The Rolling Stones - Blue & Lonesome

This Slate piece has pretty much totally drained away my interest in a book I'd been looking forward to reading. (Also, I know his focus in this segment is on the late '60s and early '70s, but that's unfortunate, because it keeps him from mentioning that the Stones had both Prince and Living Colour open for them in the '80s and '90s.)

― Don Van Gorp, midwest regional VP, marketing (誤訳侮辱), Friday, 7 October 2016 01:45 (five days ago)

I keep meaning to read Hamilton's book; what I've taken a look at so far seems somewhat problematic to me, since he goes into the rockism vs. poptimism debate and declares that no one thinking about popular music seriously could be a rockist these days, which I think is wrong. Don't know if he does talk about the business, and that would certainly be appropriate to discuss the careers of Janis Joplin on the one hand and Howard Tate, say, on the other, since Joplin and Tate both hit with songs by the same white songwriter but Joplin is famous and Tate known only to soul fanatics. Seems obvious that rock fans in the '60s tended to valorize "blues" but had trouble with "soul" and maybe even "funk," and I wonder if he talks about James Brown anywhere. So I guess I'll have to read it.

I think curmudgeon posted something about it on another thread.

I read the Hamilton book and no, James Brown is virtually not talked about. The author tries to explain that omission up front in his introduction, saying that Brown's "been written about extensively elsewhere" and that "he never really inhabited the 'crossover' ethos that this book probes."

Among other subjects the book doesn't discuss are Curtis Mayfield, Stax Records, and Sly & the Family Stone (believe it or not) although Hamilton hints that he might write books about Curtis & Sly in the future.

I'm not totally slagging the book - there's a lot of good subtle analysis within it - but as you can guess it's a pretty selectively scattershot treatment of a large and complicated topic. Really it reads like a collection of six individual essays, one per chapter.

The lack of attention paid to the business side of the story was the biggest disappointment to me. It's just not the author's angle - as he warns in the introduction, he's mainly discussing recordings and what print media was saying at the time.

Honestly, dealing with what print media was saying at the time basically guarantees that all you're analyzing is rockcrit myopia. What might have been much more interesting (albeit a lot more challenging and labor-intensive) would have been contrasting contemporaneous press narratives with a) analysis of what was actually charting vs. what was canonical, and b) Studs Terkel-style interviews with people about what they were actually listening to at the time. I mean, I know my mom (who's 65) owned 45s by the Beatles and the Stones and Dylan, but also tons of Motown and other soul/R&B stuff, chintzy pop hits, etc., etc.

yes i'm p interested in this book but my topic currently is *literally* rockcrit myopia

Ah, well then, have at it.

Getting back to the Stones, I'm glad to see they're giving props to Little Johnny Taylor. For some reason I thought he was still alive, but he's been gone since 2002. Not a Chicago guy, either, from Arkansas and made his career in L.A. The song the Stones cover was done for Ronn in Shreveport and was a big hit in 1971.
Interested to find out just how much substantive reporting was being done in the '60s on black popular music--did Jet write about it at length? I think Jim Delehant at Hit Parader often covered black acts. But I suppose what rock crit there was at the time was focused on the San Francisco bands, the British Invasion groups and whatever white bands hit the top 40. Was anyone writing about soul in depth? (I guess blues was recognized as a sacrosanct topic, but again, how much substantive writing was being done on contemporary blues, apart from people like David Evans, who were writing about "country" blues?).

'Just Your Fool' most reminds me of their really straight but really effective cover of 'Stop Breaking Down'

Interesting, Edd. I only know Johnnie Taylor, don't think I've heard of Little Johnny Taylor before.

Little Johnny and Johnnie are often confused with one another. Little Johnny's claim to fame is his recording of "Part Time Love," from 1963. Howard Tate also did it. Fantasy has a one-disc comp, Greatest Hits, that's pretty much all you need, though I'm partial to his 1972 Ronn LP Everybody Knows About My Good Thing.

desert set:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2qTOh-Ok60

Don Was: "The record sounds very crude, very authentic," he said. "It captures the essence of what they are."
Ron Wood: "They are extremely great cover versions of Howlin' Wolf and Little Walter, among other blues people. But they really sound authentic. ... When we heard them back after not hearing them for a couple of months, we were, 'Who's that? It's you,' It sounded so authentic."

the rhythm section certainly sounds cruddy

Old blues not a very high sonic bar to hurdle

This is, I suppose, good, and Jagger's in good form as vocalist and harmonica player, but I don't care much for Chicago blues.

The Stones should have been making records raw again like this one instead of screwing around with loops and all sorts of other BS. The sound on these tracks is great.

I don't care much for Chicago blues.

There's some shit you just don't say in public.

"Old blues not a very high sonic bar to hurdle"

so not true if you're talking about the stuff they are covering on this album! the original stuff sounds awesome.

can't believe they didn't record this at jack white's house direct-to-shellac and then make a 4 hour making of the album documentary for netflix. seems like the 2016 way to go.

i'd like to see them go back to their 90's roots. they were masters of the authentic 10 minute remix.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAVK6d13RS0

Just wanted to point out how perverse the Stones=authenticity argument is. Jagger basically invented tongue-in-cheek pop.

Figured that goes without saying on ilm but I got triggered by some early posts itt.

this is actually your trigger warning: Οὖτις

What do you mean? Mick Jagger learned the harmonica from a blind drifter who did some work on his daddy's worm farm

http://www.zokka.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Rolling-Stones-fans-1978-air-guitar.jpg

keith's book was very straightforward about their origins. it was all right there. the snobby brit blues purists were definitely mentioned.

I'm with Alfred. My tolerance for Chicago Blues is very low. That Delta shit, though? I can listen to that forever.

he and Mick hated Brian Jones for being such a purist!

Mick is my favorite thing about this record. He revels in the material. The band & guests are solid but nothing remarkable.

they should have made this album with metallica. unplugged. at jack white's house.

drum sound on this is so wack:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGUhfg3PPb0

the muffled version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEU6_vgBp10

for awhile thought this might be mono but it's not, though it's mixed pretty down the middle

would be kind of full circle if this were their last album, all the way back to doing blues covers

I'm with Alfred. My tolerance for Chicago Blues is very low. That Delta shit, though? I can listen to that forever.

me too. I love the Muddy/Howlin Wolf/Bo Diddley's Chess stuff (ok and the Staples too, but they're kinda different/gospel) but that's about it.

they would never do it in a million years but i think it would be cool if they got good current songwriters to write the best "stones" songs that they could and have them record those. not jack white though.

alejandro escovido could do a good job he could prolly use the dough

seems like something Andy Partridge would be up for (although not ideally suited for either)

challenge people to write hit stones songs. but no guest appearances. and that goes double for jack white.

for a sec I thought you were suggesting Andy Partridge produce the Stones.

her satanic majesty's request II!

would love to hear a courtney barnett song for keith to sing. it would have to be less wordy than her own songs though...he might get confused.

Spoon has written a few.

yeah Partridge could obviously nail the psych-period stuff (something I'm sure Keith and Mick are super-eager to revisit lol)

xp

this should be the title track of their next album
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSdkrzqI8m0

alejandro escovido could do a good job he could prolly use the dough

Always wanted to hear Jagger sing "Castanets".

escovedo has a decent cover of 'evening gown' from jagger's 'wandering spirit' album on a bloodshot record comp:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVZjtQF7OIg

that 'fancy man blues' has the sound of an early '90s alligator/telarc blues album.

I love the Muddy/Howlin Wolf/Bo Diddley's Chess stuff (ok and the Staples too, but they're kinda different/gospel) but that's about it.

― Οὖτις, Monday, December 5, 2016 10:39 AM (two hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Have you tried the Otis Rush Cobra label stuff? Dude was a beast on the guitar. Also, have you checked out the Junior Wells/Buddy Guy records (Hoodoo Man Blues etc.)? Much to dig there as well.

JB Hutto & the Hawks are dope

Slim Harpo isn't really from Chicago (iirc) but feels like it

magic sam
little walter
jimmy dawkins