Quote
swiss

Quote
dgiorr

Quote
swiss
Anyway.

It's so interesting to consider the similarities and points of divergence between these two seminal bands...

What would Mick be able to handle, musically and thematically--seems like nothing too lyrical, nothing too emotionally honest, nothing too intellectual (tho he's somewhat intellectual, or at least thoughtful or intellectually curious, as a person), nothing too complex, nothing too "weird" or psychedelic or "silly" (so I'd suggest he wouldn't be able to sing "I Am the Walrus"). Anything the Beatles write that's cynical, Mick could handle.

Whoever suggested "Street Fighting Man" for John--spot on!

Musically, the Paul songs are more up Mick's alley, but the cynicism and sarcasm of John's lyrics are a better fit--so I can't agree with stanlove that any of them could sing anything written by anyone. These are first-tier artists whose songwriting and singing reflects who they are--not just notes or words strung together.

I think it's diverting and interesting, as a Stones' fan, to consider, for example, the fact that Keith could sing and do a great job with "Julia" or "Here Comes the Sun," and Mick just could not. That neither Paul nor John could do justice to "Angie." That John, in the right mood, could have spit poison into "Satisfaction" that would have worked in its own way, but in a way that Mick is too cool and detached to do himself. Even "Brown Sugar" - Paul would not touch it; John is too passionate to sing it right--it requires the strange dispassion of a Mick for it not to be hateful.

This thread--or what it was before being plowed into a 72-page amalgamation of OT: Beatles mess--has been a fun exercise that's served to underscore further for me just how nigh on impossible it is for Mick to be emotionally honest/vulnerable, and that Keith can and does "go there." I'm bummed this thread has been shoved into a Times Square of other posts, but will come back later and finish my take on what Stones songs John (and maybe Paul) would have done well...

I'd love to hear more of other people's thoughts. This is the kind of discussion I would want to be having around a table at a bar, actually.

- swiss

Several really great responses to my "Trading Places" post (which got moved into this one - why? I'd hoped to keep the topic separate), and swiss's here is just fantastic, putting into words some thoughts I had half-formed but couldn't improve on.

I particularly like the analysis of why Mick wouldn't touch some of John's songs.

"Under My Thumb" and "Run for Your Life" are two misogynist-themed songs from the same timeframe, and I cannot imagine swapping singers on those two, yet can't figure out why. Maybe the malevolent threats in RFYL ("let this be a sermon, I mean everything I said / baby I'm determined that I'd rather see you dead" ) are offset by the jaunty melody, and with the Mick/Stones treatment would sound just too dangerous.

Kind of ironic that, especially at that point in his life, Lennon was much more, in real life, about putting a woman "in her place" than I think the real Jagger ever was, and yet the UMT lyrics wouldn't have sounded "right" coming from John.

BV generally condenses threads when they are obviously redundant, OT, or...if someone reports the thread, which could be surmised happened here (tip of hat to Olly for reintroducing the word to my lexicon).

OK...I am thinking (as said just above) that John's lyrics and temperament are "hotter," more fiery/passionate, than Mick's. There's a ubiquitous emotional distance/dispassion to Mick's lyrics (and delivery). Mick can be almost coldly sociopathic in some songs, and I can't think of one song where he's out of control of his emotions--or admitting to it--his vulnerability being a crux or main point of the song (think "Mother"). John can move himself to enraged unhinged un-reason. Dignity, and not losing face, is important to Mick (i.e., or his songwriting persona). He can sing about squashing someone like a bug, dispassionately. John wouldn't and couldn't. The closest I can think of that John comes to "remove" is--maybe--in Girl, when he sings "When you say she's looking good/she acts as if it's understood/she's cool." But still, there's an edge--he's resentful, but grudgingly impressed.

Mick can be bitchy, coldly cutting, and mean. John not so much. Even "Sexy Sadie"--starts out trying to more or less sort of objectively narrate this person's sins and ills foisted on others--but soon moves to John vitriol "Sexy Sadie you'll get yours yet/However big you think you are!" And in general, John is more of pissed-off, restless, and heading toward primal scream temperament cuz it FEELS good to vent spleen and let loose (think, even, of his singing on "Rock and Roll Music"). In sharp chilling contrast--Mick singing "Now you’ve got your diamonds-and you will have some others/but you’d better watch your step, girl/or start living with your mother.”
However big you think you are"

He's so cold...like an ice cream cone.

- swiss

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
swiss

Quote
dgiorr

Quote
swiss
Anyway.

It's so interesting to consider the similarities and points of divergence between these two seminal bands...

What would Mick be able to handle, musically and thematically--seems like nothing too lyrical, nothing too emotionally honest, nothing too intellectual (tho he's somewhat intellectual, or at least thoughtful or intellectually curious, as a person), nothing too complex, nothing too "weird" or psychedelic or "silly" (so I'd suggest he wouldn't be able to sing "I Am the Walrus" ). Anything the Beatles write that's cynical, Mick could handle.

Whoever suggested "Street Fighting Man" for John--spot on!

Musically, the Paul songs are more up Mick's alley, but the cynicism and sarcasm of John's lyrics are a better fit--so I can't agree with stanlove that any of them could sing anything written by anyone. These are first-tier artists whose songwriting and singing reflects who they are--not just notes or words strung together.

I think it's diverting and interesting, as a Stones' fan, to consider, for example, the fact that Keith could sing and do a great job with "Julia" or "Here Comes the Sun," and Mick just could not. That neither Paul nor John could do justice to "Angie." That John, in the right mood, could have spit poison into "Satisfaction" that would have worked in its own way, but in a way that Mick is too cool and detached to do himself. Even "Brown Sugar" - Paul would not touch it; John is too passionate to sing it right--it requires the strange dispassion of a Mick for it not to be hateful.

This thread--or what it was before being plowed into a 72-page amalgamation of OT: Beatles mess--has been a fun exercise that's served to underscore further for me just how nigh on impossible it is for Mick to be emotionally honest/vulnerable, and that Keith can and does "go there." I'm bummed this thread has been shoved into a Times Square of other posts, but will come back later and finish my take on what Stones songs John (and maybe Paul) would have done well...

I'd love to hear more of other people's thoughts. This is the kind of discussion I would want to be having around a table at a bar, actually.

- swiss

Several really great responses to my "Trading Places" post (which got moved into this one - why? I'd hoped to keep the topic separate), and swiss's here is just fantastic, putting into words some thoughts I had half-formed but couldn't improve on.

I particularly like the analysis of why Mick wouldn't touch some of John's songs.

"Under My Thumb" and "Run for Your Life" are two misogynist-themed songs from the same timeframe, and I cannot imagine swapping singers on those two, yet can't figure out why. Maybe the malevolent threats in RFYL ("let this be a sermon, I mean everything I said / baby I'm determined that I'd rather see you dead" ) are offset by the jaunty melody, and with the Mick/Stones treatment would sound just too dangerous.

Kind of ironic that, especially at that point in his life, Lennon was much more, in real life, about putting a woman "in her place" than I think the real Jagger ever was, and yet the UMT lyrics wouldn't have sounded "right" coming from John.

BV generally condenses threads when they are obviously redundant, OT, or...if someone reports the thread, which could be surmised happened here (tip of hat to Olly for reintroducing the word to my lexicon).

OK...I am thinking (as said just above) that John's lyrics and temperament are "hotter," more fiery/passionate, than Mick's. There's a ubiquitous emotional distance/dispassion to Mick's lyrics (and delivery). Mick can be almost coldly sociopathic in some songs, and I can't think of one song where he's out of control of his emotions--or admitting to it--his vulnerability being a crux or main point of the song (think "Mother" ). John can move himself to enraged unhinged un-reason. Dignity, and not losing face, is important to Mick (i.e., or his songwriting persona). He can sing about squashing someone like a bug, dispassionately. John wouldn't and couldn't. The closest I can think of that John comes to "remove" is--maybe--in Girl, when he sings "When you say she's looking good/she acts as if it's understood/she's cool." But still, there's an edge--he's resentful, but grudgingly impressed.

Mick can be bitchy, coldly cutting, and mean. John not so much. Even "Sexy Sadie"--starts out trying to more or less sort of objectively narrate this person's sins and ills foisted on others--but soon moves to John vitriol "Sexy Sadie you'll get yours yet/However big you think you are!" And in general, John is more of pissed-off, restless, and heading toward primal scream temperament cuz it FEELS good to vent spleen and let loose (think, even, of his singing on "Rock and Roll Music" ). In sharp chilling contrast--Mick singing "Now you’ve got your diamonds-and you will have some others/but you’d better watch your step, girl/or start living with your mother.”
However big you think you are"

He's so cold...like an ice cream cone.

- swiss

but beautiful tho'!

Quote
Turner68
Sexy Sadie is about the Maharishi.

Quote
swiss

Quote
Turner68
Sexy Sadie is about the Maharishi.

yup...

Quote
Svartmer

Quote
swiss

Quote
Turner68
Sexy Sadie is about the Maharishi.

yup...

I think that trip to India was a big mistake. According to Geoff Emerick, the long time Beatles engineer, the mood in the band had worsened considerable when they came back and gathered in the studio to record the White Album. Especially John Lennon seemed to be angry and frustrated most of the time, and a lot of his lyrics on that album reflects his state of mind, Sexy Sadie being one of those. It got so bad that Emerick left the recordings, sick and tired of the endless arguing in the band.

Quote
Turner68

Quote
Svartmer

Quote
swiss

Quote
Turner68
Sexy Sadie is about the Maharishi.

yup...

I think that trip to India was a big mistake. According to Geoff Emerick, the long time Beatles engineer, the mood in the band had worsened considerable when they came back and gathered in the studio to record the White Album. Especially John Lennon seemed to be angry and frustrated most of the time, and a lot of his lyrics on that album reflects his state of mind, Sexy Sadie being one of those. It got so bad that Emerick left the recordings, sick and tired of the endless arguing in the band.

I blame the drug abuse. But the White Album is remarkably good.

Quote
Hairball
I received my Beatles +1 Deluxe package yesterday - I forgot that USPS now delivers on Sundays!!!

Anyhow, it's a beauty - still sealed, so will have a proper unveiling tonight!

Quote
Turner68

Quote
Hairball
I received my Beatles +1 Deluxe package yesterday - I forgot that USPS now delivers on Sundays!!!

Anyhow, it's a beauty - still sealed, so will have a proper unveiling tonight!

how was it!? i'm trying to decide between getting it now, or asking for it for x-mas.

Quote
swiss

Quote
dgiorr

Quote
swiss
Anyway.

It's so interesting to consider the similarities and points of divergence between these two seminal bands...

What would Mick be able to handle, musically and thematically--seems like nothing too lyrical, nothing too emotionally honest, nothing too intellectual (tho he's somewhat intellectual, or at least thoughtful or intellectually curious, as a person), nothing too complex, nothing too "weird" or psychedelic or "silly" (so I'd suggest he wouldn't be able to sing "I Am the Walrus" ). Anything the Beatles write that's cynical, Mick could handle.

Whoever suggested "Street Fighting Man" for John--spot on!

Musically, the Paul songs are more up Mick's alley, but the cynicism and sarcasm of John's lyrics are a better fit--so I can't agree with stanlove that any of them could sing anything written by anyone. These are first-tier artists whose songwriting and singing reflects who they are--not just notes or words strung together.

I think it's diverting and interesting, as a Stones' fan, to consider, for example, the fact that Keith could sing and do a great job with "Julia" or "Here Comes the Sun," and Mick just could not. That neither Paul nor John could do justice to "Angie." That John, in the right mood, could have spit poison into "Satisfaction" that would have worked in its own way, but in a way that Mick is too cool and detached to do himself. Even "Brown Sugar" - Paul would not touch it; John is too passionate to sing it right--it requires the strange dispassion of a Mick for it not to be hateful.

This thread--or what it was before being plowed into a 72-page amalgamation of OT: Beatles mess--has been a fun exercise that's served to underscore further for me just how nigh on impossible it is for Mick to be emotionally honest/vulnerable, and that Keith can and does "go there." I'm bummed this thread has been shoved into a Times Square of other posts, but will come back later and finish my take on what Stones songs John (and maybe Paul) would have done well...

I'd love to hear more of other people's thoughts. This is the kind of discussion I would want to be having around a table at a bar, actually.

- swiss

Several really great responses to my "Trading Places" post (which got moved into this one - why? I'd hoped to keep the topic separate), and swiss's here is just fantastic, putting into words some thoughts I had half-formed but couldn't improve on.

I particularly like the analysis of why Mick wouldn't touch some of John's songs.

"Under My Thumb" and "Run for Your Life" are two misogynist-themed songs from the same timeframe, and I cannot imagine swapping singers on those two, yet can't figure out why. Maybe the malevolent threats in RFYL ("let this be a sermon, I mean everything I said / baby I'm determined that I'd rather see you dead" ) are offset by the jaunty melody, and with the Mick/Stones treatment would sound just too dangerous.

Kind of ironic that, especially at that point in his life, Lennon was much more, in real life, about putting a woman "in her place" than I think the real Jagger ever was, and yet the UMT lyrics wouldn't have sounded "right" coming from John.

OK...I am thinking (as said just above) that John's lyrics and temperament are "hotter," more fiery/passionate, than Mick's. There's a ubiquitous emotional distance/dispassion to Mick's lyrics (and delivery). Mick can be almost coldly sociopathic in some songs, and I can't think of one song where he's out of control of his emotions--or admitting to it--his vulnerability being a crux or main point of the song (think, for contrast, John in "Mother" ). John can move himself to enraged unhinged un-reason. Dignity, and not losing face, is important to Mick (i.e., or his songwriting persona). He can sing about squashing someone like a bug, dispassionately. John wouldn't and couldn't. The closest I can think of that John comes to "remove" is--maybe--in Girl, when he sings "When you say she's looking good/she acts as if it's understood/she's cool." But still, there's an edge--he's resentful, but grudgingly impressed.

Mick can be bitchy, coldly cutting, and mean. John not so much. Even "Sexy Sadie"--starts out trying to more or less sort of objectively narrate this person's sins and ills foisted on others--but soon moves to John vitriol "Sexy Sadie you'll get yours yet/However big you think you are!" And in general, John is more of pissed-off, restless, and heading toward primal scream temperament cuz it FEELS good to vent spleen and let loose (think, even, of his singing on "Rock and Roll Music" ). In sharp chilling contrast--Mick singing "Now you’ve got your diamonds-and you will have some others/but you’d better watch your step, girl/or start living with your mother.”


He's so cold...like an ice cream cone.

- swiss

Quote
Come On
Which Band won?

Quote
Deltics

Quote
Deltics

Quote
Come On
Which Band won?

Herman's Hermits.

Quote
CaptainCorella

(Looks like the image Deltics found was "borrowed" from saki's archives?)

Quote
Deltics

Quote
CaptainCorella

(Looks like the image Deltics found was "borrowed" from saki's archives?)

I "borrowed" it from another site that "borrowed" it!
Thanks for the link.

Quote
Svartmer

Quote
swiss

Quote
Turner68
Sexy Sadie is about the Maharishi.

yup...

I think that trip to India was a big mistake. According to Geoff Emerick, the long time Beatles engineer, the mood in the band had worsened considerable when they came back and gathered in the studio to record the White Album. Especially John Lennon seemed to be angry and frustrated most of the time, and a lot of his lyrics on that album reflects his state of mind, Sexy Sadie being one of those. It got so bad that Emerick left the recordings, sick and tired of the endless arguing in the band.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Svartmer

Quote
swiss

Quote
Turner68
Sexy Sadie is about the Maharishi.

yup...

I think that trip to India was a big mistake. According to Geoff Emerick, the long time Beatles engineer, the mood in the band had worsened considerable when they came back and gathered in the studio to record the White Album. Especially John Lennon seemed to be angry and frustrated most of the time, and a lot of his lyrics on that album reflects his state of mind, Sexy Sadie being one of those. It got so bad that Emerick left the recordings, sick and tired of the endless arguing in the band.

Odd, innit, considering that trip about peace...

Quote
Turner68

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Svartmer

Quote
swiss

Quote
Turner68
Sexy Sadie is about the Maharishi.

yup...

I think that trip to India was a big mistake. According to Geoff Emerick, the long time Beatles engineer, the mood in the band had worsened considerable when they came back and gathered in the studio to record the White Album. Especially John Lennon seemed to be angry and frustrated most of the time, and a lot of his lyrics on that album reflects his state of mind, Sexy Sadie being one of those. It got so bad that Emerick left the recordings, sick and tired of the endless arguing in the band.

Odd, innit, considering that trip about peace...

there was a lot going on then, as i think swiss pointed out... the band's personal relationships, the drugs, and the thing that they all identified as being the biggest issue - brian epstein's death. it's not reasonable to blame the trip or any one thing in isolation.