Rolling Stones - 1964 >Live Show

[Michael Messer]

Outstanding!



Shine On
Michael

[slide496]

Thanks - Awesome:)

[General Savage]

Great piece of history. Interesting to see how much they rely on and far they get with good rhythm playing

[slide496]

Seems to me that both in this clip and the early Tina Turner clips, perhaps others, one style of the times in rock music was a carefree exhilaration that was rousing of spirits much like gospel.

I don't believe that Jagger has really departed from his original energy level in performance that much, though I don't know what he's done to maintain it - he certainly seem has recognized what he had there and protected it and his weight.

To my mind, one only needs to try and follow hopping along with a clip like this or some of Rory Gallagher's for a minute or two to be reminded how high the energy level was in these performers- although both Tina Turner and Jagger were singers unencumbered by a guitar.

[leeophonic]

Notice the resemblance between Mick and the latest teen hearthrob Harry Styles, appearance only although the American girls seem to like that look.

Lee

[slide496]

Don't really see the resemblance. Back in the day the Stones were edgy and Jagger was a newly accepted bisexual and androgyny type - the apex of that vibe being Performance, where he dresses in drag and I believe he did that elsewhere. His body type, was slender and prepubescent, somewhat like a model.

I think that Bowie was a similar style though he went much further in the theatricality and was able to express his separation from the macho/hero persona more freely. The Stones were limited to my mind by their early financial success and commercial packaging. Sorry to drone on!

[snakehips]

Hi there !

Having started my musical interest/self-education in 1977 at around the age 6, mainly listening to Elvis, then started on Chuck Berry and Fats Domino when I was about 12 or 13 yrs old,then got into blues, heavily, then a deep interest into soul & funk, I believe I learned a good bit about african-american music. It was my one-year-older brother who was into the 60's British bands copying Blues - Rolling Stones, Fleetwook Mac, then Jimmy Hendrix, Doors etc. (so I heard some of that too).

I recently watched this Rolling Stones Live performance. It's from the American TAMI show, isn't it ?
I watched it because I had been looking for live James Brown footage.
James Brown was on the same show as the Rolling Stones.

I'll make two points :

1. Listen a few times to Chuck Berry's original Chess recording of Round and Round, then listen to the Rolling Stones TAMI show version. They sound like a School band. Very amateurish version, IMHO.

2. Next, watch the TAMI show James Brown and band performance of the same night.
The Rolling Stones were billed on the show AFTER James Brown - ie. the Rolling Stones had to go on stage AFTER James Brown.
I give them the compliment that they SURE had balls to go on stage after Brown's performance.
If I was in the Rolling Stones, I'd have walked out of the studio and never come back, refusing to be part of the humiliation of James Brown and his band having to be followed by the tame/lame Rolling Stones version of Chuck Berry's Round and Round.
And/or if I had never heard of or seen James Brown up o this point, upon seeing James Brown performon thisnshow, I'd count myself as not being worthy to go on stage after him.

Sure, every band has to start somewhere, and the Rolling Stones blossomed into a great band when they starting writing their own stuff, but that performance on the Tami Show, I can't agree about it being a great performance musically.

I suppose at the time, white British bands trying their best to copy the blues music they had fallen in love with, no one knew any better. Obvious I'm more a James Brown fan than the Rolling Stones, but still some valid points.

[slide496]

I don't like to compare the performances.White or not the Stones were not seasoned professionals at the time of this show - IMHO they had other things that they brought to the show equally emotionally compelling and exciting, including perhaps the novelty.

To many in America I think, we hadn't seen anything like this, the style or anything!

[Michael Messer]

Well, you either get it or you don't.

Shine On
Michael.

[wolvoboy]

heres a little film of Mick Jagger playing slide guitar,looks like he was havin some fun on his own,on stage,nice guitar.just came across this film by accident havent seen it before

wolvoboy

[pete1951]

There seem to be very few `white` US bands doing anything like this at the time (or none that had much air-play on US radio). So , Chuck B. did do his songs `better`, James B. did have `the moves` , BUT the Stones put a Howling Wolf number on the top of the singles chart, AND gave credit to writers of songs (like Willie Dixon etc) which were labeled `trad. arg. Page` by some other bands.
Unlike modern guitarists who have the Interweb , the only players they could get to see were Bert Weeden and Hank Marvin ( both fine players in their way) and maybe some `real` blues artist brought over to the UK by Chris Barber (2 one hour sets once a year).
I have never bought a Stones record or CD ( I can borrow them from my 19 year old daughter) but without people like them(no lists please) Blues would not have got a foothold here, and who knows, may have died out in the States (OK that maybe going a bit far)
Pete T

[Michael Messer]

The first record I bought was Not Fade Away.

It wasn't just about the music, it was everything. For me back then James Brown was boring compared to the Stones.

Shine On
Michael

[Stevie]

Good, I'm not alone then...

[slide496]

Big early Stones fan here. Steady through the 80's and off and on since.

I saw them live at Shea Stadium in the early 2000's and their outdoor setup was amazing, they released balloons and there was fireworks at the end. They were very exotic to watch blown up on the 20 foot monitors, very youthful, yet at the same time very wrinkled, gaunt and somewhat otherworldly looking.

Arrived early - they piped all old blues - none of their own - and a great selection although I don't remember what exactly but it was sort of a warm up and tribute.

[blueshome]

Nothing much changes. Blues and rock performed by whites was and is more palatable to the mass media than that played by its originators. Then we had the Stones and the others, today we have the likes of Seasick Steve, Joe Bonamassa, Clapton etc. having a high profile whilst guys like Robert Belfour and John Primer (a great slide player BTW) never get air time.

Yes I know that some of these guys have tried to promote the black guys, but the point is that they shouldn't have had to.

At the time that was broadcast I was lucky enough to see Buddy Guy, Fred McDowell, Howling Wolf and others - so I didn't spend my time listening to poor imitations.