|
Post by Michael Messer on Apr 22, 2013 18:12:34 GMT
I think it has changed a lot because the people that the Stones were influenced by, Muddy Waters, Chuck Berry, Bo Diddley, Howlin' Wolf...etc, were making great pop records that also once they were heard, appealed to the masses. These are household names and have been for many decades. Robert Belfour and John Primer might be great artists, but they do not make 'great' records.
Also, the Rolling Stones and other similar bands took the songs and the musical style and turned into something else. The Rolling Stones are not and never were a straight Chicago Blues band, they are a rock'n'roll band and the music they play, while it is steeped in the blues, is something else. Five years after the blues and soul thing, with the influence of Gram Parsons, they were more Country than Blues. Love in Vain done by the Stones is far closer to Country music than it is to its origins in the Blues.
Now where are my maracas and harmonica....
Shine On Michael.
|
|
|
Post by pete1951 on Apr 22, 2013 18:42:43 GMT
As Phil says `they shouldn`t have had to.` But my point is, what would have happened if the Stones etc. had not `promoted the black guys` ? My felling is that Buddy Guy, Fred McD etc would not have come here at all! So, with no `pop-blues` , record companies may have stopped recording, and Blues would have gone the way of the 1900s banjo bands and mandolin orchestras
|
|
|
Post by rickS on Apr 22, 2013 19:10:33 GMT
I saw quite a few of the bands that played the R&B circuit back then ( still got my Ricky Tick membership card, autographed by Sonny Boy Williamson!), & would just say that the Stones were one of the smokinest live bands for sheer energy & force - other than that, this 'white boy blues' nonsense got old 40 years ago - passion/conviction doesn't have a colour in my book.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2013 19:56:23 GMT
Here's some news - black guys have it tough / white guys have it easy. Generalisation I know, but some truth there? (Actually Seasick Steve probably had it tougher than most). Anyway, I like what I like, not because its blacker or whiter. And anyone that thinks Rory is a "poor imitation" is a FOOL! Also, for every 1 'good' blues artist (black or white) that made a decent stab at a career, there are a million that didn't - nothing to do with colour, 'feel', talent, or a good song. The problem now isn't 'white players / poor imitations', it DJs, boy/girl bands and Simon Cowell. TT
|
|
|
Post by slide496 on Apr 22, 2013 22:02:29 GMT
@ MM Plus 2 what you said. And where are your maracas and harmonica!?
|
|
|
Post by Michael Messer on Apr 22, 2013 22:49:36 GMT
Sadly I no longer have either. But there was a time when I was often seen with a complete set of Jagger-style maracas, a harmonica, a Beatles snare drum with Ringo's face on the head, a four string red plastic Beatles guitar and an upright vacuum cleaner which I used as a mic stand! .....They all went when the real thing, a Watkins electric guitar and a Premier snare drum, came into my life.
Now....back to....Wembley Empire Pool Christmas 1964 (sorry about the Jimmy Savile introduction)
Shine On Michael
|
|
|
Post by snakehips on Apr 22, 2013 23:58:11 GMT
Hi again !
Just to clarify a few things I was trying to say. I am judging the TAMI Stones performance by today's standards and without nostalgia clouding the issue - OK, harsh perhaps, but I'm doing this from my perspective having NOT having had the exposure to them in the same way that Michael Messer's generation did. My introduction to them came about AFTER I was already very familiar with lots of rock'n'roll and blues music from the 1950's - stuff that most of Michael's and older generation(s) didn't have access to volumes of, I expect. Only people within the clique of blues record collectors in the UK, including the Stones, had any exposure to the "real" stuff (at least initially). So, I can see why the Rolling Stones must have been exciting / revolutionary to the kids in those days.
However, I have seen many a half-decent pub band that could cover the Chuck Berry song better than the Stones did in that TAMI show.
So my point was NOT about what the 1960's teenagers thoughts were on watching the Stones in their early days.
I was talking about :
1. How people like James Brown, Chuck Berry etc must have judged early Rolling Stones music, at the time - it must of been bizarre watching 10year old blues and R&B rehashed in such a watered down format, played by spotty, ugly hoodlums, and being perceived by the general public of the time as hot, "new music" ! I'm sure the novelty of them being English had a lot to do with it. I suppose, similar to what Lottle Richard must have thought, watching Pat Boone sing Richard's "Tutti Frutti". Well, OK, that's a bit of an extreme example but I figure you guys will be getting my point by now. Maybe comparing Elvis and the blues guys is a better comparison, because Elvis actually had sex appeal and a great stage presence in his 1956 Live TV appearances. 2. How the Stones TAMI performance stacks up against any modern cover bands trying to cover rock'n'roll and blues nowadays
I feel that the Stone's TAMI performance comes out weak/tame/lame under this benefit of historical hind-sight, when that comparison is done by people having not grown up with fond memories of bands like the Rolling Stones, in their teenage years.
Perhaps I could still be putting this clearer, and less rambling, but it's getting late now !!!
I was talking about rehashing great music poorly, I wasn't trying to make any comments about colour/creed etc.
Another poor, embarrasing even, early Rolling Stones cover is Muddy Water's (well, it was written by Willie Dixon) I Just Want To Make Love To You. They just miss the whole cool element, the whole grown man element, the sexiness. Instead, the Stones version is just pre-pubescent, played way too fast, in a non-musical way, and sounds like a pre-groomed One Dirction goofing off !
All my own opinion of course !
|
|
|
Post by snakehips on Apr 23, 2013 0:19:23 GMT
Hi again !
One last thing. Just to clarify again - it was a month or two ago that I watched the youtube videos of the TAMI show - James Brown first, then the Rolling Stones. I actually switched off the Rolling Stones performance after the Round and Rund song, in disgust. I couldn't believe how that CR@P ever got onto TV, way back then. I'm darn sure it wasn't down to musical talent . Most likely, partly already paved the way by the Beatles in America already, there was a thirst in the US for those crazy, ugly English bands, playing that weird music - ie. the novelty value.
Sorry to be so cruel sounding. Those thoughts were still in my mind, when by chance, this thread came up about this Stones TAMI performance. I simply had to put in my 2.5 pence worth ! No offence intended to anyone whos views are different to mine.
It seems the older i get and / or the deeper into blues music i have become, the less tolerant I have become to any music not to my liking. It's like a bloody curse ! I'd half excuse myself for this if I was the sort of amazing musician I would always like to be .... I'd have a right to think I'm better than all that stuff...... But I'm not !!! And I'm quite willing to admit it. Right Richard, BED !
|
|