Thank goodness someone knows what they are talking about - well done.
3 Likes
Kingsbury High School? I went there from 1971-78.
69-74
1 Like
Just cannot get that riff out of my head ā¦ ā¦ ā¦ this is how it used to work when I was seventeen years old ā¦ ā¦ ā¦ The Riffmeister driving me daft until the record shop on the corner finally started selling the latest single.
Happy Days. 
3 Likes
Cruel, but fair!
1 Like
Here you go looks pretty easyā¦
2 Likes
Thanks for nothing, @AndyP, thatās my plans for this morning oot the windae. 
Daeāin yon Keef five string thing the noo, as we speak. 
3 Likes
@AndyP Lord Keef in his excellent auto biography explains how on any Saturday evening you will hear any number of pub bands making a half decent fist of Brown Sugar or Start Me Up BUT it wonāt sound like the Stones because they donāt tune like Keef or indeed use just 5 strings.
3 Likes
Yes I was surprised to find a version of the Angry riff in standard tuning.
This guy by no means Keef at all rattles off 35 songs in Open G and heās even removed the tuning peg.
For all the non guitarists here - just grab a guitar tune to Open G and all need is your index finger and a groove - simpleā¦errr
2 Likes
Sweet Sounds of Heaven???
Decent but a bit cliche??
I think it is an absolute belter! Love the vocal blend of Mick and Lady Gaga and to top it Stevie W on keyboards. Very Sticky Fingers/Exile in vibe. Keith and Ronnie doing what they do best - the ancient art of weaving! Come on, can you believe at this point in their career they would/could deliver anything as good as this? Itās a treat for Stones fans
4 Likes
Couldnāt agree more ! Just love it. Jaggers vocals also on fine formā¦
3 Likes
Enjoyed the video, although the use of machine learning is benign but disturbing and really ought to attract more comment.
The song itself is a prime example of a band sounding like a diluted version of itself. A tired sprinkle of this. A half remembered bit of that. For some itās a trigger to remind of former glories. For others itās a tepid retread. What it most definitely isnāt is any kind of remarkable comeback/late renaissance although extraordinarily thereās still a sub set who see it that way.
Itās less than 50% of the original Stones sounding like 25% of late 1980s Stones, which itself was trapped between a fossilised version of itself which didnāt really exist and an attempt, as ever, to try and keep up with some perceived latest trend. Itās remarkable theyāre capable of producing anything at all but in itself Iāll take some convincing that thatās a thing worth applauding.
You can kid yourselves thereās some relationship with the band in the 60s or 70s but there really isnāt. The 90s onwards maybe but this is a band which, with or without Charlie long since ceased to swing like the Stones.
Donāt even start me on Keith. Iāve a friend who has worked live sound for them and his description of Keithās latter day guitar playing is hilarious. Ronnie isnāt great but he does an awful lot of covering up to put it politely. His description of post gig Keith on an acoustic as Ted Hawkins with a pigs trotter where a picking hand used to be nails it. The image is just a sad parody nowadays.
1 Like
Bands sell records on the back of that? Yawn.
Better or worse than Paul McCartney?
Iāll take some convincing thatās something I need to be concerned about. I judge music on its own merits rather than by comparison. Doesnāt always work but mostly does.
Streaming now, typical fare - ramshackled blues/punk/rock - from a band that had their heyday over 50 years ago - I suppose full marks for their longevity but I canāt see that itās as good as the hyperbole.
Perhaps post Charlie they should finally retire?
3 Likes
Can I just keep reposting my post from 20 days ago?