Golden Stones

[blindboygrunt]

She did..she still remembers the record with "to kekie" as she says in Greek.

The song she actually sang some to was "Let it be" which she got for me and I played over & over..

 

let it be?

 

let it bleed , perhaps ?

 

did you know delia smith made the cake ?

[flatbaroque]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/rolling-stones-turn-50,28782/

 

guys don't take offence, it's a satirical online comedy newspaper..

[bobouz]

Remember......... Nanker Phelge ?

Oh yes. To my junior high school brain, Little By Little was the real deal, whereas Tell Me just bored me.

[fretplay]

I saw Stones many times at The Marquee but certainly in 1963. They were not headlining then, it was either Cyril Davies or Manfred Mann. Keith was always the cool one he could quiet happily carry on a conversation whilst playing the guitar with a cigarette stuck in the strings of his headstock.

[j45nick]

Keith was always the cool one he could quiet happily carry on a conversation whilst playing the guitar with a cigarette stuck in the strings of his headstock.

 

That was a trick a lot of us copied: coil the strings rather than cutting them, and leave an inch or so of the end sticking out of the coil so you could skewer yer ciggie on it. How cool were we?

[fretplay]

That was a trick a lot of us copied: coil the strings rather than cutting them, and leave an inch or so of the end sticking out of the coil so you could skewer yer ciggie on it. How cool were we?

 

 

Yes that's it Nick, as I never smoked I didn't do that but I can't talk and play either. Keith would often be carrying on a conversation with someone just off the stage. The Marquee was a small venue 450 people max so you could touch the band. There was no stage as such only a small raised platform say about six inches.

[MissouriPicker]

This isn't my favorite Stone's song, but I imagine there were at least a few groupies beating on their hotel room doors after the show. One of the remarkable things about The Stones is that their incredible success did not really change who they were. They remained moody, bored, disengaged,"the bad boys," The Stones. That persona has persisted for over fifty years. They've always done their own rough-cut interpretation of the blues/folk/R&R. They also have an ummatched staying power. Their music is almost always relevant to sex, fighting, drinking, and the seedy side of love. Some groups might sound better. Almost all groups are prettier. Some might have better muscians (although, it's tough to improve on a Keith Richards and Ronnie Wood). Most groups would/have broken-up long before fifty years..........Love'em or hate'em, they are who they are. As all the other groups fade and wane, dissolve, The Stones remain. I don't like every song they've done, but I don't believe any other band can really compete with them. Are they as good as they once were? Probably not, but they still perform at a very high level.

[E-minor7]

This isn't my favorite Stone's song, but I imagine there were at least a few groupies beating on their hotel room doors after the show. One of the remarkable things about The Stones is that their incredible success did not really change who they were. They remained moody, bored, disengaged,"the bad boys," The Stones. That persona has persisted for over fifty years. They've always done their own rough-cut interpretation of the blues/folk/R&R. They also have an ummatched staying power. Their music is almost always relevant to sex, fighting, drinking, and the seedy side of love. Some groups might sound better. Almost all groups are prettier. Some might have better muscians (although, it's tough to improve on a Keith Richards and Ronnie Wood). Most groups would/have broken-up long before fifty years..........Love'em or hate'em, they are who they are. As all the other groups fade and wane, dissolve, The Stones remain. I don't like every song they've done, but I don't believe any other band can really compete with them. Are they as good as they once were? Probably not, but they still perform at a very high level.

 

Well spoken - (though I'm pretty sure they changed quite a bit on the inner shelvers over the years).

Btw. a friend bought the Bigger Bang album. Absolutely worthy. . . .

[j45nick]

This isn't my favorite Stone's song, but I imagine there were at least a few groupies beating on their hotel room doors after the show. One of the remarkable things about The Stones is that their incredible success did not really change who they were. They remained moody, bored, disengaged,"the bad boys," The Stones. That persona has persisted for over fifty years. They've always done their own rough-cut interpretation of the blues/folk/R&R. They also have an ummatched staying power. Their music is almost always relevant to sex, fighting, drinking, and the seedy side of love. Some groups might sound better. Almost all groups are prettier. Some might have better muscians (although, it's tough to improve on a Keith Richards and Ronnie Wood). Most groups would/have broken-up long before fifty years..........Love'em or hate'em, they are who they are. As all the other groups fade and wane, dissolve, The Stones remain. I don't like every song they've done, but I don't believe any other band can really compete with them. Are they as good as they once were? Probably not, but they still perform at a very high level.

 

 

You pretty much said it all........

 

There are a lot of Stones songs I love, and an equal number that I don't care for at all. When they stick to being a hard-driving rock 'n roll band, or to their British interpretations of American-style blues or R&B, they are as good as it gets.

[merseybeat1963]

let it be?

 

let it bleed , perhaps ?

 

did you know delia smith made the cake ?

Both records out around the same time.

Delia Smith..never heard of her.

[blindboygrunt]

Both records out around the same time.

Delia Smith..never heard of her.

 

britains most famous tv chef

[MiloMinderbinder]

This isn't my favorite Stone's song, but I imagine there were at least a few groupies beating on their hotel room doors after the show. One of the remarkable things about The Stones is that their incredible success did not really change who they were. They remained moody, bored, disengaged,"the bad boys," The Stones. That persona has persisted for over fifty years. They've always done their own rough-cut interpretation of the blues/folk/R&R. They also have an ummatched staying power. Their music is almost always relevant to sex, fighting, drinking, and the seedy side of love. Some groups might sound better. Almost all groups are prettier. Some might have better muscians (although, it's tough to improve on a Keith Richards and Ronnie Wood). Most groups would/have broken-up long before fifty years..........Love'em or hate'em, they are who they are. As all the other groups fade and wane, dissolve, The Stones remain. I don't like every song they've done, but I don't believe any other band can really compete with them. Are they as good as they once were? Probably not, but they still perform at a very high level.

Good stuff here. I always liked the edginess of their music and its content. Not too crazy, almost never political, and usually relevant to stuff I could appreciate when growing up. Other bands were crazier and darker and that just never appealed to me for whatever reason. Like being attracted to someone, you just can't explain it beyond something superficial.

[ol fred]

"And so the story ends were told" or "The song remains the same"