A treasury and a place to meet people of all ages with various interests from all over the World
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

PLEASE READ OUR FORUM RULES HERE

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6

Author Topic: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish  (Read 8937 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Moogmodule

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1630
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #20 on: August 08, 2015, 08:08:19 AM »

I never thought Satanic was total rubbish. It had She's a Rainbow, Citadel,  2000 light years. All pretty good tunes. She's a Rainbow was pretty close to a Beatles song. Maybe the closest the Stones got. But that said it's nowhere near Pepper in my book. While Pepper isn't my favourite Beatles album there's a lot good going on there to me. Nothing on Satanic came anywhere near the best Pepper songs.
Logged

nimrod

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2459
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #21 on: August 08, 2015, 08:17:05 AM »

I never thought Satanic was total rubbish. It had She's a Rainbow, Citadel,  2000 light years. All pretty good tunes. She's a Rainbow was pretty close to a Beatles song. Maybe the closest the Stones got. But that said it's nowhere near Pepper in my book. While Pepper isn't my favourite Beatles album there's a lot good going on there to me. Nothing on Satanic came anywhere near the best Pepper songs.

LOL

I was just jokingly using his own elucidation (hence the smiley)
Logged

Kevin

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 5544
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #22 on: August 08, 2015, 08:56:33 AM »

thats a matter of opinion, surely its no more eclectic that Revolver, Abbey Rd or The White album and millions of people are fans of the Beatles because of their eclecticism, there was no typical Beatles style, they did everything, and thats why imo they were head and shoulders above all other bands like the Stones, The Who, Led Zep etc The fabs could write all sorts of music, music hall ? no problem, Childrens singalongs? no problem, Crooner songs? Heavy rock ? no problem, pure Pop? Prog rock? no problem..... I mean what other band put childrens songs on their albums?

I think Pepper is absolutely fantasmagorically brilliant, every track......When Im 64 is a masterful melody any Jazz musician wouldve been proud of, LSD was THE best psych song ever, Rita. The fab title track and of course the fact that it was the worlds first concept album.
Keef is just p*ssed because their imitation is weak and is in fact rubbish.  ;D

Hey, I'm a Beatles fan, so I don't need too much convincing. :) I love their albums, but personally I do find the constant style- shifting distracting, sometimes. Mostly McCartneys fault of course ( who is my favourite Beatle). His ability to seemingly master any style is an awesome thing, just that a lot of folk don't see this as always a good thing.
It's why Revolver doesn't top my list. Each song is great (mostly) but its a bit like someone's sat at the radio and played a song from each station they land on. I understand for some ( nay many) this is a thing of wonder, but I find it sometimes detracts ( and again I'm a Beatles fan, and would play Revolver over any other sixties album by anyone else.)
I guess because of its mantle of "greatest album ever" Pepper comes under more scrutiny than most. But I do think if you take away the cover and the reprise you're left with Revolver 2. A Little Help v Yellow Submarine? Eleanor Rigby v She's Leaving Home? Within you...v Love You To? Tomorrow Never Knows v A Day In The Life? Not a bad thing of course. But it does have the cover and the reprise and the mystique and there you go.
Don't care for Satanic Majesties, but I don't care generally for Brian Jones era Stones. Beatle wannabes. Much prefer The Mick Taylor era and it's pervading sense of menace ( even if it is as contrived  as Dylan's Wondering Minsteral or Lennon's Working Class Hero. But rock has always been about smoke and mirrors)

Now I don't know which side I'm arguing for, or what my point is. But nowdays the four tracks on the blue album are enough Pepper for me, but I will happily sit through Rubber Soul. And Revolver. If I owned a copy.
Logged
don't follow leaders

oldbrownshoe

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 806
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #23 on: August 08, 2015, 09:08:43 AM »

How? What? Where?
All irrelevant.
The only question that matters is When?
No 60s, no Beatlemania, it simply couldn't have happened at any other time.

The two groups virtually lived as one in swingin' London.
The Beatles are The Stones, and The Stones are The Beatles. Jimi is The Stones, The Beatles are Jimi. Dylan is Jimi. Jimi is Dylan.

Overwhelmingly (100 per cent?), in 2015, the people who pitch them up against each other, are those who missed the 60s.
Logged

nimrod

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2459
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #24 on: August 08, 2015, 09:10:53 AM »

Hey, I'm a Beatles fan, so I don't need too much convincing. :) I love their albums, but personally I do find the constant style- shifting distracting, sometimes. Mostly McCartneys fault of course ( who is my favourite Beatle). His ability to seemingly master any style is an awesome thing, just that a lot of folk don't see this as always a good thing.
It's why Revolver doesn't top my list. Each song is great (mostly) but its a bit like someone's sat at the radio and played a song from each station they land on. I understand for some ( nay many) this is a thing of wonder, but I find it sometimes detracts ( and again I'm a Beatles fan, and would play Revolver over any other sixties album by anyone else.)
I guess because of its mantle of "greatest album ever" Pepper comes under more scrutiny than most. But I do think if you take away the cover and the reprise you're left with Revolver 2. A Little Help v Yellow Submarine? Eleanor Rigby v She's Leaving Home? Within you...v Love You To? Tomorrow Never Knows v A Day In The Life? Not a bad thing of course. But it does have the cover and the reprise and the mystique and there you go.
Don't care for Satanic Majesties, but I don't care generally for Brian Jones era Stones. Beatle wannabes. Much prefer The Mick Taylor era and it's pervading sense of menace ( even if it is as contrived  as Dylan's Wondering Minsteral or Lennon's Working Class Hero. But rock has always been about smoke and mirrors)

Now I don't know which side I'm arguing for, or what my point is. But nowdays the four tracks on the blue album are enough Pepper for me, but I will happily sit through Rubber Soul. And Revolver. If I owned a copy.

tut tut a Beatle fan without Revolver ?  ;D

agree about the Strolling Bones though, the only time I briefly thought they were a good band was when Mick Taylor joined, made a few decent albums with his influence, I could hear him knockin  ;D
Logged

Moogmodule

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1630
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #25 on: August 08, 2015, 10:02:16 AM »

LOL

I was just jokingly using his own elucidation (hence the smiley)

I need to brush up on my fluency in emojis  ;)
Logged

Mr Mustard

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 576
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #26 on: August 09, 2015, 12:00:18 AM »

Revolver doesn't top my list. Each song is great (mostly) but its a bit like someone's sat at the radio and played a song from each station they land on. I understand for some ( nay many) this is a thing of wonder, but I find it sometimes detracts ( and again I'm a Beatles fan, and would play Revolver over any other sixties album by anyone else.)
I guess because of its mantle of "greatest album ever" Pepper comes under more scrutiny than most.

So very true....

"Revolver", fine album that it unarguably is, suffers because of its yin yang makeup. An eclectic approach works well sprawled over a double album as they proved two years later. But within the brief grooves of "Revolver" we have Paul pulling firmly in one direction with some sublime songwriting and John and George pushing the opposite way with searing,sitar-spangly soundscapes. Even the ever reliable Ringo can't paper over the obvious dichotomy. Most of the tracks are individually great but the whole package is just too disjointed for me.

With the exception of the gloriously humdrum "She's Leaving Home", Pepper by contrast maintains a polished and seamlessly united front. The over-arcing theme of some Victoriana-tinted whirligig dream somehow holds it all together: yes, the cover and the costumes and the whole damn alter-ego carnival mood have a lot to do with it but the end result is a peacock-packaged entity - a jigsaw for sure but a tightly interlocking, multi-coloured jigsaw with no pieces missing, unlike "Revolver". 

Inevitably having immaculately committed the zeitgeist onto plastic it has dated badly, and the plaudits it rightly accrued at the time of and in the years following its release have become a stick with which to beat it. It's nonetheless one of their better albums in my opinion: top four at least. But then, even the weakest Beatles album outshines the best Stones LP...






And it's knowing that which makes Keef so churlish of course.

« Last Edit: August 09, 2015, 12:02:15 AM by Mr Mustard »
Logged

fanofthefab4

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #27 on: August 12, 2015, 09:05:12 AM »

John (the rocker) Lennon would probably agree with him



No, first of all there a few very good rock songs on Sgt.pepper,and The Beatles especially John and Paul not only wrote plenty of great rock n roll and rock songs from their early days,and later hard rock,they wrote all different types of music because they were the most creative,prolific,diverse,greatest rock band ever.

And John actually went to an off broadway play in New York based on the Sgt.Pepper album in November 1974!

http://dangerousminds.net/comments/john_lennons_nearly_forgotten_1974_broadway_flop
« Last Edit: August 12, 2015, 03:48:31 PM by fanofthefab4 »
Logged

fanofthefab4

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #28 on: August 12, 2015, 09:15:02 AM »

Not only did The Beatles give The Rolling Stones one of their first hits with their rock n roll song I Wanna Be Your Man as you know,and they wrote it right in front of them and Keith Richards and Mick Jagger were impressed and like wow how can you write a song just like that and it motivated them to start writing their own songs.  The Rolling Stones were good friends with and fans of The Beatles.
 
Mick Jagger was at 4 Beatles recording sessions and Keith Richards was at 2 of them with him.Also Mick Jagger was such a big Beatles fan that in May 1967 when The Beatles were redording their song Baby You're A Rich Man he came there and stood on the sidelines to watch and listen to them recording it. His name is also on the tape box and he likely sang at the end verses.In Mark Lewishon's great detailed music diary book, The Beatles Recording Sessions there is a big black and white picture of Mick Jagger sitting in between John and Paul in the recording console room during The Beatles Revolver recording sessions too.
 

The Beatles remastered albums sold much more 40 years after their break up than The Rolling Stones remastered albums and they are still together! The Beatles have the best selling album of the last decade with their CD 1.And soon after thir music went on iTunes,it went to the top.
 


And Brian Jones played the saxaphone on the strange Beatles song, You Know My Name Look Up The Number and he and Mick Jagger's girlfriend at the time Marriane Faithful contributed sound effects on the song Yellow Submarine.

 
As this guy Sal66 who is also a musician and has also posted on sites debunking ignorant cr*p about The Beatles has rightfully pointed out, The Beatles wrote,played and recorded I Feel Fine (which The All  Music Guide says has brilliant,active ,difficult guitar leads and riffs) in the Fall of 1964 which was the first use of feedback guitar on a pop rock record and it also had a prominent guitar riff throughout this very good song almost a year *before* The Rolling Stones's Satisfaction came out.
 

And on John's great Norwegian Wood recorded in the Fall of 1965,George Harrison was the first to play a sitar on a pop rock song and it was released on their great album Rubber Soul in December and then in May 1966 The Rolling Stones song Paint It Black came out with Brian Jones playing a sitar.
 


And in Paul McCartney's authorized biography Many Years From Now, Mick Jagger's former girlfriend singer Marianne Faithful says that she and Mick used to go over to Paul's house a lot and hang out in his music room. She said he never went to see them at their house they always went to visit him because he was Paul McCartney.She also said that Mick was intimidated by Paul but that Paul was totally oblivious to this.

 

Paul also says in this book that he turned Mick on to pot in his music room and he said which is funny because a lot of people would assume it was the other way around. Mick Jagger was also with The Beatles in Bangor when they got the call that Brian Epstein was found dead because he went on the train with them with his then girl friend singer Marianne Faithful  to see the Maharishi to study meditation that weekend.
 

Also Mick Jagger is quoted on a Rolling Stones fan site,timeisonourside.com saying that Keith Richards liked The Beatles because he was quite interested in their chord sequences and he says he also liked their harmonies which he said were always a slight problem for The Rolling Stones.He said Keith always tried to get the harmonies off the ground but they always seemed messy.Mick then says,that what they never really got together were Keith and Brian singing backup vocals and he said it didn't work because Keith was a better singer and to keep going,oooh,ooh,ooh(he laughs) and he said Brian liked all of those oohs which Keith had to put up with.He also said Keith was capable of much stronger vocals than ooh,ooh,ooh.
 


On this same fan site Keith Richards is quoted from 1971 saying that The Beatles were perfect for opening doors,when they went to America they left it wide open for them and he said that The Rolling Stones could never have gone to America without them.He also said that The Beatles are so f**king good at what they did.
Logged

fanofthefab4

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #29 on: August 12, 2015, 09:26:55 AM »

Here Keith Richards talks about how The Beatles and The rolling Stones were good friends from 1962 on! A fan  asked Keith a question and Keith posted this back in 2003 on his web site .


<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvsGmh-rRIM" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvsGmh-rRIM</a>





And here in 1984 on Friday Night videos Keith gets emotional talking about his friendship with John Lennon and his death.

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma4bIvgnJi4" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma4bIvgnJi4</a>

Logged

fanofthefab4

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #30 on: August 12, 2015, 09:32:31 AM »

thats a matter of opinion, surely its no more eclectic that Revolver, Abbey Rd or The White album and millions of people are fans of the Beatles because of their eclecticism, there was no typical Beatles style, they did everything, and thats why imo they were head and shoulders above all other bands like the Stones, The Who, Led Zep etc The fabs could write all sorts of music, music hall ? no problem, Childrens singalongs? no problem, Crooner songs? Heavy rock ? no problem, pure Pop? Prog rock? no problem..... I mean what other band put childrens songs on their albums?

I think Pepper is absolutely fantasmagorically brilliant, every track......When Im 64 is a masterful melody any Jazz musician wouldve been proud of, LSD was THE best psych song ever, Rita. The fab title track and of course the fact that it was the worlds first concept album.
Keef is just p*ssed because their imitation is weak and is in fact rubbish.  ;D



Very well said and all very true,but you also forgot The Beatles wrote and played great folk rock,and the psychedelic rock on this album which as many people have said over the years  The Rolling Stones made a poor copy of.
Logged

fanofthefab4

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #31 on: August 12, 2015, 09:57:32 AM »

The Rolling Stones also wrote quite a few soft sentimental pop kind of songs,Lady Jane,As Tears Go By,Rubey Tuesday,Angie,Wild Horses,Waiting On A Friend and the 2 dreadful disco imitations,Miss You and Emotional Rescue. At least when Paul McCartney did a disco like song,Good Night tonight it was good interesting sounding music!


Also since Keith Richards made is totally ignorant,stupid comments about Sgt.Pepper,I thought about the fact that in The Beatles anthology video series there is party The Beatles filmed for their brilliant,great song A Day in The Life on Sgt.Pepper and Keith Richards and Mick Jagger were there. They also were at the June 1967 TV broadcast for the show Our World when The  Beatles played All You Need Is Love.
Logged

fanofthefab4

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #32 on: August 12, 2015, 10:15:23 AM »

Unfortunately, after Keith said what he did,all of the usual many morons come out of the woodwork on many online news papers and magazines including Rolling Stone,Fox News,The Daily Mail,where they are saying the extremely ludicrous,ignorant,nonsense that The Beatles were rubbish and an overrated crap ''pop boy band''! icon_mad :(
« Last Edit: August 12, 2015, 10:18:33 AM by fanofthefab4 »
Logged

fanofthefab4

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #33 on: August 12, 2015, 10:22:01 AM »

Award winning Indiana University School of music professor Dr.Glen Gass,who has been teaching a course on The Beatles and on rock music in general since 1982,examines the impact of the Sgt.pepper album 45 years later.

http://www.depauw.edu/news-media/latest-news/details/29256/
« Last Edit: August 12, 2015, 10:24:27 AM by fanofthefab4 »
Logged

fanofthefab4

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #34 on: August 12, 2015, 10:27:37 AM »

By way, my first cousin who used to be an accountant  and she's been a ''head hunter'' helping people find jobs for over 20 years,used to be a huge Rolling Stones fan in her early 20's,she had The Beatles Revolver on her bedroom rug. I asked her when she was 32 in 1989 when The Rolling Stones had their Steeel Wheels tour,if she still liked The Rolling Stones and she said no.That same year at her wedding shower I was talking with my female and male first cousins about The Beatles and they are all fans too,and she said I love The Beatles.And when I was excited about seeing Paul McCartney live for the first time in 1990,she said OK! I said you said that you love The Beatles too and she said,hey bottom line they were geniuses.


And when I was 11 my music teacher asked us to guess who he was talking about when he said they were music geniuses and they wrote 200 mostly great songs and many great albums in only an 8 year recording career and I already being a big and very educated Beatles fan,said The Beatles and he said that's right! And my mother who was a talented artist with sculptures and drawings and she went to art school for years and even sold some of her sculptures in several local art galleries,used to dislike The Beatles and only liked classical music of Beethoven,Bach and Mozart and owned those records and played them on the piano,said to me after a radio station played all Beatles songs all day,that she now loved all of their music and thought they were brilliant!
Logged

fanofthefab4

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #35 on: August 12, 2015, 10:34:56 AM »

Now Paul has to call a Rolling Stones album rubbish when he promotes his next solo album,except Paul wouldn't stoop so low! But then getting even would only be justice and not stopping low.
Logged

fanofthefab4

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #36 on: August 12, 2015, 03:26:28 PM »

This is a great December 2012 about music professor Dr.Glen Gass's lecture about how great and important the Sgt.Pepper album is.In it he says his father a math professor,who was at the lecture used to hate The Beatles but now likes them. Poster 74tiger said their father learned to like The Beatles too! :)



http://www.bannergraphic.com/story/1920057.html
« Last Edit: August 12, 2015, 04:59:31 PM by fanofthefab4 »
Logged

fanofthefab4

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #37 on: August 12, 2015, 03:45:23 PM »

In this film of John Lennon walking in New York including Central Park November 1974,he's also seen going to the Beacon Theatre play based on the Sgt.Pepper's album.


<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnV9n3co3lk" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnV9n3co3lk</a>
« Last Edit: August 13, 2015, 04:20:27 PM by fanofthefab4 »
Logged

Fab4Fan

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 270
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #38 on: August 15, 2015, 04:17:46 PM »




Ahhh, Haaa, Haaa!!!  I love this!
Logged
I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.

Fab4Fan

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 270
Re: The ESQ&A: Keith Richards Explains Why Sgt. Pepper Was Rubbish
« Reply #39 on: August 15, 2015, 04:24:38 PM »

...but I will happily sit through Rubber Soul. And Revolver. If I owned a copy.

Wait! Stop the presses! Kevin, do you seriously not own a copy of Rubber Soul or Revolver? Good gosh, man, I'll send you a legitimate, genuine store bought copy of each if you send me your address!
Logged
I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6
 

Page created in 1.333 seconds with 21 queries.