Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: spbetz ()
Date: April 10, 2008 22:07

Anyone have any ideas why this track hasn't been pulled from the archives for a live performance since the European '82 tour?

I've always thought it was the 2nd best track from 'Tattoo You.'




-Steve

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: Hound Dog ()
Date: April 10, 2008 22:19

I know its been rehearsed, I'd be sort of afraid of what they'd do to this song if they played it today. I picture too much of the backing singers and too many horns. This song was great and Keith tore it up in 81, however when they added horns to it in 82 it sounded horrible in my opinion.. Rather hear them give Slave a shot...

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: sweet neo con ()
Date: April 10, 2008 22:39

somewhat surprised they didn't play it during the Licks small theater shows.

i always love it when the Stones write lyrics using uncommon terms and
phrases....i had never heard of the term "hang fire" before Tattoo You..

Wiki says:Hang fire is a term that refers to a state in which an unexpected delay is encountered between a firearm being triggered and the initiation of the propellant. This mode of failure was common in firearm actions which relied upon open primer pans, due to poor/inconsistent quality powder. Modern weapons are susceptible, particularly where the ammunition has been stored in an environment outside of the design specification. The delay is typically too small to be noticed, but may be disruptive in processes where accurate timing is important - as in synchronization gear in propeller driven aircraft.

World Wide Words says: So to hang fire became an expression for some event that was slow in acting or of a person hesitating, usually with the inference that a matter of some importance was involved.







IORR............but I like it!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-04-10 22:44 by sweet neo con.

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: HelterSkelter ()
Date: April 10, 2008 23:53

It's really a B level song - It's no MONKEY MAN or CAN'T YOU HEAR ME KNOCKING.... I'd rather hear never played (as far as I know) SUMMER ROMANCE.... But HANG FIRE is like a less exciting RESPECTABLE, WHIP, SUMMER ROMANCE, LIES, or WHERE THE BOYS GO - all kinda the same in a way... IMHO RESPECTABLE and WHIP are the best from that group of songs.....

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: flairville ()
Date: April 11, 2008 00:36

They rehearsed it back in 2005 but sadly never played it, the version from the Hampton PPV is amazing.

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Date: April 12, 2008 03:38

Quote
HelterSkelter
It's really a B level song - It's no MONKEY MAN or CAN'T YOU HEAR ME KNOCKING.... I'd rather hear never played (as far as I know) SUMMER ROMANCE.... But HANG FIRE is like a less exciting RESPECTABLE, WHIP, SUMMER ROMANCE, LIES, or WHERE THE BOYS GO - all kinda the same in a way... IMHO RESPECTABLE and WHIP are the best from that group of songs.....

B level Stones songs are still darn good and they deserve to be played once in a while.They can't go on any longer relying on the same 80-90 songs that they've relied on for the past 14 years without losing credibility.In my opinion,the best songs in the group you mentioned are " Whip " and " Summer Romance " followed by " Hang Fire " and " Respectable " .I don't believe that Respectable is that much better than Hang Fire.

What really gets me is the fact that they decided to play " Respectable " on three (pretty much) consecutive tours in London > 1999 (all shows in London),2003,and then they decided to play it there again in 2007.You'd figure that in 2007 they would have been willing to try a song such as " Hang Fire " instead of " Respectable " yet again - if for no other reason, to avoid that much repetition with a non-warhorse in a given city - considering half of the show is almost always the same.

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: stickydion ()
Date: April 12, 2008 03:52

I think there are better songs from "TY" album. Slave, Black Limousine...

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: melillo ()
Date: April 12, 2008 04:05

you know what would really be great is a cd box set of tour rehearsals from lounge through bang

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: soundcheck ()
Date: April 12, 2008 06:22

... fantastic music, fantastic lyrics . . . 'marryin' money is a full time
job, i dont need the aggravation im a lazy slob', that line alone should be in

the smithsonian institutes salt basement......

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: Mathijs ()
Date: April 12, 2008 11:40

One of the highlights on the '81 tour. Fast, aggressive, great groove.

Mathijs

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: LA FORUM ()
Date: April 12, 2008 11:49

Yeah I never liked it, too much happy clappy 50s Springsteen arena rock. But, in 1981 it worked thanmks to Keith and the 50s retro hype.

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: barbabang ()
Date: April 12, 2008 11:52

Great song. Live and studio.

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: noughties ()
Date: April 12, 2008 15:21

Hang Fire a "50s song"?

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Date: April 12, 2008 16:25

Quote
melillo
you know what would really be great is a cd box set of tour rehearsals from lounge through bang


Exactly.

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: john nicholls ()
Date: April 12, 2008 21:10

Really bad song that's why they never play it live. Just poor by Stones standards.


John Nicholls

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: keithfan64 ()
Date: April 12, 2008 22:34

So much better than She was Hot or She's so Cold. A good rocker with good lyrics.

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: Slick ()
Date: April 12, 2008 22:47

too fast for them to play right now, better left in the vault cause it would be a mess (see little t+a)

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: guitarbastard ()
Date: April 12, 2008 23:57

agree: its a boring song and poor by stones standard...

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Date: April 13, 2008 04:25

I don't really agree there.Hang Fire was chosen to be included on the Stones' best of '71-'84 compilation "Rewind".Those were definitely not lean years either.


Also,if the Stones can't pull these songs off without making a mess of them,they should consider retirement.If they can,as I think they can,they should perform them in concert at least once in a while.It does not necessarily have to be Hang Fire either - there are plenty of options : Black Limo,Slave,No Use In Crying - on and on.I still say that the 2006 Little T&A is better to listen to than almost any 1982 version of it.There was not really that much wrong with it.They could have used those back up singers,among other things,on a good # of songs in '82.

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: ohnonotyouagain ()
Date: April 13, 2008 08:24

Hang Fire - one of the overlooked classics in my humble opinion. Could just be because I don't need the aggro, I'm a lazy slob, but still.

Re: 'HANG FIRE' - Why not live since 1982?
Posted by: JumpingKentFlash ()
Date: April 13, 2008 14:56

Always loved the studio version of it. On the USA tour of 1981 it was merely OK. It was horrible on Wembley 1982 with those horns. I'd like them to play it today. The reason being that I think they'd make it into a rock 'n roll song. Give it the same treatment Neighbours got for Four Flicks and Respectable got for No Security. I love those versions and I think Hang Fire would be very cool in such a version.

JumpingKentFlash



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 792
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home