You missed a really good one, in my completely biased opinion...
Forum: Tell Me

A "Brian Jones memorial show", featuring only songs from the 1963-1968 era.
Forum: Tell Me

One thing that should perhaps be pointed out is that 'Come On' wasn't that obscure, as it was the B-side of Chuck's No. 38 UK hit 'Go-Go-Go' a couple of years earlier. By contrast, songs like 'Roll Over Beethoven', 'Johnny B. Goode', Carol' and 'Rock and Roll Music', were, unbelievably, complete chart failures in the UK.
Forum: Tell Me

QuotePaddy Love Me Do Come On Even the title of each song lays out where each group was coming from. One was coming for your mothers and grandmothers and the other was coming for your daughters! Flip them over, and the difference is even more stark: P.S. I Love You (ahhh, how sweet...) I Want To Be Loved (yikes! these ragamuffins are seriously horny!)
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteHairball Hank Marvin - LEGEND. Britain's 1st guitar hero!
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteRockman
Forum: Tell Me

I was referring to him striking business deals that allowed him to produce the band's recordings and gave him complete control of the master recordings. No-one else was doing that in 1964.
Forum: Tell Me

Quotetreaclefingers Even the Stones didn't want Come On as their first single. Of all of Chuck's songs they could have covered, this was one of them. It's a fabulous cover. The Stones album I grew up with (which my parents bought when I was 3) was the UK version of 'Big Hits (High Tide and Green Grass)', and 'Come On' fit on there perfectly. It was st
Forum: Tell Me

Dave Clark had (and still has) far more control over the band's music than the Beatles, the Stones, and just about everyone else. A real pioneer. George Martin. I have very mixed emotions about him: yes, he had a very commercial "ear" (indeed, he recognised the potential of 'How Do You Do It', as quickly proven by Gerry and The Pacemakers' chart-topper), but he al
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteCaptainCorella Quoteslewan well, at least the Beatles wrote their song while the Stones covered Chuck Berry It's impossible to overemphasise how important the above point actually is. Up until then it was 100% assumed that the artists would be the puppets of the A&R folk in the record company. The chance combination of Lennon/McCartney and the maverick George Martin (for all o
Forum: Tell Me

Quoteslewan well, at least the Beatles wrote their song while the Stones covered Chuck Berry Chuck Berry was a much better songwriter than Lennon-McCartney, at least up until 1962.
Forum: Tell Me

'Come On' is far, far superior, in every way, But then again, that's why I'm on a Rolling Stones forum, and not a Beat-less one.
Forum: Tell Me

I'll take your word for that. I honestly couldn't name a Taylor Swift song.
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteHairball QuoteProfessorWolf QuoteHairball A new album...performed LIVE in it's entirety! at least one time in a small club record and release it on one of the dozen versions of the new album that some think are gonna be released Yes that sounds like a good plan- from start to finish in a small club along with some of the classic warhorses for the second set. They could make it a pa
Forum: Tell Me

Quotebv To those who complain - if you were a Beatles fan, and not a Stones fan, what were your excitements since 1970? A perfect way of putting it. Back in 1998 and 2000, Chuck Berry, Little Richard and Jerry Lee Lewis all toured Europe together, and some people complained that "they're not as good as they used to be" or "the setlists are too predictable". I told pe
Forum: Tell Me

Muhammad Ali could no longer box; Mick, Keith & Ron can certainly still make great music and put on an exciting show.
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteEintracht Book arrived today. What a great book! Was not aware that New Model Army feat. Tom Jones covered Gimme shelter! Thank you! I really like that interview I got with NMA's Justin Sullivan.
Forum: Tell Me

I thought the last tour was wonderful! Seems that whenever they lose a key member Brian, Mick, Bill, Charlie) it somehow makes them want to prove themselves more. Only thing I'd change, is add 'Mother's Little Helper' occasionally. Pretty sure I read that it was rehearsed last time.
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteDoxa Quote24FPS [The songs starts out like Anybody Seen My Baby. (Which had kind of a laughable rap in it that they didn't even bother to try and duplicate on stage.) I recall Mick and Bernard doing that rap part on stage. And it sounded good and fitting. - Doxa Yes, it worked well. And didn't 'Fingerprint File' way back in '75 have a sort of rap bit in i
Forum: Tell Me

Quotebuffalo7478 I would love to have their next record be another cover album. More blues, maybe even acoustic with Keff, Ronnie and Mick only. God, no! I like this album a lot, but we have two of the finest songwriters ever, fronting a still highly successful touring band - yet we haven't had an album of new songs in 18 years. Even the usually unprolific The Who have managed to put out
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteBig Al Anyway, my thoughts are valid and true, I think. The Stones are my favourite group, but let’s not pretend the outlaw image of old is, in any way, a weapon to beat the Beatles with. The latter dressed more neatly and had a preference for a less grittier, pop-sound. They were no less authentic; and as I stated in my post, their genuine beginnings were far more ‘rock n’ roll’ than the St
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteRocky Dijon Their version of "Happy" has Waddy on slide and rhythm guitar and Nicky on piano. Very nice version, indeed. I included The Pointer Sisters' great version in my 'Undercover' book, and wrote to their management to see if I could get an interview or some quotes from any members: their manager wrote back, telling me that they had no specific memory of the
Forum: Tell Me

Quotetreaclefingers QuoteSpud The real difference is that the Beatles became an almost universally popular entity.. ... whereas the Stones have always alienated as many folks as have been drawn to them, both by the music itself and by the perceived image. The Stones have been and remain very much a love them or hate them phenomenon. spot on. The 'anti-beatles' marketing camp
Forum: Tell Me

Quotetreaclefingers Satisfaction, The Last Time, Play With Fire, Heart of Stone, Not Fade Away, Have You Seen Your Mother Baby, Paint it Black Under My Thumb, Let's Spend The Night Together, Mother's Little Helper, 19th Nervous Breakdown, We Love You, Dandelion, She's A Rainbow, Ruby Tuesday, As Tears Go By, Little Red Rooster...this is pop pop/blues perfection. How can one sa
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteTaylor1 QuoteCongratulations QuoteTaylor1 But I also like Abbey Road and the White Album . It’s Revolver to Sgt Pepper and then Let it Be which are today overrated and dated Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da, Don't Pass Me By, Maxwell's Silver Hammer, Octopus's Garden... yes, there's some great stuff on The White Album and Abbey Road, but their weakest tracks are far worse than anythi
Forum: Tell Me

Quotedcba QuoteProfessorWolf it's a genre that's been around for half a century at this point It must be said that the genre evolved quite a lot over the years : In the 70's the pioneers like Grand Master Flash were an offspring of disco : strong bass lines and tunes you could dance to. Today rap music is just bad pop with robotic beats. Hence its massive success : it&#
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteThe Joker Iggy Pop would be a dare move. Cliff Richard and Chris Farlowe would be my choices.
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteBig Al Just to capitalise on what Doxa and a few others have said regarding the impact of the early Beatles, or ‘Beatlemania’, and how it’s now, perhaps, a little overlooked and not appreciated in the same vein as Revolver onwards. Well, those early years have always been my favourite. The joyousness and excitement within those songs is something else. Past Masters Volume One is probably my
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteTaylor1 But I also like Abbey Road and the White Album . It’s Revolver to Sgt Pepper and then Let it Be which are today overrated and dated Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da, Don't Pass Me By, Maxwell's Silver Hammer, Octopus's Garden... yes, there's some great stuff on The White Album and Abbey Road, but their weakest tracks are far worse than anything on BB, LIT & SF (which, alo
Forum: Tell Me

QuoteBig Al QuotePaddy The Beatles were a group and The Stones were a band. You’d think there would be no difference but there is for me. I disagree strongly, though I see where you’re coming from. The Beatles may have performed a popper brand of commercial music, though they crossed paths with much of what they liked: Little Richard, Chuck Berry, etc. The Beatles enjoyed rhythm-and-blues, ye
Forum: Tell Me