Rolling Stones Retiring.

[MissouriPicker]

As far as I'm concerned they should have called it a day when Brian died.I am currently reading Keith's autobiography-Life and a biography by Laura Jackson of Brian's life. In Keith's biography he makes it seem like he and Mick formed the Stones when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.In their very earliest days they were always billed as Brian Jones and His Rolling Stones.Brian is the one who scrimped and saved and begged borrowed and even stole to get the money to rent venues for auditions.He was the driving force of their formation and it was him that taught Richards most of playing the blues and also taught Jagger how to play the harp.He played a good deal of the lead and all the slide and harp on their early albums.

 

I have known this for years from listening to candid interviews with their producer Andrew Loog Oldham,who has been setting the record straight for years,and as well Brian's story has been told by many who were close to him and wanted the world to know the truth of it all.It truly sickens me to see Richards and Jagger take all the glory and credit for forming the Stones when in fact they wrenched control from Brian which caused him incredible heartbreak to see something that was his brainchild and his making whipped out from under his feet.This caused his downward spiral into depression that drove him to abusing alcohol and drugs to kill the pain of loosing what was so precious to him and was his life's work.It would behoove anyone who reads Richard's book to pick up a copy of "Brian Jones...the untold life and mysterious death of a rock legend" by Laura Jackson and get the real story.So The Stones are retiring......good riddance.

 

I've read both books. Both are very interesting, but are you suggesting that Jagger and Richards are tied to the "mysterious death" of Jones? If Jagger and Richards did take-over the band from Jones, it's likely because they had stronger and more aggressive personalities than Jones. We're all different, If Jones isn't remembered, that's not their faults. It's the way life goes. Bands get taken-over and become incredibly successful, while other bands get taken-over and disappear. People are here, they live their lives, they make mistakes, they die. Good things happen and unfortunate things happen. Who aside from those of us who lived with and through the music recalls who Dennis Wilson was? He drowned, but those who knew him well stated he was a strong swimmer. Did Mike Love undermine Brian Wilson and take control of The Beach Boys from him, thus making Wilson's drug abuse even worse? That's how authors and fans get way out-of-sync with reality. Why was The Beatles first drummer dropped from the band? Did Robert Wagner push Natalie Wood overboard? Who really killed Jimi Hendrix? Who killed Jim Morrison? Did someone actually hold Whitney Houston under the water? Why did Waylon Jennings give-up his seat to Buddy Holly on the ill-fated plane? Remember the stories of how Mama Cass choaked to death on a ham sandwich? Some folks still believe that's how she died....And many of the theories on why someone died come from supposed longtime friends of the deceased, and many come decades after the incident. You know, life isn't easy. We do the best we can. Sometimes people like me, some think I'm a prick. If they want to say my comments on something on an action of mine made someone else do something, then I can't really control that. I'm sorry if things I've done have caused someone else heartache or misfortune, but again, that's just life. I could go around blaming all my misfortune on others, but that wouldn't solve any of my problems. I really don't care who likes The Stones or The Beatles or Cash or Neil Diamond, or Gillian Welch, or Rush or Aerosmith, and so on. I figure that they're all human beings and in many ways face the same issues in life that I face.........Brian Jones had a tragic life, but that's life. Sadly, it happens like that for some folks. What if he hadn't met Jagger and Richards? Would the magic have worked with others? Who knows? All we know is that The Stones have been around for decades and that Jones was a major force in the early years and his influence no doubt carried-on. I totally understand the interest in these stars who meet sad and tragic ends. It's very interesting and very human to ask "What if?" and wonder about different scenarios. Jones had a huge amount of talent and he died at a young age...Good discussion.

[bonzoboy]

Hi Missouri Picker,I in no way meant to infer that Jagger and Richards were in any way tied to his sudden and unexplained death but they were responsible for cutting him adrift when he was at his lowest and most vulernable state and that contributed to his demise in a huge way and apparently they in no way reached out to help him when he needed help most.As were many others I was disgusted at the so-called tribute concert at Hyde Park they held days after his death where they released thousands of butterflies as Jagger read from Longfellow or some other poet-give me a break-that was such a shallow attempt at drama.If they had cared as deeply for him as they lead us to believe he maybe could have been saved from his penchant for self destruction and who knows how life for him and the Stones would have progressed?

 

BTW I haven't finished either of the books yet and I'm only about 100 pages into each one so I don't know what either of them says beyond that.It's too bad that Jimi died when he did because he was one of the few people who Brian was really close to and confided in,as a matter of fact-when Jimi had his landmark return to the US when he played The Monterey Pop Festival,he insisted that Brian be the one who introduced him.There are so many what-ifs in Brian's tragic life that if one were to dwell on it it would probably drive them mad.

[FirstMeasure]

I completely disagree with you. I think people get sucked into big names. If Aerosmith had just started in 1989 and made Pump, and tried to push Janies Got A Gun as a single, I think they would have been unsuccesful. But the fact that they were Aerosmith, and had a reputation, and had been around doing great music for years, the single got airplay. Same with Tom Pettys Into The Great Wide Open. It's a terrible song, but the fact that Tom Petty did it, it became a hit. There are exceptions. Radiohead is as good today or even better than they were 20 years ago. The Chili Peppers are also in that category.

So, you have to like it before it's legit? That's just too simple for me. Personally, I think the RHCP and Radiohead were better off in the garage, but my opinion means spit in the face of their rabid fans and record sales.

 

Tom Petty's written a number of singles that didn't take off, in fact a few albums that didn't take off. That tells me "Into the Great Wide Open" was a great song if petty fans liked it enough to turn it into a classic rock staple. Aerosmith, too. "Done With Mirrors" was not exactly well received.

 

I have to say your logic is simply flawed. What are you suggesting all the people who bought Stones tickets do for entertainment? Watch a Radiohead concert even though they play music that puts baby's to sleep. I'd rather listen to a seasoned pro play some Rock and Roll History than a Johnny Come Lately entertain the kids. I'm pretty sure The Stones want to entertain Stones Fans, not placate Radiohead fans.

[stein]

The Stones made a VERY generous offer to Jones when they split: he would get a cut from every Stones record ever made from then on forward. So while on the one hand he was "out", on the other hand he was forever "in".

 

The split didn't happen all at once and suddenly. And while there are many different versions and twist, I don't believe there was an effort on the part of the Stones to push him out. I think the versions of the story that tell of Jones contributing less and less and being difficult are the accurate ones. He would show up late to recording sessions, or not at all, and what he would play would be unusable or he would play nothing at all. For the MOST part, they made efforts to get him into the process of making the recordings. Recording without him was a matter of nessesity, his absense being his own doing.

 

By the time LET IT BLEED was finished and time to tour, the Stones could not tour the US because Jones did not have a visa and could not get one, and the record didn't have him on it hardly anyway. But even more than that, the decision to wait for him or not was also based on if they thought he would even come around if they did choose to wait.

 

What might have happened if Jones had not died?

[stein]

Have you been able to compare the Stones of '72 to the Stones of today? What about other times? How would you rate the live shows you have attended, or seen?

 

How might you compare the music you were listening to in '72 compared to what the Stones were putting out at THAT time? And then how would you rate BIGGER BANG and BRIDGES in the context of the music of THAT time? What songs do you think depart or out-do current music on these two records?

Yo Rocky! Did you miss this one?

[jdgm]

The Bill Wyman book 'Stone Alone' is really worth reading for what he writes about Brian Jones.

And Wyman and Taylor's names have both been mentioned as possible guests, so let's hope they can all get together and make it work. At the heart of the Stones are Watts and Richards - that's where the pulse is - and Watts is 71 now, with Keef not far behind (68).

[clayville]

What might have happened if Jones had not died?

 

My view (not that i *know* anything) is that Brian was most happy being in a London bar band playing the blues. He did a tremendous job educating the others, tapping into the blues they were discovering themselves, and suggesting songs to cover. He and many Brits of his generation were responsible for preserving The Blues, introducing it to a new generation, keeping it alive until larger audiences came to their senses. He made wonderful multi-instrumental contributions to many of the earliest records... but for whatever reason he simply couldn't handle the vast chemical cocktails he ingested over the years, and didn't have the discipline, stamina or constitution to write much. Keith was no wiz at a lot of this either - and neither was Hendrix or any number of blues/rock/jazz casualties - but Keith survived, and his ability to hold it together enough to write songs and record them (even while nodding off at Nellcote or getting his blood transfused in Switzerland) created the band's future and it's legacy. 'Course... he stole Brian's girlfriend too, the bastid! That may sound like a Keef-centric view, but last I checked history is written by the survivors.

 

I've always assumed that even if Brian had lived, the band would have grown beyond him - already they could barely function with him around, were chasing (under extreme pressure that Brian was escaping) larger ambitions. Eventually, he may have sobered and become a sort of John Mayall-style champion of his true love: The Blues.

[FirstMeasure]

If he hadn't killed himself then he would have killed himself later. Destructive personalities like Jones and Syd Barret aren't just addicted to a chemical and need to break the habit, like Keef. They are searching for oblivion in an attempt to leave life behind, they ignore red flags and near death experiences that prompt normal addicts to clean up until they finally leave life behind in the literal sense. They needed help before they were addicted to drugs.

 

In fact, I'd say their desire to abandon success is all part of the self destruction that type of personality engages in.

[Rocky4]

So, you have to like it before it's legit? That's just too simple for me. Personally, I think the RHCP and Radiohead were better off in the garage, but my opinion means spit in the face of their rabid fans and record sales.

 

Tom Petty's written a number of singles that didn't take off, in fact a few albums that didn't take off. That tells me "Into the Great Wide Open" was a great song if petty fans liked it enough to turn it into a classic rock staple. Aerosmith, too. "Done With Mirrors" was not exactly well received.

 

I have to say your logic is simply flawed. What are you suggesting all the people who bought Stones tickets do for entertainment? Watch a Radiohead concert even though they play music that puts baby's to sleep. I'd rather listen to a seasoned pro play some Rock and Roll History than a Johnny Come Lately entertain the kids. I'm pretty sure The Stones want to entertain Stones Fans, not placate Radiohead fans.

 

Please don't tell me I'm arguing with a Kid Rock fan......

[EVOL!]

The Bill Wyman book 'Stone Alone' is really worth reading for what he writes about Brian Jones.

 

Can you give us the CliffsNotes version, brother? I know Wyman *hated* Their Satanic Majesties Request even though it's my favorite Stones album. We argue about it all the time ;)

[slavestate]

Next to Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones were one of the best cover bands of all time!

 

The first 7 full length LP's by the Rolling Stones have 80 songs, 54 of which are covers, the rest are potential re-writes and/or blatant rip offs of already recorded and pressed classics.

 

Here you go…

 

The Rolling Stones - No. 2

----------------------

Everybody Needs Somebody to Love - Solomon Burke - 1964

Down Home Girl - Alvin Robinson - 1962

You Can't Catch Me - Chuck Berry

Time Is on My Side - First recorded by jazz trombonist Kai Winding in 1963, it was covered by both soul singer Irma Thomas and The Rolling Stones in 1964.

What A Shame - Stones ?

Grown Up Wrong - Stones ?

Down the Road a Piece - Don Raye - 1940

Under the Boardwalk - The Drifters - 1964

I Can't Be Satisfied - Muddy Watters - 1947

Pain In My Heart - Ottis Redding - 1962

Off the Hook - Stones ?

Susie Q - Dale Hawkins - 1957

 

The Rolling Stones - S/T

--------------------

Route 66 - Bobby Troup - 1946

I Just Want to Make Love to You - Willie Dixon - 1954

Honest I Do - Jimmy Reed - 1957

Mona - Bo Diddley - Year ?

Now I've Got A Witness - Stones ?

Little By Little - Stones ?

I'm a King Bee - Slim Harpo - 1957

Carol - Chuck Berry - 1958

Tell Me (Your'e Coming Back) - Stones?

Can I Get a Witness - Marvin Gaye - 1963

You Can Make It If You Try - Ted Jarett / Gene Allison - 1958

Walking the Dog - Rufus Thomas - 1963

 

The Rolling Stones - 12x5

----------------------

Around And Around - Chuck Berry - 1958

Confessin' The Blues - Jay McShann - 1940's

Empty Hearts - Stones ?

Time Is on My Side - First recorded by jazz trombonist Kai Winding in 1963, it was covered by both soul singer Irma Thomas and The Rolling Stones in 1964.

Good Times, Bad Times - Stones?

It's All Over Now - Bobby Womack / The Valentinos - 1964. The Rolling Stones had their FIRST NUMBER ONE HIT with this COVER song in JULY of 1964.

2120 South Michigan Avenue - Stones?

Under the Boardwalk - The Drifters - 1964

Congratulations - Stones?

Grown Up Wrong - Stones?

If You Need Me - Solomon Burke - 1963

Susie Q - Dale Hawkins - 1957

 

The Rolling Stones - Around And Around

----------------------------------

Around And Around - Chuck Berry - 1958

Good Times, Bad Times - Stones?

It's All Over Now - Bobby Womack / The Valentinos - 1964. The Rolling Stones had their FIRST NUMBER ONE HIT with this COVER song in JULY of 1964.

Empty Heart - Stones ?

Confessin' The Blues - Jay McShann - 1940's

Not Fade Away - Buddy Holly - 1957

Bye Bye Johnny - Stones?

You Better Move On - Arthur Alexander - 1961

I Wanna Be Your Man - Lennon-McCartney

2120 South Michigan Avenue - Stones?

If You Need Me - Solomon Burke - 1963

Poison Ivy - The Coasters - 1959

 

The Rolling Stones - Out Of Our Hands

---------------------------------

She Said Yeah - Sonny Christy & Roddy Jackson / Larry Williams - 1959

Mercy Mercy - Don Covay - 1964

Hitch Hike - Marvin Gaye - 1962

That's How Strong My Love Is - O. V. Wright - 1964

Good Times - Stones?

Gotta Get Away - Stones?

Talking 'Bout You - Chuck Berry - 1961

Cry To Me - Solomon Burke - 1962

Oh, Baby (We Got A Good Thing Going On) - Barbara Lynn Ozen - 1964

Heart of Stone - Stones?

The Under Assistant West Coast Promotion Man - Stones?

I'm Free - Stones?

 

The Rolling Stones - The Rolling Stones, Now!

--------------------------------------

Everybody Needs Somebody to Love - Solomon Burke - 1964

Down Home Girl - Jerry Leiber / Jerry Butler / Alvin Robinson - 1962

You Can't Catch Me - Chuck Berry - 1956

Heart of Stone - Stones?

What A Shame - Stones ?

Mona - Bo Diddley - Year ?

Down the Road a Piece - Don Raye - 1940

Off the Hook - Stones ?

Pain In My Heart - Ottis Redding - 1962

Oh, Baby (We Got A Good Thing Going On) - Barbara Lynn Ozen - 1964

Little Red Rooster - Howlin' Wolf - 1961

Surprise, Surprise - Stones?

 

The Rolling Stones - December's Children (And Everybody's)

--------------------------------------------------

She Said Yeah - Sonny Christy & Roddy Jackson / Larry Williams - 1959

Talking 'Bout You - Chuck Berry - 1961

You Better Move On - Arthur Alexander - 1961

Look What You've Done - McKinely Morganfield - year?

The Singer, Not the Song - Stones?

Route 66 - Bobby Troup - 1946

Get Off of My Cloud - Stones.

I'm Free - Stones?

As Tears Go By - Stones.

Gotta Get Away - Stones?

Blue Turns To Grey - Stones.

I'm Moving On - Hank Snow - 1950

[FirstMeasure]

Please don't tell me I'm arguing with a Kid Rock fan......

What's the price of tea in China?

[Versatile]

An organic thread...and rightly so...

 

It is interesting to compare the talent, intelligence and creativity of the Stones with the Beatles...

 

The Beatles went stellar when they spent most of their time in the studio doing the genius thing...

 

The Stones performed to larger and larger audiences and probably initiated mega-stadium rock...

 

More smiles put on faces by the Stones than any other act in history...

 

V

 

[jdgm]

Can you give us the CliffsNotes version, brother? I know Wyman *hated* Their Satanic Majesties Request even though it's my favorite Stones album. We argue about it all the time ;)

Can't remember the exact chapter and verse etc, but Wyman presents a logical and persuasive argument: Jones wasn't only heavily asthmatic but suffered mild fits ('petit mal') which knocked him out, and it was probably a combination of these 2 things happening at once that most likely did for him.

If you read the Keef book 'Life', it is really worth also reading Bill's account as he is such a contrast to Keef, who can be very damning and dismissive. Wyman's book is a bit pedantic in places, but much more sympathetic to Brian Jones and he seems more aware of real life outside the rock star bubble.

 

One persistent legend about 'Satanic Majesties' that I've never been able to resolve is that it is not the Stones but members of the Small Faces playing on Bill Wyman's track. The drumming certainly sounds very like Kenney Jones.

[Rocky4]

What's the price of tea in China?

 

so the answer is yes?

[FirstMeasure]

so the answer is yes?

No, it's not. It's simply irrelevant. I would go to his concert for free, but I'd never pay for a ticket nor cover one of his songs. However, I hope he's still being exactly what he wants to be until he has to be wheeled out on the stage and is called Dinosaur Rap by "Kids Today" (which would make a great name for an entertainment rag).

 

So, you think The Stones were better in 1968. Do you suggest I buy a ticket to see them in 1968?

[Rocky4]

 

 

So, you think The Stones were better in 1968. Do you suggest I buy a ticket to see them in 1968?

 

No. but why pay to see them now if they can't do what they used to do?

 

If the only Eric Clapton I ever heard was from the Beano album and I paid through the nose to see him now, wouldn't I be very disappointed?

If the only Rush album I ever heard was Caress of Steel and I paid to see them now, wouldn't I be disappointed?

If the only Sammy Hagar I ever heard was from the Montrose album, and I saw him now wouldn't I be disappointed?

 

I don't know about you, but I would be......big time......

 

Musicians and bands change. I'm a Jimmy Page fanatic, but I wouldn't pay to see him now. He's not the same guitarist he was in 1970.

[FirstMeasure]

No. but why pay to see them now if they can't do what they used to do?

 

If the only Eric Clapton I ever heard was from the Beano album and I paid through the nose to see him now, wouldn't I be very disappointed?

If the only Rush album I ever heard was Caress of Steel and I paid to see them now, wouldn't I be disappointed?

If the only Sammy Hagar I ever heard was from the Montrose album, and I saw him now wouldn't I be disappointed?

 

I don't know about you, but I would be......big time......

 

Musicians and bands change. I'm a Jimmy Page fanatic, but I wouldn't pay to see him now. He's not the same guitarist he was in 1970.

So, because Rocky 4 would be disappointing they should all just retire? Even though there are legions of fans that actually do enjoy their concerts and albums. I have to completely reject the premise of your argument. I don't believe for a minute that the stones were at their Peak when you seen them. I think you want to believe they were at their peak when you seen them.

 

Besides, isn't it possible your memories are clouded by nostalgia. Personally I prefer Cream's 2005 reunion to Cream's Farewell Concert. It's obvious that all three of them were much better musicians than they were back when they played their egos.

 

Caress of Steal is a pretty weak Rush Album, even Rush thinks so.

 

Eric Clapton's lineup for his 2007 tour was absolutely the best band he'd ever had backing them up. And, IMO, Clapton's best work was on 461 Ocean Blvd, and Journeyman. Both post Beano and about 25 years apart from one another.

 

I wouldn't go see Jimmy Page because he's pretty much rested on his laurels since Zep broke up, that's exactly what you want him to do, so what's the issue there?

 

I listen to music for what it is, not what it was. You should try that sometime.

 

BTW, I'm still waiting to hear what Kid Rock has to do with the price of Tea in China?

[Rocky4]

So, because Rocky 4 would be disappointing they should all just retire? Even though there are legions of fans that actually do enjoy their concerts and albums. I have to completely reject the premise of your argument. I don't believe for a minute that the stones were at their Peak when you seen them. I think you want to believe they were at their peak when you seen them.

 

Besides, isn't it possible your memories are clouded by nostalgia. Personally I prefer Cream's 2005 reunion to Cream's Farewell Concert. It's obvious that all three of them were much better musicians than they were back when they played their egos.

 

Caress of Steal is a pretty weak Rush Album, even Rush thinks so.

 

Eric Clapton's lineup for his 2007 tour was absolutely the best band he'd ever had backing them up. And, IMO, Clapton's best work was on 461 Ocean Blvd, and Journeyman. Both post Beano and about 25 years apart from one another.

 

I wouldn't go see Jimmy Page because he's pretty much rested on his laurels since Zep broke up, that's exactly what you want him to do, so what's the issue there?

 

I listen to music for what it is, not what it was. You should try that sometime.

 

BTW, I'm still waiting to hear what Kid Rock has to do with the price of Tea in China?

 

No they shouldn't retire, but (for the umpteenth time) don't expect me to pay to see them

 

Caress Of Steel rocks

 

I listen to music that I like, not what people tell me I should like. Recently becoming an Umphrey's McGee fanatic.

 

If you liked Kid Rock, your taste for music would be so far away from mine that this debate with you would be pointless, but considering you think Radiohead is boring, it already is pointless.

 

 

....that is all.....

[FirstMeasure]

No they shouldn't retire, but (for the umpteenth time) don't expect me to pay to see them

 

Caress Of Steel rocks

 

I listen to music that I like, not what people tell me I should like. Recently becoming an Umphrey's McGee fanatic.

 

If you liked Kid Rock, your taste for music would be so far away from mine that this debate with you would be pointless, but considering you think Radiohead is boring, it already is pointless.

 

 

....that is all.....

Well, the tread is about the Stones retiring and you said they should have done that some time ago. Then you said a Band should only have a shelf life of 5 years. I assumed you meant they should hang it up after 5 years. That's know as retiring in the music business, unless you think a musician should start over every time he finds success. Which is financial suicide and bad business (in a capitalist economy Art is either Business or Hobby).

 

But go ahead and dismiss me as "less than you" because our tastes differ, it's a reflection of your character, not mine.

[Rocky4]

Then you said a Band should only have a shelf life of 5 years. I assumed you meant they should hang it up after 5 years.

 

I was making a generalization. Few bands do better than their first two or three albums.

[FirstMeasure]

I was making a generalization. Few bands do better than their first two or three albums.

 

I'd say there's at least as many bands that took more than three albums to finally hit their stride, or that have many great albums spread out along a period of decades, interspersed with questionable material.

[stein]

No. but why pay to see them now if they can't do what they used to do?

 

If the only Eric Clapton I ever heard was from the Beano album and I paid through the nose to see him now, wouldn't I be very disappointed?

If the only Rush album I ever heard was Caress of Steel and I paid to see them now, wouldn't I be disappointed?

If the only Sammy Hagar I ever heard was from the Montrose album, and I saw him now wouldn't I be disappointed?

 

I don't know about you, but I would be......big time......

 

Musicians and bands change. I'm a Jimmy Page fanatic, but I wouldn't pay to see him now. He's not the same guitarist he was in 1970.

If you saw Clapton now, chances are very good you might get moments of what you heard on the Beano album. Not to mention Steve Gadd on drums. REALLY good band.

Seen him twice in a row in 3 years. One show was VERY good, and the other blew my mind, reminding me of why he is who he is.

 

If you saw Hagar with Chickenfoot? you kidding?

 

In my humble experience, what I have seen of 'old guys' playing live where the MUSIC is the main component of the live show, is that all these yaers of playing and experience make them better players. Rocking ans kicking *** is a LEARNED art, more so than youth can provide. Playing and instrument certainly is.

 

It's kinda wierd that you would only prefer to see "young" bands and write off old guys. I don't see what you are using for a measuring stick.

 

I see your point about bands with certain magical records that are so great it is hard to top, but if this is the rule, it has been broken more than a few times. FROM THE CRADLE is every bit of the Bluesbreakers album and then some to me. But, this is DIFFERENT than the art of the "live" performance, and the ability to play, whatever type of music it is. I find it hard to believe that certain bands can't reproduce the songs they came up with years before, and not play them better if they have been doing it for so long. And that intangable thing that's like magic that happens live? Well, from what I have seen, MOST bands I have seen LEARN how to do that on a more regular basis when they are older as opposed to younger.

 

Respect your elders, son.

[stein]

Next to Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones were one of the best cover bands of all time!

 

The first 7 full length LP's by the Rolling Stones have 80 songs, 54 of which are covers, the rest are potential re-writes and/or blatant rip offs of already recorded and pressed classics.

 

I feel you.

 

I think the template for the Stones was the Blues, and in Blues, covers are the norm in a different way than they seem to be in Rock and other forms of music. In Blues, doing covers isn't "stealing" or being a copy-cat the way it is viewed in Rock.

 

But what is kinda cool, is that not all the covers they do are really purely Blues, but more early rock music. So what we get, is to me a form of Rock and Roll done in the Blues tradition. Many of these songs they cover Go further in a sense than the origonals, as opposed to being watered down versions (*cough* Beatles).

[EVOL!]

 

Besides, isn't it possible your memories are clouded by nostalgia. Personally I prefer Cream's 2005 reunion to Cream's Farewell Concert. It's obvious that all three of them were much better musicians than they were back when they played their egos.

 

 

But what the farewell concert had that the reunion didn't was sense of urgency and attitude. Sure, they have finesse now and Clapton is very polite, but that was not what Cream is about. It's amps turned up all the way and playing with fierce abandonment. A Strat through some Fender amps just don't cut it.