Tell Me :
Talk
So what? That's not the point of their music.
They transformed the Blues like no one else.
They had a few swinging dance numbers...
"Dancin' Days", "Rock and Roll", "All my Love", "Fool in the Rain" and for a very nice slow dance number... "Dazed and Confused"...
From what I've heard of that album,I'm not impressed."Gone,Gone,Gone,Really Gone" or whatever its official title is sounds like a nursery rhyme.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: all my dog's in vain
Posted by:
ilikemick
()
Date: February 29, 2008 09:02
Quote
with sssoul
>> How would reading the whole interview change ... <<
what i've read so far is not slagging Mick - the part of the quote that's not in the headline says:
"we want a vain bloke up there, don’t we?" (it's also old-fashioned to read more than the headline, i know!);
i haven´t read the whole interview yet, but what i have read so far i call slagging Mick, because he does not only say " we want a vain bloke up there", and i don´t care, if he calls Mick vain, bacause who is NOT vain in this world?
what i don´t like is, that at first he laughs about this question, and than says "vanity will not carry the band, a band carries vanity". does he think, that the band, or he, carries Mick? that´s what i find, äh, funny.
Re: all my dogs in vain
Posted by:
with sssoul
()
Date: February 29, 2008 09:30
smile: i'm glad you find it äh, funny, but that's your own interpretation, not what he said.
>> what i don´t like is, that at first he laughs about this question <<
what was the question, exactly - how was it phrased?
>> Just read the whole thing. As you might suspect ... and as with sssoul rightly pointed out ...
context does somewhat dilute the mischief making. Keith actually alludes in the interview
to the fun he has winding up the press with his stories and comments. <<
thanks Spud. yep, winding up the press is area that Glimmer Twins are highly skilled at,
having collaborated on it very successfully for 45 years.
>> what i don´t like is, that at first he laughs about this question <<
what was the question, exactly - how was it phrased?
>> Just read the whole thing. As you might suspect ... and as with sssoul rightly pointed out ...
context does somewhat dilute the mischief making. Keith actually alludes in the interview
to the fun he has winding up the press with his stories and comments. <<
thanks Spud. yep, winding up the press is area that Glimmer Twins are highly skilled at,
having collaborated on it very successfully for 45 years.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
NumberOneStonesFan
()
Date: February 29, 2008 09:32
I'd like to view a video clip of this interview dialogue to better understand the context of what Keef intended.
Most likely it's one brother playfully messing with his other brother...
It's nothing like the old Lennon and McCartney bashing they did to each other where it was mean spririted and bad blood...
Just Keef being Keef...no worries.
Most likely it's one brother playfully messing with his other brother...
It's nothing like the old Lennon and McCartney bashing they did to each other where it was mean spririted and bad blood...
Just Keef being Keef...no worries.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
BluzDude
()
Date: February 29, 2008 09:40
Quote
1962
"In the seventies Jagger said''i dont like Zep i cant dance to it''"
Exactly. Led Zeppelin doesn't swing!!!
So what? That's not the point of their music.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
1962
()
Date: February 29, 2008 09:43
Rock and roll is about the swing.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
BluzDude
()
Date: February 29, 2008 09:46
YCAGWYW and SFTD - real Dance music!
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
1962
()
Date: February 29, 2008 09:46
Yes!
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
1962
()
Date: February 29, 2008 09:48
But Zep is only a good white rock band. Without swing.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
BluzDude
()
Date: February 29, 2008 09:55
Quote
1962
But Zep is only a good white rock band. Without swing.
They transformed the Blues like no one else.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
rebelrebel
()
Date: February 29, 2008 10:06
I don't suppose for a moment it's a big deal to Mick, who after all is more than used to it. But you can't help but wonder how Keith would react if it were the other way round. And if you can't take it don't give it.
On the question of vanity not carrying a band: there is no way I would have gone to the O2 three times in a week at a cost of £450, (plus all the other expenses), to have heard the band play the same tunes over and over if there hadn't have been Mick prancing around and giving us a real show to enjoy.
On the question of vanity not carrying a band: there is no way I would have gone to the O2 three times in a week at a cost of £450, (plus all the other expenses), to have heard the band play the same tunes over and over if there hadn't have been Mick prancing around and giving us a real show to enjoy.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: February 29, 2008 10:13
Lots of folks did it "like no one else" that's why it's such a rich and varied genre. ;^)
And it's always been quite obvious what it is about Zep [and bands that followed in their wake] that Keith doesn't like. He doesn't care for the Robert Plant style of Rock vocal. So he says it's shit.
That's keith. Ever the diplomat !
And it's always been quite obvious what it is about Zep [and bands that followed in their wake] that Keith doesn't like. He doesn't care for the Robert Plant style of Rock vocal. So he says it's shit.
That's keith. Ever the diplomat !
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
1962
()
Date: February 29, 2008 10:23
I like Plant's voice but I don't like the rhytm. So I am with Mick. I need the swing in rock'n'roll!!!
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
NumberOneStonesFan
()
Date: February 29, 2008 11:16
Quote
BluzDudeQuote
1962
"In the seventies Jagger said''i dont like Zep i cant dance to it''"
Exactly. Led Zeppelin doesn't swing!!!
So what? That's not the point of their music.
They had a few swinging dance numbers...
"Dancin' Days", "Rock and Roll", "All my Love", "Fool in the Rain" and for a very nice slow dance number... "Dazed and Confused"...
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 29, 2008 11:31
"Fool in the Rain" >
<
Some dance track
<Some dance track
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
ablett
()
Date: February 29, 2008 11:45
How on earth can you dance to Dazed and Confused??????
I've just read the KR interview. I tend to skim over them nowadays as its pretty well the same stuff. I do wish he'd stop pretending to a rebel. It's wearing abit thin nowadays....
Great CD though!
I've just read the KR interview. I tend to skim over them nowadays as its pretty well the same stuff. I do wish he'd stop pretending to a rebel. It's wearing abit thin nowadays....
Great CD though!
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: February 29, 2008 14:53
Anyone who actually takes the time to read this interview will see that (even more than usual) its a big fuss over nothing..if anything Keith is less bitchy to Mick than usual (its Ronnie who bears the brunt, if anything, with Keith ridiculing Ronnie's inventive portrayal of him and recollection of events in his autobiography)
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
nellcote'71
()
Date: February 29, 2008 15:17
The point is not that this one particular interview bugs us.
In the grand scheme of things it's not a big deal at all, and as many people have pointed out there really isn't anything new said here.
Keith has been bitching about Mick forever now. Nothing new at all.
Keith rarely compliments any other bands, or people for that matter. Nothing new at all there either.
The point is that it's not attractive behavior.
And more to the point it's unnecessary.
For the last 20 years or so Keith has been adding to his legend in a negative way, by being arrogant and drawing attention to himself by saying stupid and mean spirited things over and over.
Obviously he can, and will, do what he wants but it would be so much cooler if that cat cooled it a little.
In the grand scheme of things it's not a big deal at all, and as many people have pointed out there really isn't anything new said here.
Keith has been bitching about Mick forever now. Nothing new at all.
Keith rarely compliments any other bands, or people for that matter. Nothing new at all there either.
The point is that it's not attractive behavior.
And more to the point it's unnecessary.
For the last 20 years or so Keith has been adding to his legend in a negative way, by being arrogant and drawing attention to himself by saying stupid and mean spirited things over and over.
Obviously he can, and will, do what he wants but it would be so much cooler if that cat cooled it a little.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
Theif in the Night
()
Date: February 29, 2008 15:19
Quote
ohnonotyouagainQuote
nellcote'71
<I guess this is what our boys do.>
No, only Keith does this.
You wouldn't hear the other boys talking crap about each other or dissing Zep like that.
Yeah, Keith seems to get crankier as he gets older. So do a lot of people, I suppose, and then again it's not like he never made remarks like this in his youth. Somehow he seems more mean-spirited now, though. He's always been jealous of Zeppelin's success. Jagger too, for that matter. I'd like to see either of them make a new album as good from start to finish as the one Plant just did with Alison Krauss.
From what I've heard of that album,I'm not impressed."Gone,Gone,Gone,Really Gone" or whatever its official title is sounds like a nursery rhyme.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
phelge
()
Date: February 29, 2008 15:29
Keith's always had a thing about Led Zep. I remember him writing them off as " a studio project, not a real band". I smell sour grapes.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
Theif in the Night
()
Date: February 29, 2008 15:33
I just think that (like many other people) he has a hard time listening to Plant's voice on many of their tracks.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: February 29, 2008 16:08
I think that's true.
But Isn't the bottom line simply that one of Keith's less attractive features is the tendency to shoot his mouth off. We've all got faults...Keith included ;^)
What's puzzling is why some folks suddenly seem to be surprised and take exception to his typical little rants.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-02-29 16:12 by Spud.
But Isn't the bottom line simply that one of Keith's less attractive features is the tendency to shoot his mouth off. We've all got faults...Keith included ;^)
What's puzzling is why some folks suddenly seem to be surprised and take exception to his typical little rants.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-02-29 16:12 by Spud.
Re: about things that we've never seen
Posted by:
with sssoul
()
Date: February 29, 2008 16:27
>> For the last 20 years or so Keith has been adding to his legend in a negative way <<
as opposed to adding to it in positive ways like heroin addiction and not going to the dentist, you mean?
sorry - that just struck me as very funny. what i really meant to say was:
sure, if one leaves out all the positive things someone says, one might get a negative sort of impression.
somehow the trash-media blurbs don't pick the positive stuff up to spew all over the place out of context
to have three-page threads about before more than three people have read the article.
oh and that person up there who wouldn't have gone to see the Stones if it weren't for Jagger prancing around:
"we want a vain bloke up there, don't we?" but it's not his vanity that you're going to witness - it's their talent.
[turning up Yap Yap way loud]
as opposed to adding to it in positive ways like heroin addiction and not going to the dentist, you mean?
sorry - that just struck me as very funny.
what i really meant to say was:sure, if one leaves out all the positive things someone says, one might get a negative sort of impression.
somehow the trash-media blurbs don't pick the positive stuff up to spew all over the place out of context
to have three-page threads about before more than three people have read the article.
oh and that person up there who wouldn't have gone to see the Stones if it weren't for Jagger prancing around:
"we want a vain bloke up there, don't we?" but it's not his vanity that you're going to witness - it's their talent.
[turning up Yap Yap way loud]
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
Bashlets
()
Date: February 29, 2008 16:36
Hey, THEIF IN THE NIGHT made a great point two posts up. How many casual fans or non die hards don't have a hard time listening to Keith's voice every time it comes on?
Keith needs to fu_king grow up. We all bitch about the back up singers, but I think they are there mostly to limit Keith's backing vocals. Overall, Jagger can still hit most of the notes that he did before. Does anyone really believe Keith could still sing harmony live like on Sweet Virginia like he did in 1972 without it sounding like complete shit? I wish he could but to claim he can is just out and out denial.
I love both Jagger and Richards....but Keith has become so lazy over the past 20 years. Why aren't more of his songs on ABB? Could it be they are half completed ideas with no follow-through. Watch the Four Flicks doc when he is recording LOSING MY TOUCH. He's winging the whole thing. Then he boasts about writing BS, JJF in some interview. Hey dude, that was a looong time ago. I suspect he has tons of these half finished jams in his Connecticut home. I think Keith thinks he can "wing it" every time based on his past achievements.Richards has been the weak link in the Glimmers for a long time.
Keith needs to fu_king grow up. We all bitch about the back up singers, but I think they are there mostly to limit Keith's backing vocals. Overall, Jagger can still hit most of the notes that he did before. Does anyone really believe Keith could still sing harmony live like on Sweet Virginia like he did in 1972 without it sounding like complete shit? I wish he could but to claim he can is just out and out denial.
I love both Jagger and Richards....but Keith has become so lazy over the past 20 years. Why aren't more of his songs on ABB? Could it be they are half completed ideas with no follow-through. Watch the Four Flicks doc when he is recording LOSING MY TOUCH. He's winging the whole thing. Then he boasts about writing BS, JJF in some interview. Hey dude, that was a looong time ago. I suspect he has tons of these half finished jams in his Connecticut home. I think Keith thinks he can "wing it" every time based on his past achievements.Richards has been the weak link in the Glimmers for a long time.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
ablett
()
Date: February 29, 2008 16:44
I dispair of the rehashing of 'legends' ie: blood change, snorting dad etc. and the griping at new bands ie: Oasis Rubbish etc.
Its like Dean Martin taking the piss when the stones first started. Makes you sound old and bitter
Its like Dean Martin taking the piss when the stones first started. Makes you sound old and bitter
Re: yap yap you know ...
Posted by:
with sssoul
()
Date: February 29, 2008 16:49
smile: Bashlets indeed! swing on
yep, Keith's singing has changed: Keith in 1972 couldn't sing what he sings now.
but the topic of his singing, and/or how both the Glimmers' singing has changed over the decades,
is worth a thread unto itself. as is the question of how you know who wrote what on ABB.
>> Then he boasts about writing BS <<
LoFL: he boasts about writing Brown Sugar where? Mick wrote Brown Sugar.
>> I despair of the rehashing of 'legends' ie: blood change, snorting dad etc.
and the griping at new bands ie: Oasis Rubbish etc <<
oh, is that kind of thing all they ask him about in this interview? too bad -
did they ask if he dreamt the Satisfaction riff too?
i'll read it anyway, when i can. meanwhile, i'm not saying anyone has to like everything Keith says,
or that he doesn't make us all wince once in a while - sure he does, he always has.
i'm simply noting that forming judgements on the basis of what the trash media spews out
is not a very good idea. and i sure hope that isn't a radical minority view.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-03-02 21:29 by with sssoul.
yep, Keith's singing has changed: Keith in 1972 couldn't sing what he sings now.
but the topic of his singing, and/or how both the Glimmers' singing has changed over the decades,
is worth a thread unto itself. as is the question of how you know who wrote what on ABB.
>> Then he boasts about writing BS <<
LoFL: he boasts about writing Brown Sugar where? Mick wrote Brown Sugar.
>> I despair of the rehashing of 'legends' ie: blood change, snorting dad etc.
and the griping at new bands ie: Oasis Rubbish etc <<
oh, is that kind of thing all they ask him about in this interview? too bad -
did they ask if he dreamt the Satisfaction riff too?
i'll read it anyway, when i can. meanwhile, i'm not saying anyone has to like everything Keith says,
or that he doesn't make us all wince once in a while - sure he does, he always has.
i'm simply noting that forming judgements on the basis of what the trash media spews out
is not a very good idea. and i sure hope that isn't a radical minority view.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-03-02 21:29 by with sssoul.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
nellcote'71
()
Date: February 29, 2008 16:56
<as opposed to adding to it in positive ways like heroin addiction and not going to the dentist, you mean?>
with eeedit - no, that's not what i mean.
Keith never brought attention to his teeth or heroin addiction back in the day.
He just went about his business without trying to be a rock star - and he became the ultimate rock star in the process.
Now he brings attention - much of it negative - to himself on a regular basis.
Look at his stage antics now versus 60's & 70's.
Read what he says these days and compare it to interview in the 60's & 70's. And stop worrying about what the question was or whether someone has read the whole article. Try being objective about Keith, for once.
Keith is the Stones musically, for me.
I just don't like some of what he's become, that's all.
And judging from the comments on this 3 page thread it appears as though that's the majority opinion, that's all.
with eeedit - no, that's not what i mean.
Keith never brought attention to his teeth or heroin addiction back in the day.
He just went about his business without trying to be a rock star - and he became the ultimate rock star in the process.
Now he brings attention - much of it negative - to himself on a regular basis.
Look at his stage antics now versus 60's & 70's.
Read what he says these days and compare it to interview in the 60's & 70's. And stop worrying about what the question was or whether someone has read the whole article. Try being objective about Keith, for once.
Keith is the Stones musically, for me.
I just don't like some of what he's become, that's all.
And judging from the comments on this 3 page thread it appears as though that's the majority opinion, that's all.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
Baboon Bro
()
Date: February 29, 2008 16:59
Not so sure its the majority opinion.
I havent said sh*t yet. Rockman? ErikSnow? erikjjf?
I dont want to debate any tabloid type writing.
I havent said sh*t yet. Rockman? ErikSnow? erikjjf?
I dont want to debate any tabloid type writing.
Re: about things that we've never seen
Posted by:
with sssoul
()
Date: February 29, 2008 17:07
>> Read what he says these days and compare it to interview in the 60s & 70s <<
i will read it, i promise. that's what i keep saying (or anyway meaning).
meanwhile, my interest in ways people read (or don't read, as the case may be)
is related to my profession, and that's okay too. swing on
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-02-29 17:15 by with sssoul.
i will read it, i promise. that's what i keep saying (or anyway meaning).
meanwhile, my interest in ways people read (or don't read, as the case may be)
is related to my profession, and that's okay too. swing on
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-02-29 17:15 by with sssoul.
Re: all my dog's in vain
Posted by:
TrulyMicks
()
Date: February 29, 2008 17:46
Quote
ilikemickQuote
with sssoul
>> How would reading the whole interview change ... <<
what i've read so far is not slagging Mick - the part of the quote that's not in the headline says:
"we want a vain bloke up there, don’t we?" (it's also old-fashioned to read more than the headline, i know!);
i haven´t read the whole interview yet, but what i have read so far i call slagging Mick, because he does not only say " we want a vain bloke up there", and i don´t care, if he calls Mick vain, bacause who is NOT vain in this world?
what i don´t like is, that at first he laughs about this question, and than says "vanity will not carry the band, a band carries vanity". does he think, that the band, or he, carries Mick? that´s what i find, äh, funny.
That's exactly what I was thinking lol...As far as Mick being vain and a control freak, well I don't really consider those insults, but it's the comment he said about vanity carrying the band that I didn't get. Us Mick fans think alike, because I think it is quite funny also.
And why does Keith talk down so badly about other musicians. I've noticed that he only compliments musicians that are older than him. I don't think I've ever read about him speaking highly of his contemporaries or younger musicians.
...If he just likes having fun with the press, why doesn't he find something else to laugh about, I just don't get it.
Re: Richards says Jagger is "Vain" in latest interview
Posted by:
ilikemick
()
Date: February 29, 2008 18:39
there are people who agree with Keith, so of course they think it is much fuss about nothing, or who think, that it is ok when he insults other people, just because he has always done that, but there are also people who don´t think it is all right and who don´t like it, and we just want to talk about it, that´s all!
yes, with sssoul, it is always interesting, how someone interprets something, but i think, EVERYBODY interprets -)
yes, with sssoul, it is always interesting, how someone interprets something, but i think, EVERYBODY interprets -)
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
angee , Anitapal82 , bitusa2012 , Chris85 , clance65 , Colonel Dan , corstones , cyclist , LeonidP , midimannz , Rambler62 , spunky , stoneskid , TeddyB1018 , terukun , voodoodrew
Guests:
1321
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10