|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Jan 7, 2020 17:42:49 GMT
Jagger was definitely handsome, albeit in an unusual, androgynous type way. He's one of those ugly attractive people. A bit like Sandra Bernhard. An ex thought brian Jones was beautiful but never saw it myself.
|
|
Sneelock
god
there's a difference, you know...
Posts: 8,434
|
Post by Sneelock on Jan 7, 2020 17:45:32 GMT
maybe before the Ashtray Eyes set in. I just stopped by to say that "Tell Me" rules the world. I love that tune.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Jan 7, 2020 17:47:32 GMT
Mean Streets too
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2020 18:01:23 GMT
I'm not familiar enough with their early work to comment but I'm using their discography here to help.
'Tell Me' (June 64) is their 6th single (some releases are only in single regions), first original, ie not a cover. 'Heart of Stone' (Dec 64) is their 10th single, second original.
Both of these are pop-y, both taking the heartbroken perspective (standard blues).
Those two singles are followed by two covers ('Under the Boardwalk' and 'Last time') (Aus only) before you get
'The Last Time' (Feb 65) 'Play with Fire' (Feb 65) '(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction' (May 65)
Look at the trajectory of that, what a learning curve. Tell me is awful. Cringeworthy. They knew that simple works, they already have a grounding in blues and rock, they live in a pop world - and that's the best they can do? But they have enough of a following and enough passion and skill with their blues stuff to keep them going. Heart of Stone is equally simple, still has the pop element but it's so very much more effective (if heavy on the pop dramatic tone). So that's already what I think is a really big jump in terms of quality. But then pow, those three.
It is an impressive learning curve and talent development. Not looked at it before like that.
|
|
toomanyhatz
god
I've met him/her. He/she's great!!
Posts: 3,219
|
Post by toomanyhatz on Jan 7, 2020 19:17:35 GMT
Generally speaking, I am a naysayer on this stuff - they were not the traditionalists that I believe Brian wanted them to be, nor did they have the gravitas of the Pretty Things, Animals, or even Manfred Mann. They really start for me when the original songs start to become more than imitations, which I think started to happen in '65.
That said, there's something for the energy of this (which I probably mostly credit to ALO):
|
|
Sneelock
god
there's a difference, you know...
Posts: 8,434
|
Post by Sneelock on Jan 7, 2020 19:40:56 GMT
man, you people are whacked. early Stones tracks are fantastic. I agree that their steady wave of originals is exceptional but there is something really exciting in the grooves of those earliest records. I love them and return to them often.
|
|
~ / % ? *
god
disambiguating goat herder
Posts: 5,532
|
Post by ~ / % ? * on May 15, 2020 14:37:39 GMT
Lots of great atmosphere on both the albums and singles of the JonesStones era stuff: for the most part they are mining the yakety-sax soul era of 60-64 which has a lightness of touch that vanishes as the vocal firepower increases as 60s soul progressed. These albums from the debut up through Satanic always sound so fresh, cause they are so underplayed in the US. I don't think the first two have even gone Gold in the US yet. The monos have nice punch, lots of variety cover songs and variances between the US and UK versions. And Jones adds a musicality with his touches that is lost once they become Doors chasing blooze rockers with taylor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 15:01:11 GMT
Never really saw a link with the Doors I gotta say.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie O. on May 15, 2020 15:19:04 GMT
This isn't much of a song, but it conveys how exciting the early Stones must have been. Nice of Charlie to give credit to Bo Diddley, considering that the Got LIVE If You Want It EP and LP and the US Out Of Our Heads have it as a Nanker Phelge composition!
|
|
~ / % ? *
god
disambiguating goat herder
Posts: 5,532
|
Post by ~ / % ? * on May 15, 2020 15:30:51 GMT
Never really saw a link with the Doors I gotta say. Other than Hendrix (who competed with them worldwide as the highest paid touring act), the Doors were their biggest competitor at touring in their biggest market.
|
|
wobblie
god
Just a prick out to make a name for himself.
Posts: 1,230
|
Post by wobblie on Feb 20, 2021 1:19:55 GMT
I think this deserves a bump:
Not sure why they would ever have stage fright, their audience is more than sympathetic. Jagger exudes an animalistic sexuality, no matter your feelings on his face.
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Feb 20, 2021 5:16:34 GMT
They look like stars, even then, reheating America’s own music, and serving it back to them. There’s a nonchalance which is compelling. There’s a weird undercurrent of entitlement to rock’s second wave. The first wave was built of artists who made their name to n the clubs. The Black ffirst-wavers (Chuck, Richard, Fats, Bo, James, Sam, etc) were all pretty mean ch hardened road warriors. The white first wavers (Elvis, Jerry Lee, Buddy, Eddie, Johnny, etc) mostly managed a slightly shorter trajectory from road-warrior to recording sensation, but still put in their time. Maybe The Everly’s and Bill Haley’s trajectories looked a bit more like the Black guys. But in pretty much all cases, these folks had to have created themselves before they truly knew there was much of a marker for what they were becoming. At least, not a worldwide one. But The Beatles, Stones, Dylan, Beach Boys, Kinks, Who, most of the Motown artists - there was an element of appropriation and cosplay to the whole thing. They hopped on a freight-train already in motion. Not really that different than Pat Boone and his ilk were doing, but instead of a cynical record company cashing in, they just jumped on in and grabbed market-share on their own terms. No negative judgement about any of it. But that’s what that nonchalance makes me think about.
|
|
|
Post by bungo the mungo on Feb 20, 2021 5:47:00 GMT
Generally speaking, I am a naysayer on this stuff - they were not the traditionalists that I believe Brian wanted them to be, nor did they have the gravitas of the Pretty Things, Animals, or even Manfred Mann. They really start for me when the original songs start to become more than imitations, which I think started to happen in '65. i think they were traditionalists, but were unable to recreate the records they loved with any authenticity, which ended up being a good thing. none of their covers sound like imitations to me, the same with the pretty things. take 'i just want to make love to you', it's a million miles from the original and a million more times more exciting, yet blues bores will dismiss it. early brit blues is a completely different genre and without it, those US garage bands would never have existed. a thrilling one and a half minutes of pure nirvana.
|
|
wobblie
god
Just a prick out to make a name for himself.
Posts: 1,230
|
Post by wobblie on Feb 20, 2021 6:00:46 GMT
I love early delta blues and some electric blues stuff but I certainly don't dismiss this at all. It is, as you say, an entirely different genre. People who can't or don't get that can stuff it, quite frankly.
|
|
|
Post by Crunchy Col on Feb 20, 2021 6:05:39 GMT
No negative judgement about any of it. Christ no! Nobody would ever accuse you of such an awful thing!
|
|