Tell Me :
Talk
I'd say Jerry was a great musician. And, while JT certainly wasn't, nobody played the guitar in quite the same way. NOBODY. But I think their ace in the hole was the great songs.
I'm 56 years old and have been a rock and roll fanatic since childhood. I'm not sure if I should be proud or ashamed to admit that I have never listened to anything by the NYD. I've only read about them, and having seen pictures, dismissed them as another band that seemed to want to copy the Stones' image. If I've missed some good music, I stand willing to be humbly corrected....
Can only agree on both points. Loved the debut album when it first came out and still listen to it today. Was also skeptical about the reunion and had to be talked into catching a show and I was blown away - one of the best gigs I've been at. That was with Steve Conte and Sami Yaffa in the band and they had that wonderful combination of tightness and looseness. Saw them later with Frank Infante on guitar and they were still great, but somewhat under-rehearsed.
Loved the way the Dolls didn't take themselves too seriously. It is, after all, only Rock 'N' Roll.
David Johansen is on the "Draw The Line" album by Aerosmith, co-writing one of the songs, "Sight for Sore Eyes" I think.
--------
Otherwise, I agree with some points here, unless one was on the Eastern Seaboard, ones exposure to the NYD is probably limited but that may be the loss of those who haven't heard this music.
--------
I've listened to some glam lately, glam was not just Bowie and Mott the Hoople; I don't even know what the proper definition is but Mud, even Showaddywaddy and some other bands are called Glam.
--------
Anyway, enjoy them all.
Stephen Tyler came out wearing those jump suits in the '70s, really, looks very Jagger-ish but a lot of good music. Some people will say Aerosmith kept on rocking out with some good vibes post 1975 while the RS may have gone in a different direction. Maybe there is something to that.
And then, some Aerosmith fans dislike it when Aerosmith got commercial; had those hits. THat's for another forum.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-19 19:24 by BroomWagon.
I am so jealous.
Thank you. I'd rather have labor pains then listen to this garbage. In fact, I'd rather eat garbage then listen to this garbage.
That would be this gig :
"16-Mar-74
US CA,Santa Monica,Civic Center
[with Silverhead]
Setlist: Courageous Cat/ Personality Crisis/ Bad Girl/ Looking For A Kiss/ Great Big Kiss/ Stranded In The Jungle/ Puss 'n' Boots/ Trash/ Milkman (a.k.a. Chatterbox)/ Who Are The Mystery Girls?/ Pills/ (There's Gonna Be A) Showdown(*)/ Hootchie Cootchie Man(*)/ Dizzy Miss Lizzy(*)/ Back In The U.S.A.(*)/ Bad Detective(*).
Note: Preceded by the screening of Bob Gruen's "Lipstick Killers" film. (*) Available on the "Hootchie Cootchie Dolls" CD (Solid records 1998) and (except "Bad Detective" ) also on the "Dizzy Dolls" bootleg LP (1985)"
[www.fromthearchives.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-21 12:23 by dcba.
Yeah, it's a peach and has stood the test of time better than a lot of albums from that era.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
pepganzo
()
Date: April 18, 2016 10:49
Quote
exhpart
Love Johnny Thunders esp So Alone solo album ...still gets played now and again. New York Doll too
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
matxil
()
Date: April 18, 2016 11:19
I don't know Thunders solo work, but I really liked Sylvain Sylvain's solo albums. Especially the one with "Teenage News" on it.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: April 18, 2016 13:55
Dolls is/was a great band. Pure rock r roll from the beginning to the end...
Thunders together with Zappa is my biggest guitar-heroes...Keith is more rock n roll personified even without playing guitar...
2 1 2 0
Thunders together with Zappa is my biggest guitar-heroes...Keith is more rock n roll personified even without playing guitar...2 1 2 0
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
cineplexed2
()
Date: April 18, 2016 19:03
Love both bands...but they are completely different. The Stones swing in a way the dolls never could (dotted 8th versus straight ahead rock n roll). If you pick up a guitar and play like Johnny, then play like Keith, you will know instantly how different they are...and how wonderfully they co-exist. No reason to choose.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
reg thorpe
()
Date: April 18, 2016 19:43
Quote
rodes
David Johansen and Johnny Thunders clones?
personality crisis?
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
lem motlow
()
Date: April 18, 2016 22:13
i think the Dolls were a band with alot of camp and sense of humor that doesnt really come across now-of course they were doing a sendup of mick and keith but in a fun way,they weren't great musicians like the guys you're mentioning them with so it isn't fair.
Calling Aerosmith 'stones clones" is a bit comical when you consider Joe Perry could play circles around anyone who's ever been in the Stones not named Mick Taylor.
Calling Aerosmith 'stones clones" is a bit comical when you consider Joe Perry could play circles around anyone who's ever been in the Stones not named Mick Taylor.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
andrewm
()
Date: April 18, 2016 23:57
Quote
lem motlow
i think the Dolls were a band with alot of camp and sense of humor that doesnt really come across now-of course they were doing a sendup of mick and keith but in a fun way,they weren't great musicians like the guys you're mentioning them with so it isn't fair.
Calling Aerosmith 'stones clones" is a bit comical when you consider Joe Perry could play circles around anyone who's ever been in the Stones not named Mick Taylor.
I'd say Jerry was a great musician. And, while JT certainly wasn't, nobody played the guitar in quite the same way. NOBODY. But I think their ace in the hole was the great songs.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
Marhsall
()
Date: April 19, 2016 00:36
How could even COMPARE The Stones w/ The Dolls ???
"Well my heavy throbbers itchin' just to lay a solid rhythm down"
"Well my heavy throbbers itchin' just to lay a solid rhythm down"
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
RockinJive
()
Date: April 19, 2016 03:26
The guys are terrible. What a joke
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
HonkeyTonkFlash
()
Date: April 19, 2016 16:29
Quote
RockinJive
The guys are terrible. What a joke
I'm 56 years old and have been a rock and roll fanatic since childhood. I'm not sure if I should be proud or ashamed to admit that I have never listened to anything by the NYD. I've only read about them, and having seen pictures, dismissed them as another band that seemed to want to copy the Stones' image. If I've missed some good music, I stand willing to be humbly corrected....
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
johnnythunders
()
Date: April 19, 2016 17:12
Just like to give a plug for newly-formed Remarquable Records. They are doing a long overdue upgrade on Johnyy Thunders solo work, culminating in a double vinyl LP version of So Alone which came out this week - looks terrific and sounds fantastic
Start with "You Can't Put Your Arms Around A Memory" or "Daddy Rolling Stone" and take it from there
[www.remarquablerecords.com]
Go Johnny Go!
Start with "You Can't Put Your Arms Around A Memory" or "Daddy Rolling Stone" and take it from there
[www.remarquablerecords.com]
Go Johnny Go!
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
BluzDude
()
Date: April 19, 2016 17:16
Why don't we compare the New York Yankees to my little league baseball team while we are at it?
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
johnnythunders
()
Date: April 19, 2016 17:31
Becuause at their best the Dolls embodied many of the qualities we like in the Stones - raunch,great songs, a disregard for convention and (on a good night) a phenomenally exciting live show.
Mind you, with a login like mine I am not exactly unbiased.
Mind you, with a login like mine I am not exactly unbiased.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
teleblaster
()
Date: April 19, 2016 19:00
Quote
andrewmQuote
RockinJiveQuote
Dan
The New York Dolls debut is one of the most perfect albums ever laid down.
As far as what?
As far as rock 'n' roll albums go. I'm with Dan. And as much as I was initially skeptical about the reunion that began in '04 (how could there be no Thunders or Nolan?) I ended up seeing 'em four times and it was insanely great every time.
Can only agree on both points. Loved the debut album when it first came out and still listen to it today. Was also skeptical about the reunion and had to be talked into catching a show and I was blown away - one of the best gigs I've been at. That was with Steve Conte and Sami Yaffa in the band and they had that wonderful combination of tightness and looseness. Saw them later with Frank Infante on guitar and they were still great, but somewhat under-rehearsed.
Loved the way the Dolls didn't take themselves too seriously. It is, after all, only Rock 'N' Roll.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
BroomWagon
()
Date: April 19, 2016 19:23
Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Love the Dolls. They were pure to the point of self sabotage. I think that is why they didn't get big - they were their own worst enemy.
And there was no rivalry between Sex Pistols and Dolls; they didn't even cross each other's path. Dolls were already done in '75, when Pistols had yet to be born.
Aerosmith and Dolls rocked side by side in late 70's. But I have always heard they were good friends, and respected each other. The Mick/Keith thing...I think the Stones were just the first. Thing is it is part of rock'n roll hard-wiring; it's like an archetype - one must have these parts in place to become a true rockin bad boy band of rebels and never-do-wells.
David Johansen is on the "Draw The Line" album by Aerosmith, co-writing one of the songs, "Sight for Sore Eyes" I think.
--------
Otherwise, I agree with some points here, unless one was on the Eastern Seaboard, ones exposure to the NYD is probably limited but that may be the loss of those who haven't heard this music.
--------
I've listened to some glam lately, glam was not just Bowie and Mott the Hoople; I don't even know what the proper definition is but Mud, even Showaddywaddy and some other bands are called Glam.
--------
Anyway, enjoy them all.
Stephen Tyler came out wearing those jump suits in the '70s, really, looks very Jagger-ish but a lot of good music. Some people will say Aerosmith kept on rocking out with some good vibes post 1975 while the RS may have gone in a different direction. Maybe there is something to that.
And then, some Aerosmith fans dislike it when Aerosmith got commercial; had those hits. THat's for another forum.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-19 19:24 by BroomWagon.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
BluzDude
()
Date: April 19, 2016 20:44
Maybe it was just my musical taste at the time, but I did see the Dolls back in the 70's, (Santa Monica Civic) but I was more impressed with the opening act - Silverhead (Michael Des Barres).
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
Virtual_Nobody
()
Date: April 19, 2016 21:59
Weren't the Dolls in line to be signed by Rolling Stones Records just before one of them died.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
Rollin' Stoner
()
Date: April 19, 2016 22:55
N.Y. Dolls Fan...both lps are excellent, especially the first, Thunders Solo work (So Alone and Que Sera Sera), Heartbreakers L.A.M.F. is fantastic, the Heartbreakers live at Max's Kansas City and live at The Speakeasy are excellent. Johansen's 1st solo lp is a great listen...saw Thunders live twice, just months before he died and the day after one of the gigs in L.A. saw him carrying his guitar case on Hollywood Blvd.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-20 01:34 by Rollin' Stoner.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-20 01:34 by Rollin' Stoner.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
blivet
()
Date: April 20, 2016 04:49
Quote
BluzDude
I did see the Dolls back in the 70's, (Santa Monica Civic)
I am so jealous.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
Cooltoplady
()
Date: April 20, 2016 05:34
Quote
His Majesty
Barf.
Thank you. I'd rather have labor pains then listen to this garbage. In fact, I'd rather eat garbage then listen to this garbage.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
haimbarr
()
Date: April 20, 2016 18:27
Wow did not think the Dolls would provoke such a visceral reaction. I got into them after Johansen solo #3 came out - Saw him at the Ritz with Blondie Chaplain on guitar. We definitely felt like the stones were in abstentia so the next best thing was Dolls expats...
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: April 20, 2016 18:52
Quote
BluzDude
I did see the Dolls back in the 70's, (Santa Monica Civic) but I was more impressed with the opening act - Silverhead (Michael Des Barres).
That would be this gig :
"16-Mar-74
US CA,Santa Monica,Civic Center
[with Silverhead]
Setlist: Courageous Cat/ Personality Crisis/ Bad Girl/ Looking For A Kiss/ Great Big Kiss/ Stranded In The Jungle/ Puss 'n' Boots/ Trash/ Milkman (a.k.a. Chatterbox)/ Who Are The Mystery Girls?/ Pills/ (There's Gonna Be A) Showdown(*)/ Hootchie Cootchie Man(*)/ Dizzy Miss Lizzy(*)/ Back In The U.S.A.(*)/ Bad Detective(*).
Note: Preceded by the screening of Bob Gruen's "Lipstick Killers" film. (*) Available on the "Hootchie Cootchie Dolls" CD (Solid records 1998) and (except "Bad Detective" ) also on the "Dizzy Dolls" bootleg LP (1985)"
[www.fromthearchives.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-21 12:23 by dcba.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
andrewm
()
Date: April 20, 2016 21:20
Yeah, I don't understand such a negative reaction to the Dolls. Garbage? What a crock. Barf? Your loss. Great rock 'n' roll and thumbs up for the plug for Remarquable Records! Obviously, they don't hold a candle to the Stones but they certainly captured that same spirit.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-20 22:08 by andrewm.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-20 22:08 by andrewm.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
BroomWagon
()
Date: April 21, 2016 00:09
Just listening to that first album and for the first time, excellent.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
teleblaster
()
Date: April 21, 2016 13:54
Quote
BroomWagon
Just listening to that first album and for the first time, excellent.
Yeah, it's a peach and has stood the test of time better than a lot of albums from that era.
Re: Stones versus New York Dolls.
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: April 21, 2016 18:55
Johnny Thunders and Chet Baker, the two musicians I admire most ... where did they get their energy from to continue playing their delicate and wonderful music despite their severe substance abuse problem ... I thank them with all my heart for their power to spread joy in the midst of all the crap they were embroiled in ...
2 1 2 0
2 1 2 0
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
AllAboutYours , artedm , britstones , ChrisL , crawdaddy , Dan , esqcjh , GJV , henrik87 , irishjohnnie , keefmick , letitloose6 , monkeymantoo , NoPanic , ohmercy61 , powerage78 , rockdriguez67 , sandandglue , superglen , TW2019 , UGK56 , z
Guests:
2203
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10