ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
A Bigger Bang World Tour 2005 - 2006
Thanks Nicole!!
Fenway Park, Boston - August 21, 2005
Thanks Nicole!!
[ ROCKSOFF.ORG ] [ IORR NEWS ] [ SETLISTS 1962-2003 ] [ FORO EN ESPAÑOL ] [ BIT TORRENT TRACKER ] [ BIRTHDAY'S LIST ] [ MICK JAGGER ] [ KEITHFUCIUS ] [ CHARLIE WATTS ] [ RONNIE WOOD ] [ BRIAN JONES ] [ MICK TAYLOR ] [ BILL WYMAN ] [ IAN "STU" STEWART ] [ NICKY HOPKINS ] [ MERRY CLAYTON ] [ IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN ] [ LINKS ] [ PHOTOS ] [ JIMI HENDRIX ] [ TEMPLE ] [ GUESTBOOK ] [ ADMIN ]
CHAT ROOM aka The Fun HOUSE Rest rooms last days
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: A Bigger Bang: reviewing the reviews Return to archive
August 20th, 2005 02:57 PM
jackdanielsisastone Alice In Wonderland

So the New album is here. But not yet.
We’ve been waiting for it for years now. 8 years to be precise!!. During Licks tour ‘they’ said ‘they’ were recording songs. About 20 or 30 of them. And they were recording them smoothly. But let's not have a fuss about it. It's there now. At last.

And the reviews are coming in already. A lot of opinions of songs that are being heard lo-fi, hi-fi, partially, complete. And as Gazza said: "Of course, opinions are like assholes in that we all have one - and you may think that this one stinks compared to yours! (I like that one, Gazza). And reading them all and also listening myself to some partially/complete hi-lo-fi songs of the new album I am feeling a little bit like Alice In Wonderland !?

"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."

But then again, a New Album after 8 years. That creates high expectations. Or should I say 'demands'. We want it to be special. But we don't (or didn't) believe it. "They" were never able to make a good album as the one I like most. And that one was yeaaaars ago. Our rational minds said to us it wasn't possible for 'them' to make something worthwile. But our hearts demanded, expected and (desperately) hoped for "it".

And the of course everybody starts comparing, without even having heard anything. It had to be something like Exile, Some Girls, Tattoo You, Sticky Fingers even. Also -not in the least- being fed by the Rolling Stones PR-machine..... Mick saying it will be hard-hitting, yet contemporary, ... and so on (they must have had a bottle of JD to come up with these words). Keith referring to the times they were using his house for recording Exile (there ya go ...), so now it was Mick's turn to use his house (castle) for the recordings. So the link with Exile is 'official' now ...!? Or is it...?

Then "they" let information loose into the world. The press-conference with ONNYA (i like these abbreviations..). And we are on our way. Discussing, reflecting, interpretating (is that english? i'am dutch you know), how the other songs would be.

And then 'they' release the songs for the singles: Streets Of Love and Rough Justice. More information. During the demo-sessions' people get cd's (it's amazing that the cd is not yet completely available on internet, 'they' must have a great security system) or tape them themselves and Alice is on her way:

Uncut magazine comes with a full review of all the songs. And if you read between the lines then you know that the ones they are not positive enough about it could be negative (magazines are almost never negative as they must also be commercially viable?). But thunder strikes as the French Fanclub (I forgot there name, i am sorry) comes with a quite explicite and mostly negative review. So who's being realistic here. What do I want to read? My hopes, expectations and demands are fighting a battle! As bits and pieces and sometimes whole songs become available (hail hail internet) we start discussing them amongst each other. In the meantime the experts get even more information then we do (and we love them for it). So we press them to give us their opinion.
Gazza takes the time to listen and write down what he hears. And we like what we read. Then Mathijs does the same. But .... a totally different interpretation. Alice is lost ......

"Would you tell me please, which way I ought to go from here?," asked Alice.
That depends a good deal on where you want to get to," said the Cheshire Cat.
"I don't mind much where," said Alice.
Then it doesn't matter which way you go," said the Cat.
"so long as I get somewhere", said Alice as an explanation.
"Oh you're sure to do that", said the Cat, "If you walk long enough".

Well let's summarize the scores so far, and see where we are. I will of course limit myself to those songs I have heard in full length beit in hi or lo fi:

Rough Justice
A Kick-ass rocker (Uncut), 'a strong rock 'n roller' (French fanclub), and according to Gazza a cracking and rousing opener with all of the band firing on all cylinders. Mathijs gives it a 7 saying it is a 'nice song', but at the end 'turn it up loud and shake your head (..?)'. Well at least we all agree here this is a good Stones rocker. I am curious how this one sounds live (I want the bootleg from Phoenix)

It Won't Take Long
Finally a rock-song that i really like, says Mathijs giving it an 8. But then he tempers the joy a bit by mentioning that we've seen it all before a bit. It reminds him of the Undercover period. As the French Fanclub is recalling the Dirty Work style. And ... 'it is alright , it is vintage stones'. According to Gazza- however- this is a 'stunning driving rocker' , a very danceable track that is still growing. I tend to feel along with Gazza. I think this will be one of the best songs of the album. I think this has the potential of becoming a Stones Classic.

Rain Fell Down
"First Misfire" according to the French Fanclub, but 'Keith's funky riff saves the song from boredom" (thank God...). Uncut thinks it 'chugs along like Dylan's 'Slow Train Coming' '. Gazza and Mathijs are reminded of 'Everything is turning to gold'. "It grooves nicely" (what does the word 'nice' means to you, Mathijs?), a jagged funky riff (Gazza). For me these reviews are a bit too 'cold'. I think this one is GREAT. It makes you dance for ever. It is much better then 'Everything is turning...", or 'Dance'. So please play this one live......!?

Streets of Love
The first single will 'build into a big stadium ballad' according to Uncut. But the French Fanclub thinks the Stones have 'seldom lacked such inspiration'. Gazza finds this an 'astonishing choice as first single to be honest' ("the repetition of the word awful is ... wel awful"). Mathijs is even clearer: the biggest piece of shit ever released by the Stones. Well, I don't like the song either. Let's stay with that.

Back of My hand
And then Mathijs says this is an 'excellent song and sound' but it should be ' something you warm up with in the studio before you start the real work' (..... what do you mean, Mathijs...... Handel, Mozart, Tchaikovsky?) . But then Gazza: "A lot more like it", and "a gorgeous minimalist blues". "Fantastic slide guitar, wailing harmonica" says Uncut. Even the French Fanclub is positive for a change "Great! A Blues. ....an authentic, haunting and gloomy blues." Well Mathijs maybe you missed something...? For me this is together with It Wont Take Long, Rain Fell Down and Laugh I Nearly died, the best song of the album, and the best bluessong of the Stones since ....?

This Place is Empty
Mathijs: "It has a nice (..?) melody and excellent verses", ".... a nice (..) catchy little song." More important: "This is the kind of song Keith should make a solo-album with. Invite some friends and make a George Jones-style album. And please include the version of Love Hurts with Nora Jones (we completely agree here Mathijs, let's start organizing it). This pleasant contry-style ballad (Gazza) played while the fire is burning in the chimney (French Fanclub) is going to be one of the Keith-Classics (me).

Oh No Not You Again
This Sticky-Fingers era rocker (Uncut) that 'they' played at the Press Conference in the Juillard School in New York has 'vintage' Chuck Berry elements (French Fanclub), but has juvenile lyrics in the verses (Gazza). For me this is a 'normal' Stones rocker as they have made plenty of.

Well Alice In Wonderland still has some chapters to go: All the other songs I have heard only partially so not much to say about them but ..... perhaps one ...?

Laugh I Nearly Died. From the bits I have heard, and what I've read ...A soul ballad unable to soar, clumsy backing vocals, Keith lost in the middle of his riff (.....OK That Must Have Been A False Translation, French Fanclub); A simmering mid-tempo groove with Mick more impassioned than in years....(Uncut), "Sweet Baby Jesus!! I didn't think they had one like this left in them (Gazza), ... and "Best of the album, actually the best thing the Stones have released since Tattoo You (Mathijs). So ..... please, please please (I am on my knees know ... in the dirt... and ...mmm ...well ) can anyone pleaaaaaase put this one for download availabe somewhere. Or send it to my mailaddress [email protected] . I Want To Hear It, I Want To Hear It,I Want To Hear It, I Want To Hear It,I Want To Hear It, I Want To Hear It,I Want To Hear It, I Want To Hear It,I Want To Hear It, I Want To Hear It,

And any reviews,opinions, thoughts you have about the New Album:... let them come. We still have some two weeks to go. Especially those who visit the first concerts in Boston, Hartford, Ottawa, Detroit and Monton and HEAR THOSE NEW SONGS LIVE. Pleeeeeeaaase let us know?

Thank You

[Edited by jackdanielsisastone]
August 20th, 2005 03:37 PM
Bob Tamp Your ALICE IN WONDERLAND shit was great. Loved it. Good post.

August 20th, 2005 07:34 PM
gotdablouse Yes very good summary, good stuff, thanks, I'm saving that to my file ;-)
August 20th, 2005 08:07 PM
exile
quote:
jackdanielsisastone wrote:
"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."




Fantastic......review of the reviews
August 20th, 2005 10:48 PM
Scottfree
quote:
jackdanielsisastone wrote:
Alice In Wonderland


Thank You

[Edited by jackdanielsisastone]





Best post ever, bless your heart, in a secular type of manner....
August 21st, 2005 12:06 AM
exile "But I don't want to go among Stones fans," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all Stones fans here. I'm a Stones fan. You're a Stones fan."
"How do you know I'm a Stones fan?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here to Rocks Off."




Stones fans are 'mad'
August 21st, 2005 01:12 AM
wgwalsh Let us see now, Tattoo You was the last great album ? It was released in 1981. This would make the release date ALMOST 25 years ago. Some of the material for that album came from the EARLY 70's with Mick Taylor.

Subsequent STUDIO releases:

1983 - UNDERCOVER
1986 - DIRTY WORK
1989 - STEEL WHEELS
1994 - VOODOO LOUNGE
1997 - BRIDGES TO BABYLON
2002 - FORTY LICKS, 4 studio tracks and remastered hits
2005 - A BIGGER BANG, for the buck, yet to be released

Now, the question is, how do the subsequent STUDIO releases of the last 25 years rate and why ? Please keep in mind, as legend has it, Tattoo You was the last great plate of Goats Head Soup.

August 21st, 2005 01:21 AM
exile I rate STEEL WHEELS and VOODOO LOUNGE as Noble efforts.

Tattoo you was the last great album...thats true

However thats not to say SW and VL didnt 'contain moments' of greatness Continental Drift and Love is Strong come to mind




August 21st, 2005 04:04 AM
ListenToTheLion
quote:
exile wrote:
I rate STEEL WHEELS and VOODOO LOUNGE as Noble efforts.

Tattoo you was the last great album...thats true

However thats not to say SW and VL didnt 'contain moments' of greatness Continental Drift and Love is Strong come to mind



Every album after Tattoo You pales. But indeed there're a few moments of greatness on some of the post 1981 albums. Continental Drift is a great real classic song. Love is strong is good but not a classic song. Undercover (the track not the album) is good. Saint of me is good. A few others I forget.
August 21st, 2005 04:08 AM
jackdanielsisastone And any reviews,opinions, thoughts you have about the New Album:... let them come. We still have some two weeks to go. Especially those who visit the first concerts in Boston, Hartford, Ottawa, Detroit and Moncton and HEAR THOSE NEW SONGS LIVE. Pleeeeeeaaase let us know?


I think that the thoughts and opinions of and about the 'new' album will change after some people have heard some new songs live. People will mix up live versions with the -not yet- released studio versions and vice versa. Comparisons it with 'older' albums will have no meaning then.

I am very curious to see what happens in the next few days/weeks

.... and waiting for the first bootleg to appear (sbd quality of course)
August 21st, 2005 08:24 AM
Mathijs Absolutely great article, a joy to read! And since you asked: "nice" to me is good, but not great. Everything is turning to Gold, Miss You and Pretty Beat Up have fucking great grooves. No matter what the lyrics or guitars do, it's all about the groove that can't stop you from dancing. A "nice" groove is something simular, but just not that great. It's a groove you can play in the background of a music store. It's not too interfearing with what you want to do (buy CD's), but you can tap your feet to it. Miss You makes you stop talking and draws you to the dance floor, Rain Fall Down makes you order another drink and hang on to the bar to check out the girls.

About Back of My Hand: it's a great song in every sense, but it's a 13-in-a-dozen-song. Every bar band of every small town plays these kind of blues. It's great music, but not from the Stones. It is a B-side, or a studio warm-up. Play this kind of blues for half a hour before you start the real work (not Bach, but Rain Fall Down for example).

Mathijs
August 21st, 2005 09:23 AM
Some Guy That was cool to read, good job!
August 21st, 2005 12:03 PM
jackdanielsisastone Tnxs for the compliments everyone.

Now it is a well known fact that music can touch you in places you never new existed. It's all feeling, intuition, and other english words I cannot come up with right now.

And the Stones have made a very diverse set of tunes, from chuck berry type or R&R, to Country, Blues, Disco-ish, Punk and Funky kind of songs.

And every fan has his or her own preferences. And that has got all to do with your 'frame of reference'. Some of us started this from the beginning of the sixties. I started from Goat's Head Soup. Others even came in through Dirty Work. In other words, where you come from and where you came in. And we all have to respect that and keep in mind that music is a personal experience that is not to be transferred to others. It's yours and it's mine !!!!! But.... we can learn and broaden our minds. Open up for other thoughts and see if it catches you there were you didn't think it would catch you!!?

So Mathijs if you say somewhere at this board that this album is the best since Undercover I start getting curious. Did I miss something here? For me after Some Girls there wasn't anything worhtwile. So I get Undercover and start listening again (Pretty Beat Up is my favourite). And that's what it's all about. Discovering and rediscovering music. The versatility of the Stones.

Now from that point of view I am asking you, Mathijs, what is your favourite Stones Blues song and what is your favourite Blues song in general?

Just being curious to see if I can understand why you think BOMH is merely a warm-up tune during rehearsals?

Can you help me out here?
[Edited by jackdanielsisastone]
[Edited by jackdanielsisastone]
[Edited by jackdanielsisastone]
August 21st, 2005 05:05 PM
Mathijs Well, I do like the original blues men. All the Chess recordings from say 1955 until late '60s are encredible. But my problem with Back of MH is this: I just don't like bands copying original blues artist, because its either never as good as the original, or it it senseless as there is already was an original. To me, when white bands play original Chicago blues it always misses the mark. You just can't play it with the same attitude and emotion as the original. What I have always liked is white men interpreting the blues and make it something of their own. Just as the Stones did with Prodigal Son, Love in Vain, Stop Breaking Down, Shake Your Hips. The took an original, and transformed it into something truly unique, something never done before. Clapton/Creem has done it, John Mayall has done it, Johnnie Winter has done that.

Back of MY hand just is a plain copy, and in my opinion, not worthy to be released. The riff is the kind of riff every guitarist plays everyday just to warm up. When I lay on the couch late at night noodling on my guitar, it's these riffs I play. All stolen from Robert Johnson and the like, but it nice to noodle on. Making a song out of these noodlings is useless. What would be the use if I take the riff of Ventilator Blues and I make up some lyrics about a girl who left me? I record it in one of the most expensive studio's (thus taking away another ingredient of the original blues: cheap studio's and played on cheap instruments) and release it on a CD. Everyone will rightly accuse me of ripping of the Stones. BOMH is just a studio run-through, something you play to get the sound right, to warm up the valves, to have Charlie warm up his hands, to have Jagger warm up his vocal chords.

Mathijs
August 21st, 2005 05:24 PM
Jumacfly
quote:
Mathijs wrote:
I just don't like bands copying original blues artist, because its either never as good as the original, or it it senseless as there is already was an original. To me, when white bands play original Chicago blues it always misses the mark. Mathijs



so you ve missed "Back in the USA" or "Lonely at the top" bootlegs, where the Stones play great blues with a certain Ronnie Wood on guitar..uhhh that's sad...

August 21st, 2005 05:33 PM
glencar He's wrong on so many things in life. Something just ain't right with the boy...
August 21st, 2005 06:38 PM
souldoggie One of my very first posts on this board a few years ago, I told my story about the night I got to have drinks in a hotel bar with Keith. I also recalled and wrote about some of my other in-person encounters with the Stones. I was called a liar. At the time, I was new to these kind of boards and to the internet in general...and it sort of made me feel bad. I've learned.
August 21st, 2005 07:46 PM
Jumacfly
quote:
souldoggie wrote:
One of my very first posts on this board a few years ago, I told my story about the night I got to have drinks in a hotel bar with Keith. I also recalled and wrote about some of my other in-person encounters with the Stones. I was called a liar. At the time, I was new to these kind of boards and to the internet in general...and it sort of made me feel bad. I've learned.


rocks off members are not liars!!
what' s your story with Keith souldoggie ?
August 21st, 2005 07:53 PM
T&A Mathijs has some valid points. The execution on BOMH is wonderful - but there's really nothing noteworthy otherwise. I do think saying white guys can't play the blues is a ridiculous, rascist comment. Butterfield was as good a blues player as any of his heroes. And, that's just for openers.
August 21st, 2005 08:43 PM
Taptrick
Mathjis: I believe what you are saying is you dislike the entire premise of why the Rolling Stones decided to become a band.

August 21st, 2005 10:57 PM
glencar And yet, he's somehow seen fit to imitate these white boy imitators in his own silly band. Pot. Kettle. Black.
August 22nd, 2005 12:24 AM
exile
quote:
Mathijs wrote:
To me, when white bands play original Chicago blues it always misses the mark. You just can't play it with the same attitude and emotion as the original.



WTF? that says it all to me??????






BTW have you heard the stones doing Mannish Boy with Muddy Waters? Great Blues..
August 22nd, 2005 03:54 AM
Mathijs >
so you ve missed "Back in the USA" or "Lonely at the top" bootlegs, where the Stones play great blues with a certain Ronnie Wood on guitar..uhhh that's sad...
>

I love these recordings just as much as you do, BUT -these are bootlegs, sets of outtakes, AND NOT OFFICIAL RELEASES ! That's my point: BOMH is a nice song, but it's absolutely nothing more than an outtake. We hardcore fans have a dozen of bootlegs with these kind of blues tracks, and they are great as bootlegs, as additions to the official catalogue, but I think we all would agree that 98% of all these recordings aren't fit fot release.

With Flip the Switch, we tried not to copy the Stones, but we tried to interpret the Stones and give the best 70's show in this era of house and rap music. It fits exactly with my opinion on BOMH: if Flip would have just copied the Stones, there was no reason for us to go on stage. We, and the audience, always felt we delivered something special, something extra, and something unique.

Mathijs
August 22nd, 2005 03:59 AM
Mathijs >
Mathjis: I believe what you are saying is you dislike the entire premise of why the Rolling Stones decided to become a band.
>

This statement just shows your ignorance of the whole being of the Stones: they never copied their heroes. From the start they have been inspired by their heroes, took there music and made it something uniquely Stones. All music they ever played did get the unique Stones treatment, whether it's a rousing R&R song like Oh Carol on Ya-Ya's or Mannish Boy on LYL -it's never a copy, but always very much the Stones. BOMH is just a plain copy.

Mathijs
August 22nd, 2005 07:03 AM
jackdanielsisastone Well Mathijs, I think I know the reason for our different opinions on BOMH.

You are a guitarplayer (and a damn good one as I might add; I've seen and hear you play) and you're listening to the songs you hear from a 'expert' point-of-view next to a 'fan' point-of-view. And because of that you know what they could (and according to you, should) have done.

I myself love good guitarplay. I love to hear John Williams play Concierto de Aranjuez. Or Alvin Lee play "Help Me Baby". But I wouldn't know if they making it easy for themselves or not. A professional would know. I just listen to what I hear and then I like it or not. I don not have the 'burden' of the expert point-of-view.

I also appreciate your love of and for the blues. I also enjoy the old chicagoblues and deltablues styles and -maybe even more- the style of the bluesrevivalists in de 60s and 70s. And yes they were copying songs but not styles. And that's what you are saying the Stones have done with BOMH. They should have made their own interpretation of Sweet Home Chicago (just to name one) instead of copying the style and giving another name (and no, I am not referring to Sweet Home now). You want them to maintain their standards as they are obliged to??

And that's were we differ of opinion. I love the song. It's plain and simple as a bluessong like that should be. And yes of course I would like it even more if they would have made another Love In Vain, or the likes, but I don't think they (Keith) are able to do that anymore. So I don't really care if they copied the style or not. It's 2005 and therefor I am very, no, extremely happy with BOMH.



August 22nd, 2005 02:47 PM
Mathijs Truly, I don't consider myself an expert in any way. But I know why I have always loved the Stones -they are unique. The thing is, and I really don't want to sound arrogant like I supposedly normally do, but at the moment I hear a song and I think "well, I could have done that", then I don't find it interesting anymore. The Stones have always been unique, and for the last 25 years I have always been seeking for the answer to "how the fuck did they do that". Fortunately you like it, and fortunately there's plenty more on the album that I like!

Mathijs
August 22nd, 2005 03:08 PM
jackdanielsisastone
quote:
Mathijs wrote:
Truly, I don't consider myself an expert in any way.

Experts never see themselves as experts
quote:
But I know why I have always loved the Stones -they are unique. The thing is, and I really don't want to sound arrogant like I supposedly normally do, but at the moment I hear a song and I think "well, I could have done that", then I don't find it interesting anymore.

And that was exactly my point. A lot of 'us' do not have that 'burden' (sorry for calling it that way). I have someone in my family who is a professional musician and she is criticising everything she hears (musically that is). And professionally she is probably right. And so are you. But that way you are passing by the joy of just enjoying a simple blues tune.
But then again, thats the way you are 'looking' at the Stones, and that's your good right.
quote:

The Stones have always been unique, and for the last 25 years I have always been seeking for the answer to "how the fuck did they do that". Fortunately you like it, and fortunately there's plenty more on the album that I like!
And songs that I don't like

Yes the Stones are unique, and they still are. I think that's a good end to this discussion.

By the way, your idea of letting Keith make a (last) solo-album by sending him a some of his friends in a studio recording a lot of covers (like Love Hurts) is a GREAT IDEA.
Let's start a petition ) and send it to the Stones Management or no even better Patti Hansen .
Seriously I hope he does something like that before he ends his career (or his career is ended).

Arjan
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
The Rolling Stones World Tour 2005 Rolling Stones Bigger Bang Tour 2005 2006 Rolling Stones Forum - Rolling Stones Message Board - Mick Jagger - Keith Richards - Brian Jones - Charlie Watts - Ian Stewart - Stu - Bill Wyman - Mick Taylor - Ronnie Wood - Ron Wood - Rolling Stones 2005 Tour - Farewell Tour - Rolling Stones: Onstage World Tour A Bigger Bang US Tour

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED)