Rolling Stones warm up gig

[godofthunder]

 Can't help it big Beatle fan here. I saw them on the Ed Sullivan show when I was 5. When I was about 9 or  10 I heard Rain and I knew the bass was for me! Paul is the reason I picked up bass. Listening/watching to The Beatles Live At Washington Coliseum 1964 right now, fantastic! I like some of the Stones songs but I never was a huge fan but to each there own. My Love of Slade is greeted with quizzical looks, who am I to judge?

[westen44]

[Big_Stu]

.......... and just to show even my childhood heroes own tastes didn't spread to me............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1ApYUxlw6I&feature=related

[westen44]

I seriously doubt if very many bands ever covered that song. 

[Dave W]

Not enough bands have covered I'm Down.



Although there is this:

[uwe]

Wot, Dave develops soft spots for a proggie muso with a King Crimsonite pedigree?

[Dave W]

Wot, Dave develops soft spots for a proggie muso with a King Crimsonite pedigree?

Nope. But it does show that he can rock and roll.

[OldManC]

I'd have thought Paul would've gotten that tooth fixed before filming. Badass bass line here.

[westen44]

Paul's bass line which convinced me at age 16 that, except for girls, there was nothing more interesting than bass. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1S-Lhu4gFQ&feature=related

[Aussie Mark]

Still the best Beatles cover ever .....

[uwe]

I just listened to the Rolling Stones' Shine a Light - the older the bands gets the more space the key members leave and the more ornamentation is allowed from the tour players. And the overall sound has become looser - not in the sense of sloppy but in the sense of airy. The Rolling Stones today sound sonically more akin to Little Feat in their heyday than to how they sounded on Get your Ya-Yas Out! or on their seventies tours. That's not a criticism, it's just the way their sound has matured.

Jagger's rhythmic precision as a vocalist is still spot-on, it sets him apart from most white singers.

[Pilgrim]

I just listened to the Rolling Stones' Shine a Light - the older the bands gets the more space the key members leave and the more ornamentation is allowed from the tour players. And the overall sound has become looser - not in the sense of sloppy but in the sense of airy. The Rolling Stones today sound sonically more akin to Little Feat in their heyday then to how they sounded on Get your Ya-Yas Out! or on their seventies tours. That's not a criticism, it's just the way their sound has matured.

Jagger's rhythmic precision as a vocalist is still spot-on, it sets him apart from most white singers.

Although i really haven't followed the Stones I've always enjoyed them, but they have traditionally been so loose-sounding that I thought of them as one step past a jug band.

OTOH, my all-time faves Sympathy for the Devil and Gimme Shelter are pretty tight.

[patman]

I actually like the bass and drums on the recent Stones albums.  I think they are really solid and swing.  That live album from Holland sounds really good.  it's the older, classic albums that IMHO aren't as good.  With the exception of Sticky Fingers, of course.  Some of the older albums sound to me like they were created in a drug induced fog, or like they thought people would buy anything because it was the "Stones".

[dadagoboi]

Got tight if you want it...1965

[Dave W]

Got tight if you want it...1965

...

Now that's what I like!

IMHO the post-Wyman Stones can't even come close.