. But there was some rarities on it still.

thats the point. It should have been all rarities

Hence the fúcking title !

The fact that there were 'some' isnt worthy of a compliment!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-04-18 20:18 by Gazza.

And that's why I agreed with you when you said that Rarities didn't have any artistically right. Wild Horses wasn't a rarity at all, but it's still @#$%&' great what's on it. Except for the HORRIBLE Mixed Emotions 12".

JumpingKentFlash

Hey - they should have given a nod to past album titles and come up with something more apropos:

Some Rarities (some not)

Heeey. It's Cousin Funny. NOT funny.

JumpingKentFlash

Thing is Doolittle - I know exactly what you're talking about. Those solos have become nerve wracking.

"...no longer shall you trudge 'cross my peaceful mind."

I love them....

JumpingKentFlash

I'm just playing Reelin' And Rockin'. Bootleg. That's what I would love to hear come from the vaults. The old stuff. Lovely jubbley.

T&A Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Doolittle:
>
> I agree in general, especially about the slide
> comment. I've written extensively on the subject
> here and elsewhere. Paperback due in the fall. I
> refer you to Exhibit A for further edification on
> the subject:
>
> [iorr.org]-
> 387885

Thanks T&A- I will check that out. I hope people don't think: "shit!- he only just came here & he's slagging the guys off!". That's not my intention at all. I LOVE this band & have done for a very long time. I have HUGE RESPECT for them even TRYING to pull off another global tour. The album was/is SO GOOD, but the reality is that you can win battles with drugs, the law or whatever- but, you can't win the fight against the ravages of age.
If you're actually at one of the shows, I think the atmosphere, excitement & sheer spectacle distracts you from any 'bum-notes'- but, they are unfortunately preserved when you listen to these gigs later.

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And that's why I agreed with you when you said
> that Rarities didn't have any artistically right.
> Wild Horses wasn't a rarity at all, but it's still
> @#$%&' great what's on it. Except for the
> HORRIBLE Mixed Emotions 12".


the fact that the songs may very well be very good (and in many cases they indeed are) is still insufficient reason to put them on the album.

By that yardstick, every Stones album since 1969 should have included "Gimme Shelter"

a recording of Wild Horses from a still-easy-to-find live album which sold 3.5 million copies isnt a 'rarity'

I'm actually perfectly ok with the concept behind releasing a 'rarities' album. However its a wasted opportunity of a release and an absolute fraud in its' execution. There are plenty of non-album songs from 1971 onwards that were more suitable for inclusion.

ChelseaDrugstore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> In a way it is weird that so many desire these
> rarities released. beacsue they are already out
> there for all intents and purposes. In excellent
> audio too. Do we really just want Jagger and Keith
> to acknowledge them by relasing them officially?


That's a good point. If with rarities is meant 'not officially released' (and 'not rare but already officially published') that is sort stuff that only inspires true fans, who already have it. There is also a scary picture that making it official, something is lost in the process, the legendary status of some bootleg treasure is gone when it is finally compared to the rest official stuff in a 'fair match'. For example, musically Metamorphosis is quite a horrible record, right? Okay, I need to admit that Metamorphosis is an unjust example, perhaps we might ask for a sort of Bootleg Series a'la Dylan. The Stones could do a series like based solely on their live apperances. And that might even interest other than hardcore fans (once they hear it! One of the ironies of life is that that most of music fans don't know how great the band once was...despite Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out! there is no justification for their 'greatest blah blah..' status in official markets. It is still one of my joys to shock people with "Brussells Affair"; are The Stones real THAT good??...haha )

- Doxa

Doxa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's a good point. If with rarities is meant
> 'not officially released' (and 'not rare but
> already officially published')

something that isnt officially released is not a 'rarity'

It has to be released but hard to find to make it 'rare'

ie, 'Let it rock' or 'through the lonely nights' were 'rarities'

the previously unreleased version of 'Thru and thru' isnt (although it is if youre counting its availability in DVD format on Four Flicks as an official release - however it was unavailable in audio format)

A band that has such a long recording career and with a wealth of unreleased material (for example 'Living In The Heart Of Love') or with many rarities (for example 'Everything Is Turning Into Gold' b-side, or All Down The Line 45 mix). They should (have made) make a proper rarities cd and an a Anthology series. Let alone a live Anthology series (think of a deluxe digipack 2cd with a concert plus rare songs of each tour for example. A good box set, etc.


Give up those huge world tours, tour like (if they really want to play for the music) Springsteen, Neil Young,etc. Do it in a short run, say for a month.
Just listened to 'Licked from the mixing desk'(live 2002, pignose release) and most of it sounds,musicwise,really awfull.

The stones must reconsider how to play live,because after the No Security Tour, Ronnie and Keith started to decline.

Don't get me wrong I love these guys, that is why I write all of this.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-04-18 22:50 by barbabang.

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> something that isnt officially released is not a
> 'rarity'
>
> It has to be released but hard to find to make it
> 'rare'
>
Exactly, that is how the definition goes. I made the distinction because people seem to use the term in two senses: referring to unreleased stuff or to released but difficult to find stuff (and the former is the false one). And like you mentioned, The Stones seem to confuse these meanings, too (but would it case that they put "Thru and Thru" just to taese semantics, those old devils

- Doxa

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > And that's why I agreed with you when you said
> > that Rarities didn't have any artistically
> right.
> > Wild Horses wasn't a rarity at all, but it's
> still
> > @#$%&' great what's on it. Except for the
> > HORRIBLE Mixed Emotions 12".
>
>
> the fact that the songs may very well be very good
> (and in many cases they indeed are) is still
> insufficient reason to put them on the album.
>
> By that yardstick, every Stones album since 1969
> should have included "Gimme Shelter"
>
> a recording of Wild Horses from a
> still-easy-to-find live album which sold 3.5
> million copies isnt a 'rarity'
>
> I'm actually perfectly ok with the concept behind
> releasing a 'rarities' album. However its a wasted
> opportunity of a release and an absolute fraud in
> its' execution. There are plenty of non-album
> songs from 1971 onwards that were more suitable
> for inclusion.


Agreed. It should've been called A Collection Of Mostly Hard To Find Songs.

JumpingKentFlash