"The Rolling Stones" Thread

[Jack68]

944735_286014131542553_2113653027_n.jpg1012162_286015168209116_736673832_n.jpg

[Terry]

Well, apparently they aren't as judgmental as you are and see Dave for what he is...a cool guy with a lot of talent who has a lot of respect for the legends in the game. And the Foos have made a lot of great music whether you think so or not.

The Foos have made some good music, but I think some of that has to do more with when they were making it (1995 to present) and in comparison to other rock music being made at the time (not a helluva lot that was good) than the intrinsics of their music itself.
I mean, I suppose I can respect someone having the right to the opinion that Grohl's music is as good as The Stones/Zep/Motorhead (not to say this is what you were alluding toward), but I'll never agree with it.
When I see Dave Grohl onstage with Mick Jagger, it just seems like an odd mismatch in terms of overall talent.
But you're right: whatever.

[FORD]

Holy Telecasters, Batman!

[FORD]

Classic Stones promo video here.... with a not exactly classic look for Mick

[Jérôme Frenchise]

I'd never seen that one, cheers!

Those promos rule... They were often hilarious - this one features the famous inflatables.

It seems Keith skipped backing vocals, unlike Mick Taylor.

It reminds me of this:

[VHscraps]

Love Goat's Head Soup - and Mick plays a nice bit of harp on 'Silver Train' there.

I'm sure it's already in this thread somewhere, but in case not I will post it - 'Brown Sugar', from UK chart chow Top of the Pops. Usually filmed in front of an audience with bands miming to inferior re-recorded versions of their hits (due to musician's unions rules, re-recorded in BBC studios ...), here the Stones play to an empty studio and Jagger is singing live over the backing track, which sounds like the original. Great campy vocal performance by Mick ...

[VHscraps]

Classic Stones promo video here.... with a not exactly classic look for Mick

Glam ... even Charlie is wearing shiny pink.

[VHscraps]

Another good cover, 'Going To A Go Go', 1982 ... damn, Bill Wyman is really good on this tune - but you never see him in the video!!

[VHscraps]

I see The Stones are live on TV right now over here in Blighty, colluding in the murder of rock'n'roll amid that mediocratised festival of crapola, Glastonbury.

What a lot of you folks might not realise is that back in the 70s and 80s Glasto was as dead as a duck; a total hippie hangover that could barely draw a crowd. It never had anything to do with rock'n'roll. The real rock festivals were at Reading, and Donnington.

I just caught a glimpse of Mick looking embarrassing and quickly switched it off ... But the BBC have got it on every one of their channels, it seems, including the news channel and some of the radio channels. The way to kill anything to do with rock music is to just have these BBC Radio 6 celeb DJs - this is a totally Brit-centric, parochial, 90s obsessed station - mugging to camera, "well, as you can see, The Stones are onstage now, but as you know, it's all about how I've had to wade through shit in these wellies, and what's going on in the tent here - which is why we'll all be interrupting anything interesting that might accidentally happen at this shitfest by asking each other what we've been up to today."

Jeezus. It makes you wanna smoke crack - or burn down a school! It is so fcking lame, so fucking the antithesis of rock'n'roll with these twerps lording it up knowing they have 3-4 days wall-to-wall opportunities to remind everyone what twats they are.

Gotta say I blame it all on the 90s, the nadir of rock'n'roll and, aside from the periods of the two World Wars, undoubtedly the worst era of the last century. The revival of Glastonbury was entirely due to the 90s and that strange rave culture virus that swept the country - England in particular. That in turn seemed to course through the body of fucking 'Britpop', and made lame-o non rock'n'roll poseurs like fucking Pulp the darlings of Glastonbury. But what was going on in the 90s was all part of that thing where people just wanted to get together in crowds as demonstration of some fake - I think - communal vibe. A post- Live Aid death knell for R'n'R.

Diana's funeral and "Sir" fucking Elton - Glasto and "Sir" fucking Mick ... what's the difference ...

I used to work beside people who'd set off to Glastonbury for a weekend. They hadn't a care in the world about who was playing, and sometimes had never even bought a record in their lives. It was all about being there and losing yourself in this big (supposed) love-in.

I can't believe the fcking Stones falling for this. Fucking Mick, no doubt, trying as always to pretend he's hip. The whole thing to me is "Later with Jools Holland" (another anemic dick-destroyer of a TV show; rock music minus testostorone) on steriods, although it is totally anemic. The sense of deadening mediocrity is not entirely the fault of the bands, some of whom are - in their own right - fine exemplars of rock'n'roll. The sense of rock'n'roll being over is just intensified as every band, and rock'n'roll itself, has the life sucked out of it by virtue of being made wallpaper for 3-4 days by the BBC, and the whole media, who have zero real interest in rock'n'roll, but are there instead because it is an event.

This is kind of the effect the existence of youtube is having for me on Van Halen's recent shows and the 2012 tour. It's why I am beginning to take it for granted, and sense it being a bit jaded. I think we'd all appreciate it more if it wasn't everywhere - if it took a bit of effort to get to see it and wasn't just there to be turned on and off at will. I grew up in an era when there was barely any music televised. My friends and I would watch crap like Tommy, the Ken Russell movie of The Who album, just to see a band onstage!

I had been a fan of Van Halen for about THREE YEARS before I saw so much as a snip of footage of them onstage, probably in 81-82. It meant the music and the idea of it was more precious because the lack of availability - no MTV, no youtube, 2 hours of rock music per wek on th radio added to the myth of this thing the music press referred to as "The Mighty" Van Halen. Who were they? Will I ever get to see them ... etc.

Anyway, fuck Glasto, and bollocks to wall-to-wall media coverage of rock'n'roll and what it represents - sucking the life out of the greatest art form of the last 100 years.

cheers!

[Zing!]

The irony is, The Stones had one of the best albums of the 90's with Voodoo Lounge. That's how fucking lame that decade was. A band that formed in '63 towered over most of the corporate rock that was being churned out then.

[VHscraps]

Contrasting review and readers' comments. From the little I saw, which forced me to turn off, I'd say the naysayers are not being negative for the sake of it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/jun/30/rolling-stones-glastonbury-2013-review#start-of-comments

[FORD]

And through the magic of YouTube, here it is....

....at least until some corporatist cocksucker pulls it, which probably will be by the time I finish typing this.

[Kristy]

Brad Paisley? I have now officially lost all respect for The Stones.

[FORD]

Well after watching the Glastonbury set, I don't know what all the negativity online was all about. Seems to be a standard Stones performance, as they are these days.

Not 1973 Stones, obviously, but pretty damn good. Woody in particular seems to be wearing sobriety very well.

The only cringe worthy moment was the beginning of "2000 Light Years From Home", where Mick seemed completely lost on the first verse, but recovered after that. But I'll cut him a little slack on that one, considering they haven't played it much live, and the last time was probably 1989.

Obviously this wasn't a full set, but apparently all that the Stones would allow the BBC to air. Probably the biggest disappointment is that the gig was in the UK, but Bill Wyman didn't bother to show up

[VHscraps]

I am just becoming convinced that - in the long run - having most of their live shows filmed by one means or another is not doing any favours for aging bands. With time, the weight of inferior 'end-of-career' performances is going to outweigh, and perhaps be more accessible (due to rights issues of legit older material vs. fan shot vids), than the stuff the really matters.

If you are a 16-yr old kid, or a casual fan checking out a band you have lost touch with, you probably look on youtube if you want to hear what something is like. Look what the totally underwhelming Tattoo vid did for VH ... it made a song that is not a bad song, look much much worse. Perception is everything, and in the age of short attention spans a casual viewer will find an ocean of fan vids, bad bootleg recordings, etc., before they see the real shit.

As I've said elsewhere on the VH Japan tour thread, my guess is that the shows are fine in person - ditto with the Stones; but, for me, all the frankly crappy vids shot on phones (as well as TV coverage that reveals too many creaks in the edifice) are diminishing the legacy, because what they show is a band past the peak of it's powers. That applies to the Stones and VH.