|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 6, 2012 6:05:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 6, 2012 6:09:57 GMT -5
3 -- I know everyone loves to trash this version because it's not fast and really rockin'. But I like it as it is as a different approach. John jokingly referred to this on a radio interview as "the Dance Hall Version". Whatever naysayers may say about it, if you really concentrate on John's vocals as the song gets more underway, he sings it with passion.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on May 6, 2012 6:23:06 GMT -5
I don't care too much for it, I give it a 2.0 .. it's not crap but it's not good so I say average ..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2012 8:09:01 GMT -5
Here are the lyrics....
Oh!
They're really rocking in Boston In Pittsburgh, P.A. Deep in the heart of Texas On down to Frisco Bay All over St. Louis And down in New Orleans All the cats wanna dance with the Sweet little sixteen
Sweet, sweet, sweet little sixteen She's got the grown-up blues Tight dresses and lipstick She's sporting high heel boots Oh but tomorrow morning You gotta have to change her trend Becomes sweet sixteen And back in class again
Oh mummy, mummy Please, please may I go? You know it's such a sight to see them Some other steal the show Oh daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy You know I beg of you Scream it to mama It's all right with you
Because they're rocking in New York In Philadelphia, P.A. Deep in the heart of Texas Down to the "rainbow", L.A. All over St. Louis And down in New Orleans All them mothers wanted to Be sweet little sixteen
Sweet, sweet, sweet sixteen She's so delicate She's just gotta have it About half, half a mountain That's framed back (fade out)
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on May 6, 2012 8:11:26 GMT -5
Not a major fan of the "Rock 'n' Roll" album. 2.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2012 8:18:41 GMT -5
Johns lyrics aren't the same as the original, it was hard to find the exact lyrics, it was hard to work them out by listening but i think i've posted the correct lyrics....
I give it a 3
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on May 6, 2012 12:54:21 GMT -5
2
I know, a 2 for John and a Chuck Berry song. Sums up this project, really.
|
|
kc
Beatle Freak
Posts: 1,085
|
Post by kc on May 6, 2012 20:37:51 GMT -5
2 average...it's ok. That criteria sums it up for me. Lennon sings with verve and conviction, but something is missing. I prefer his version of the other Berry song on the album, You Can't Catch Me.
|
|
|
Post by coachbk on May 6, 2012 20:46:13 GMT -5
2 Vocals are good, but this version is too slow. John has done several better Chuck Berry covers than this.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 7, 2012 12:41:26 GMT -5
2. John's vocal is great, the horns are hideous and the tempo change ruins it by obscuring the original song. Some songs are so good, what's the point of changing them up so much as to be unrecognizable?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 7, 2012 12:47:22 GMT -5
2. John's vocal is great, the horns are hideous and the tempo change ruins it by obscuring the original song. Some songs are so good, what's the point of changing them up so much as to be unrecognizable? Sometimes it has worked in musical history, though. There have been song re-do's with extreme tempo changes that did come off fine. I've been holding off suggesting this, but I think some detractors may have enjoyed this song if they hadn't already known the original. Hey RTP -- would you ever use the word "hideous" in describing any aspect of any Paul song?
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 7, 2012 13:29:19 GMT -5
2. John's vocal is great, the horns are hideous and the tempo change ruins it by obscuring the original song. Some songs are so good, what's the point of changing them up so much as to be unrecognizable? Sometimes it has worked in musical history, though. There have been song re-do's with extreme tempo changes that did come off fine. I've been holding off suggesting this, but I think some detractors may have enjoyed this song if they hadn't already known the original. Hey RTP -- would you ever use the word "hideous" in describing any aspect of any Paul song? Yes the falsetto voice in Darkroom is hideous.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on May 7, 2012 18:24:43 GMT -5
2. John's vocal is great, the horns are hideous and the tempo change ruins it by obscuring the original song. Some songs are so good, what's the point of changing them up so much as to be unrecognizable? 1. That is my first 1 in the Karlosi Song of the Day Examination! I have given some 1.5's but this is a 1 for every reason RTP says except I don't even like John's vocal. Give me The Beatles at the BBC version any day! Good thing John jammed with Chuck on Mike Douglas three years earlier or Chuck would have beat John up for this cover! ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2012 6:19:26 GMT -5
Sometimes it has worked in musical history, though. There have been song re-do's with extreme tempo changes that did come off fine. I've been holding off suggesting this, but I think some detractors may have enjoyed this song if they hadn't already known the original. Hey RTP -- would you ever use the word "hideous" in describing any aspect of any Paul song? Yes the falsetto voice in Darkroom is hideous. It might have been sped up
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 8, 2012 6:32:00 GMT -5
2. John's vocal is great, the horns are hideous and the tempo change ruins it by obscuring the original song. Some songs are so good, what's the point of changing them up so much as to be unrecognizable? 1. That is my first 1 in the Karlosi Song of the Day Examination! I have given some 1.5's but this is a 1 for every reason RTP says except I don't even like John's vocal. Give me The Beatles at the BBC version any day! Good thing John jammed with Chuck on Mike Douglas three years earlier or Chuck would have beat John up for this cover! ;D I wonder what you would have thought of the song if there'd never been another version previously? We will honestly never know.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on May 8, 2012 9:16:58 GMT -5
1. That is my first 1 in the Karlosi Song of the Day Examination! I have given some 1.5's but this is a 1 for every reason RTP says except I don't even like John's vocal. Give me The Beatles at the BBC version any day! Good thing John jammed with Chuck on Mike Douglas three years earlier or Chuck would have beat John up for this cover! ;D I wonder what you would have thought of the song if there'd never been another version previously? We will honestly never know. The horns on this song are what ruins it the most. John Lennon did not know how to use a horn section to save his life. The Rolling Stones used horns to give their music great swing as does every single African American artist who uses them and I saw this done wonderfully in February when I saw Kool And The Gang. Real horns, real bounce to the music. Springsteen had the Big Man! Macca uses fake horns through Wick.... BOO!Anyway, Lennon would slow the horns down and they became anti-swing. They sound sickly. John needed just guitars and/or piano and not those awful electric keyboards on the Mind Games album......hey, hey, hey, haaaay, alright!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 8, 2012 9:33:24 GMT -5
The horns on this song are what ruins it the most. John Lennon did not know how to use a horn section to save his life. That's your opinion. I disagree. Nothing wrong with that intro to INTUITION, nor the approach to the MG album, IMO. The song INTUITION is supposed to be John being carefree, and the intro conveys that. But hey, you just rated George's BYE BYE LOVE a complete "4", so of what relevance is any of this?
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on May 8, 2012 10:23:27 GMT -5
The horns on this song are what ruins it the most. John Lennon did not know how to use a horn section to save his life. That's your opinion. I disagree. Nothing wrong with that intro to INTUITION, nor the approach to the MG album, IMO. The song INTUITION is supposed to be John being carefree, and the intro conveys that. But hey, you just rated George's BYE BYE LOVE a complete "4", so of what relevance is any of this? So did I give the wrong opinion here and the wrong opinion there(for BBL)? I've enjoyed myself when posters go against the CW on a song in your cool Threads, Joe! So far everyone seems sincere except for the sarcasm of one fellow who does kind of have a funny gag going, right fabfour! The sped-up voice gag never gets old but I am looking for articles on "You" because I too thought I read that the vocals were altered so George could hit those higher registries like Ronnie did. I think I read that but am not asserting it to be true. Isn't it cool that someone appreciates George's "Bye Bye Love?" Conversely, I am digging the love expressed here by you and some others for John's "Sweet Little Sixteen!" Maybe I will rethink my position on it because of the expressed excitement of others.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 8, 2012 10:29:00 GMT -5
So did I give the wrong opinion here and the wrong opinion there(for BBL)? As I wrote in the other thread: There is no "right or wrong" opinion. (Don't try to go there). I said I should be allowed to tweak and joke just like all others do. I like people coming back and reacting to others' points of view. The very first words I wrote were that yours was an interesting take. Didn't I...?
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on May 8, 2012 11:31:41 GMT -5
So did I give the wrong opinion here and the wrong opinion there(for BBL)? As I wrote in the other thread: There is no "right or wrong" opinion. (Don't try to go there). I said I should be allowed to tweak and joke just like all others do. I like people coming back and reacting to others' points of view. The very first words I wrote were that yours was an interesting take. Didn't I...? LOL, yeah we covered this elswhere! Just as long as you know I was sincere you can tweak me! ;D I honestly groan outloud when 16 comes on. The weird thing is I kind of like the bloated, drunken "Since My Baby Left Me" which you would think I'd hate for the big production. I kind of like those cheesy female singers in it!
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on May 17, 2012 16:27:37 GMT -5
Oh dearie dearie. Johnny, Johnny. What were you thinking? Now, the Beatles at the BBC, there was a good version of this song, or better yet, the version by Chuck himself.
I got six versions of the song by Chuck. The demo version, a few takes, the released version, a sped up version and a live version. (Yes, I've changed the subject - 1.0). Chuck really rocks!
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on May 17, 2012 16:29:28 GMT -5
At least the 1 button doesn't say crap.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on May 17, 2012 16:56:50 GMT -5
2. I've never been able to sit through even half a side of the Rocknroll album before I turn it off.
|
|