Jung Roe
MLT Club MemberForum Replies Created
-
Jung Roe
Member09/08/2019 at 07:47 in reply to: The rivalry between two great 60's bands that would shape music foreverWell Jacki, the Beatles gave some incredible shows in Canada. In Vancouver they played the then largest stadium, Empire Stadium, at the PNE, and all accounts are it was like that Shea stadium concert they did in Ne York. Just out of this world. It was Aug 22nd 1964 (I was 1), and they kicked off Canada doing the first Canadian concert in Vancouver. It was quite the event.
Now as for the Rolling Stones and Canada, there was that infamous incident in Toronto when Keith Richard’s was caught bringing across some banned muffins and was not allowed into Canada. 🙂 So it was a shaky Stones/Canada relationship. I think its all water under the bridge now and they often give incredible concerts here.
-
Tomas, oh yes I know that experience! I remember the first time I went to a Beach Boys concert, my first live concert ever. I think I must have been 14 or 15, it just felt surreal to be in the same room (big room) with my absolute heroes: Brian Wilson, Carl Wilson, Dennis Wilson, Mike Love, Al Jardine, and Bruce Johnson. Dennis Wilson died a few years later, so it was one of the last concerts where all the original members were on stage together, even Brian, as often he did not do concerts in those times. There is something special about being in the presence of a legend, one of the all time greats. It takes the “right stuff” to be a hero, and they were mine! That was one moment in my life I would never forget.
-
Jung Roe
Member08/08/2019 at 15:51 in reply to: Which is better, the Rolling Stones or the Beatles, and why?Good point Howard. Stats like Billboard is no longer a gauge for good music like in the 60s when it took remarkable talent to get a song in the charts in the company if the likes of the Beatles, Dylan, or the Stones. Now forget originality or inspiration, just conform to what the major labels are willing to push and you get a hit. You are in the company of the Justin Beibers, Rianna, and Rappers.
-
Jung Roe
Member08/08/2019 at 07:36 in reply to: Which is better, the Rolling Stones or the Beatles, and why?After seeing this list of Billboard artists with the most Number 1 songs to date since Billboard began rating songs, I can only come to the conclusion in the 80’s and 90’s, since the creative renaissance of the 60’s, a number 1 song simply did not carry the same weight as a number 1 song in the 60’s. Nevertheless, 50+ years later, Beatles are still at the top (what a legacy), although the landscape of artists has significantly changed.
1..The Beatles. > No. 1 hits: 20. > Total weeks at No.
2..Mariah Carey. > No. 1 hits: 18. > Total weeks at No. …
3..Madonna. > No. 1 hits: 12. > Total weeks at No. …
4..Michael Jackson. > No. 1 hits: 12. > Total weeks at No. …
5..Rihanna. > No. 1 hits: 11. …
6..Whitney Houston. > No. 1 hits: 11. …
7..The Supremes. > No. 1 hits: 11. …
8..Usher. > No. 1 hits: 9. …Janet Jackson and Bee Gees round out the 9 and 10th place respectively for most No 1 songs.
-
Jung Roe
Member07/08/2019 at 07:54 in reply to: The rivalry between two great 60's bands that would shape music foreverHi Howard. Interestingly in real life Antonio Salieri lead a remarkable musical career as a teacher too. Beethoven, Schubert, and Liszt being some of his esteemed pupils. Things weren’t as bleak for Salieri as the movie made it out to be.
-
Jung Roe
Member07/08/2019 at 07:17 in reply to: The rivalry between two great 60's bands that would shape music foreverOne of my favorite movie music scenes is this one in Amadeus, when Mozart’s rival Salieri comes upon Mozart’s work. I think many of the Beatles contemporaries like the Beach Boys, Elvis, Rolling Stones etc at the time had Salieri epiphany moments as the Beatles onslaught of hits after hits came on in the 60’s. When I hear Brian Wilson describe the Beatles music in such awe, I can’t help but see this scene in my mind. I am sure the same for many of the other artists from the Stones to Dylan too (of admiration of course rather than envy as others went on inspired to create great music themselves). The Beatles created music like no one ever heard before that would forever change the musical landscape.
-
Jung Roe
Member06/08/2019 at 06:11 in reply to: Which is better, the Rolling Stones or the Beatles, and why?Howard, I can certainly relate to how songs from a certain time growing up, can trigger such fond memories. For me it would be a little later in the late 70’s and 80s. When I hear certain songs by ELO, Eagles, Steve Miller Band, Elton John, it triggers volumes of memories from times hanging out at my best friends place listening to his records, and cruising around in his car listening to those tunes. I was just 15 but my friend was 16 and just got his drivers license so it felt like awesome freedom cruising around with our favorite music. Music we had as we were growing up certainly was a gift, and we were fortunate there were some great music to grow up with.
In the video Pussycat-Mississippi they use a Framus string instrument. It was funny on another post here today, we were just discussing a Framus 12 string used in “Nothing is In Vain”. The Framus in this video is not a guitar though.
-
Tomas, the video is amazing indeed. It seems their videography magic just keeps getting better and better, and the music arrangement of this song, they’ve enriched it so much, and their singing and harmonies are just stellar.
You have a sharp eye, would have never spotted Rudolf unless if you pointed it out! 🙂 But he is well cloaked. Would have never detected him unless the particle array sensors were set to ultra high 🙂
-
Like many of the Beatles masterpieces with unique intros that make the song so much more special, Nothing Is In Vain has an awesome unique intro that give the song much character right from the outset, and it’s great to see the remarkable restored instrument (Framus 12 string) you did it with!
A really pretty guitar!
-
Jung Roe
Member06/08/2019 at 00:06 in reply to: Which is better, the Rolling Stones or the Beatles, and why?Well articulated Jacki. What you said reminded me of what Brian Wilson remarked about Paul, his supreme melodies and the versatility. The Stones had some remarkable rock and roll tunes and sublime ballads but come nowhere close to the versatility of the Beatles output.
-
Jung Roe
Member05/08/2019 at 23:00 in reply to: The rivalry between two great 60's bands that would shape music foreverIn the video, a young Paul McCartney says about their musical background “..we knew E, and we knew A, but we didn’t know B7…”. What humble beginnings, from the band that would transform music forever. 🙂
-
David, I like your use of the puns here. Very appropriate. Mona and Lisa are very intellectual and interesting people, which is another reason they are so irresistible. From the universe, to what music means to them, to the meaning of life, they are so insightful, and they are only 25!
Jacki, Nothing is In Vain song comparison is right on. I get the same out of this world vibe.
-
Jung Roe
Member05/08/2019 at 18:46 in reply to: Which is better, the Rolling Stones or the Beatles, and why?Wow Howard, that is quite the epic review by Eric Olsen. I don’t know who he is, but I assume he is someone with some authority in the subject? By some of his off center choices of bands to be included in his top ten, I can only presume it’s a list of his favorites as opposed to a list of the all time greatest. Despite his obscure selections, interestingly the Beatles checks all his boxes and is his #1. Attests to the universal adoption of the Beatles as the best even among the more cult music followers like Eric Olsen.
-
Oh nice Angelo. I wondered what that guitar was that Lisa used in Samba Pa Ti.
-
Jung Roe
Member06/08/2019 at 06:59 in reply to: Which is better, the Rolling Stones or the Beatles, and why?LOL. ??. Love it Howard! Thanks for digging out their drifting video..For those new to the MLT club you probably figured it out, that not only are the twins remarkably musically gifted, but they are ultra cool too!