| December 30th, 2005 01:30 AM |
|
|
| pdog |
Brilliant, all of you, Even Ian.
Greatest thread ever! |
| December 31st, 2005 09:49 AM |
|
|
| corgi37 |
Er, yeah, 1980. How can you not know that?
I had a party for 3 days! |
| December 31st, 2005 12:30 PM |
|
|
| glencar |
quote:
IanBillen wrote:
[quote]Gazza wrote:
Fortunately, the Stones managed to get through June 1970 without splitting up and February 1981 without being shot...
anyway, isnt this a re-hash of the same article that was much discussed a few weeks ago?
________________________________________________________________________
You are rarely wrong about these facts but
I thought Lennon was shot in 1980? Are you sure?
Ian
Ian, it was Feb. of 1981. Monday Night Football was where most of us first heard it. |
| December 31st, 2005 05:27 PM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
Fortunately, the Stones managed to get through June 1970 without splitting up and February 1981 without being shot...
quote:
IanBillen wrote:
You are rarely wrong about these facts but
I thought Lennon was shot in 1980? Are you sure?
Ian
Whooosh
lennon's quote was that everything the Beatles did, the Stones copied two months later.... |
| January 7th, 2006 07:30 AM |
|
|
| Honky Tonk Man |
quote:
Soldatti wrote:
I can't blame him, I think that he was tired of Stones responses (see Satanic Majesties, the white cover of Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed)
As far as I'm aware, the white cover for Beggars Banquet had NOTHING directly to do with the Stones themselves. I think they were told the graffiti toilet was unsuitable and then Decca just went ahead and gave it a plain white cover. Maybe it was because there was no time for a photo shoot or enough time to get together new artwork.
Many music critics consider the white cover to be unfortunate, as the Beatles had released The White Album a few months earlier. I think some blamed the clash of covers on Beggars Banquets failure to make it past number 3 in the UK charts.
|
| January 7th, 2006 09:14 PM |
|
|
| quackenbush |
The Stones did copy some of what the Beatles did. Bill Wyman says as much in "Stone Alone." But the Stones copied a bit from a lot of other artists too: Chuck Berry, Bo Diddley, The Everly Brothers, Bob Dylan, James Brown, Tina Turner, Muddy Waters and Ry Cooder. And these are just the influences, or as
Keith says, "triggers" that I'm pulling off the top of my head. It's not what the Stones took from each of these individuals, it's what they did with them that makes the Stones great.People did not and do not listen to the Stones to hear an echo of the Beatles or any other artist. By the time the Stones released "Beggars Banquet, I think it was apparent the Stones and the Beatles were very different bands.
[Edited by quackenbush] |
| January 7th, 2006 10:56 PM |
|
|
| quackenbush |
Mick Jagger: "The title has been used a lot by journalists, the phrase has become a big thing. That version that's on there is the original version, which was recorded half in Ron Wood's basement, if I remember rightly. It was a demo.
Here's a quote from Mick Jagger talking about "It's Only Rock and Roll." I think it is similar to what I said about the Stones in my previous post.
Mick on It's Only Rock and Roll:
It's a very Chuck Berry song, but it's got a different feeling to it than a Chuck Berry song. You can't really do proper imitations of people. You always have to start out by imitating somebody. In painting, some famous artist always starts out by being an impressionist. And then they become the most famous abstract artist. Or an actor starts out by imitating someone else's style. And then you develop your own. And I think that's what happened with this band and all the musicians that have played in it. You start off with one thing, and then you mutate into another, but you still acknowledge the fact that these influences came from here and here and here. Because not everyone knows that. But you make this new amalgam. And out of all this different music, all out these Blues, out of all this Country music, out of all this Jazz and dance music and Reggae music, you know, you make something that's your own." |
| January 7th, 2006 11:06 PM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Honky Tonk Man wrote:
Many music critics consider the white cover to be unfortunate, as the Beatles had released The White Album a few months earlier.
The White Album was released on November 22, 1968
Beggars Banquet was released on December 5, 1968
I would seriously doubt that when the Stones finally approved the cover art of Beggars Banquet they would have had any idea of the design of the Beatles' album. Total co-incidence
quote:
I think some blamed the clash of covers on Beggars Banquets failure to make it past number 3 in the UK charts.
I dont know what made it to No. 2, but the main reason why it didnt get any higher was releasing it within 2 weeks of an album by the biggest selling act in the world. The White Album was the fastest selling album in history at that time.
Not the last time the Stones boobed by putting out an album at the same time as another top selling artist!
Remember the 40 Licks vs Elvis Number Ones in 2002?
[Edited by Gazza] |
| January 8th, 2006 06:25 AM |
|
|
| corgi37 |
Due to my New Years resolution, i shall remain quiet on all things Lennon until the next anniversary of his blasting. Such a sad day it was too.
And, really, in 68, i doubt the Stones had any "approval" at all for the BB white cover. I'd imagine it was a case of Decca saying "Our way, or no way". How long did they have to wait anyway? It was months wasnt it? Anyway, ancient history now. Lets move on. To the next releases by the respective bands. Let it be/bleed! hahaha |
| January 8th, 2006 03:08 PM |
|
|
| Ern |
quote:
corgi37 wrote:
Due to my New Years resolution, i shall remain quiet on all things Lennon until the next anniversary of his blasting. Such a sad day it was too.
And, really, in 68, i doubt the Stones had any "approval" at all for the BB white cover. I'd imagine it was a case of Decca saying "Our way, or no way". How long did they have to wait anyway? It was months wasnt it? Anyway, ancient history now. Lets move on. To the next releases by the respective bands. Let it be/bleed! hahaha
No, it's Abbey Road/Let It Bleed. |
| January 9th, 2006 09:24 AM |
|
|
| Honky Tonk Man |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
Remember the 40 Licks vs Elvis Number Ones in 2002?
[Edited by Gazza]
Yes I do. How did that pan out? As far as I'm aware, although Elvis pipped The Stones to the number 1 spot, 40 Licks stayed in the charts longer and sold more copies. Is that right? |
|
