New topic
Printablethis was the first stevie song I knew thanks to an old solid gold tape
Although I like it, he has done so much better. He and mj are my favourite male artists of the 70's | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
Timmy84 said: shorttrini said: It's a nice song, but after writing such classics such as, "You are the Sunshine of my life",and "Super Woman" which sort of displays the same sentiment, the song is a step down. For me, it is just corny 80's pop that sounded just like everything else at that time. This is what had set Stevie apart from everyone....the fact that nothing he wrote, sounded like what was out. This song changed my opinion of him, from that moment on.
IMO, "I Just Called" don't sound too out of step with "Sunshine". Maybe with "Superwoman" but "Sunshine" was a simple pop ditty too. The thing that made THAT stood out was the funky ass horns, lol but sunshine's chords are jazzy ass hell. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
my dad always says (who is a musician) "i just called" may seem simple unless you go play it back exactly like the record, it isnt so easy theres there's still a wonder touch there, and don't forget it was supposed to be on "songs" also probably way more organic sounding then like "crying through the night" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
and no matter how people want to look at it "i just called" has a catchy melody it brought a lot of success so i'm sure stevie ain't mad about it. 
i dont play it alot myself but if you hear it live with live instruments like on the live dvd thats out it sounds great especially with decent speakers. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
NMuzakNSoul said: my dad always says (who is a musician) "i just called" may seem simple unless you go play it back exactly like the record, it isnt so easy theres there's still a wonder touch there, and don't forget it was supposed to be on "songs" also probably way more organic sounding then like "crying through the night"
have you got the whole Crying Through The Night Demo? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
that song is certainly not Stevie's most profound, but it's not that bad. It's just an ordinary expression of love with a nice sweet melody. Maybe the fact that it was a huge hit made people dislike it more.
It's not a huge swing & miss, it's more of a blooper single that has no impact on the score. [Edited 10/20/09 13:41pm] My Legacy
http://prince.org/msg/8/192731 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I do think the chorus is not as good as the verses, however. My Legacy
http://prince.org/msg/8/192731 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
the version on Herbie's album is amazing!!!!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
graecophilos said: NMuzakNSoul said: my dad always says (who is a musician) "i just called" may seem simple unless you go play it back exactly like the record, it isnt so easy theres there's still a wonder touch there, and don't forget it was supposed to be on "songs" also probably way more organic sounding then like "crying through the night"
have you got the whole Crying Through The Night Demo? Hasn't leaked as far as I know. Only the snippet is available. I love the demo.. so funky. graecophilos said: IJCTSILY is a good written pop-ballad.
But it's far away from soulful, deeply personal ballads like Where Were You When I Needed You. Of course. And I don't think anyone would deny that. However, LOTS of songs aren't as good as Superwoman, I don't think that necessarily makes them bad though. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BlaqueKnight said: One of the problems with American entertainment is that we feel the need to be action junkies 24/7. There are also stereotypes involved but I won't go there. All I will say is this:
If the Beatles had written this song, it would be a "simplistic genius classic" but because Stevie wrote it, its considered a "throwaway pop song" as has been stated. I see it as proof of Stevie's ability to be subtle and caring. Its simple. He omits occasions in a simple message: "I love you." That's it. Of course how a song is interpreted depends on the execution of it but overall, its obviously meant to be absorbed easily, which is why it was done the way it was. If you start off the chorus - most people can finish it word-for-word, so it worked. Stevie's subtleties are often overlooked but he's brilliant at it. Not everything needs to be a puzzle wrapped in a mystery with subliminals and double-entendres in order to be significant or effective. You don't always have to make a listener work to get the message. [Edited 10/20/09 9:31am]  [Edited 10/20/09 22:51pm] "We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
NMuzakNSoul said: Timmy84 said: IMO, "I Just Called" don't sound too out of step with "Sunshine". Maybe with "Superwoman" but "Sunshine" was a simple pop ditty too. The thing that made THAT stood out was the funky ass horns, lol but sunshine's chords are jazzy ass hell. Tru.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
 I've always liked "I Just Called to Say I Love You." I could name at least 100 songs by Stevie I like more, but I still enjoy it."Whitney was purely and simply one of a kind." ~ Clive Davis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Every time I hear that song, my first thought is,"Is this the best that you could come up with", after writing such masterpieces like, "Sunshine", "You and I",etc? As some have stated on this board, yes had the Beatles or even Julio Iglasis sang this song, maybe I would have have appreciated it more. The reason being that this song would be right up their alley. It would not have been killed by the use of the electronics. Songs such as this one, is the reason why I prefer 70's Stevie to any other incarnation of him,(yes, I know that it was written during that period). I have listened to the song, since this post started and I guess my problem with it is not so much the words or the sentiment behind them, BUT arrangement of it. His use of the synthesizers take away from the meaning of the song. I have heard him perform this with a band, and it sounds 1000 times better. I also have the version done by Herbie Hancock and Raul Midón and while it does use synths and other electronics, it is not buried by it as much as Stevie's version is. Stevie's use of electronics, just did not do it for me. "Love is like peeing in your pants, everyone sees it but only you feel its warmth" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
shorttrini said: Every time I hear that song, my first thought is,"Is this the best that you could come up with", after writing such masterpieces like, "Sunshine", "You and I",etc? As some have stated on this board, yes had the Beatles or even Julio Iglasis sang this song, maybe I would have have appreciated it more. The reason being that this song would be right up their alley. It would not have been killed by the use of the electronics. Songs such as this one, is the reason why I prefer 70's Stevie to any other incarnation of him,(yes, I know that it was written during that period). I have listened to the song, since this post started and I guess my problem with it is not so much the words or the sentiment behind them, BUT arrangement of it. His use of the synthesizers take away from the meaning of the song. I have heard him perform this with a band, and it sounds 1000 times better. I also have the version done by Herbie Hancock and Raul Midón and while it does use synths and other electronics, it is not buried by it as much as Stevie's version is. Stevie's use of electronics, just did not do it for me.
I'd love to hear the original 1976 version of this song.I bet it sounds better than the 1984 version.I'm thinking that the original version probably used a simple piano melody instead of all the synths...sounding similiar to "Knocks Me Off My Feet",perhaps. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SoulAlive said: shorttrini said: Every time I hear that song, my first thought is,"Is this the best that you could come up with", after writing such masterpieces like, "Sunshine", "You and I",etc? As some have stated on this board, yes had the Beatles or even Julio Iglasis sang this song, maybe I would have have appreciated it more. The reason being that this song would be right up their alley. It would not have been killed by the use of the electronics. Songs such as this one, is the reason why I prefer 70's Stevie to any other incarnation of him,(yes, I know that it was written during that period). I have listened to the song, since this post started and I guess my problem with it is not so much the words or the sentiment behind them, BUT arrangement of it. His use of the synthesizers take away from the meaning of the song. I have heard him perform this with a band, and it sounds 1000 times better. I also have the version done by Herbie Hancock and Raul Midón and while it does use synths and other electronics, it is not buried by it as much as Stevie's version is. Stevie's use of electronics, just did not do it for me.
I'd love to hear the original 1976 version of this song.I bet it sounds better than the 1984 version.I'm thinking that the original version probably used a simple piano melody instead of all the synths...sounding similiar to "Knocks Me Off My Feet",perhaps. Was there another version? "Love is like peeing in your pants, everyone sees it but only you feel its warmth" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
shorttrini said: SoulAlive said: I'd love to hear the original 1976 version of this song.I bet it sounds better than the 1984 version.I'm thinking that the original version probably used a simple piano melody instead of all the synths...sounding similiar to "Knocks Me Off My Feet",perhaps. Was there another version? A demo probably? That's what SoulAlive was talkin' bout. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
shorttrini said: SoulAlive said: I'd love to hear the original 1976 version of this song.I bet it sounds better than the 1984 version.I'm thinking that the original version probably used a simple piano melody instead of all the synths...sounding similiar to "Knocks Me Off My Feet",perhaps. Was there another version? Stevie wrote this song in 1976,so there may be a demo version from that period. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BlaqueKnight said: One of the problems with American entertainment is that we feel the need to be action junkies 24/7. There are also stereotypes involved but I won't go there. All I will say is this:
If the Beatles had written this song, it would be a "simplistic genius classic" but because Stevie wrote it, its considered a "throwaway pop song" as has been stated. I see it as proof of Stevie's ability to be subtle and caring. Its simple. He omits occasions in a simple message: "I love you." That's it. Of course how a song is interpreted depends on the execution of it but overall, its obviously meant to be absorbed easily, which is why it was done the way it was. If you start off the chorus - most people can finish it word-for-word, so it worked. Stevie's subtleties are often overlooked but he's brilliant at it. Not everything needs to be a puzzle wrapped in a mystery with subliminals and double-entendres in order to be significant or effective. You don't always have to make a listener work to get the message. [Edited 10/20/09 9:31am] 100% correct! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Graycap23 said: BlaqueKnight said: One of the problems with American entertainment is that we feel the need to be action junkies 24/7. There are also stereotypes involved but I won't go there. All I will say is this:
If the Beatles had written this song, it would be a "simplistic genius classic" but because Stevie wrote it, its considered a "throwaway pop song" as has been stated. I see it as proof of Stevie's ability to be subtle and caring. Its simple. He omits occasions in a simple message: "I love you." That's it. Of course how a song is interpreted depends on the execution of it but overall, its obviously meant to be absorbed easily, which is why it was done the way it was. If you start off the chorus - most people can finish it word-for-word, so it worked. Stevie's subtleties are often overlooked but he's brilliant at it. Not everything needs to be a puzzle wrapped in a mystery with subliminals and double-entendres in order to be significant or effective. You don't always have to make a listener work to get the message. [Edited 10/20/09 9:31am] 100% correct! Wrong. If the Beatles would have written this, most probably Paul McCartney, people would say: Look, he REALLY writes SILLY LOVE SONGS. Whoever claims IJCTSILY would have been okay with the B's fans/critics/themselves doesn't know anything about the Bs. Paul was widely criticzed for his pop-throwaways, just think of Ebony and Ivory. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
shorttrini said: Every time I hear that song, my first thought is,"Is this the best that you could come up with", after writing such masterpieces like, "Sunshine", "You and I",etc? As some have stated on this board, yes had the Beatles or even Julio Iglasis sang this song, maybe I would have have appreciated it more. The reason being that this song would be right up their alley. It would not have been killed by the use of the electronics. Songs such as this one, is the reason why I prefer 70's Stevie to any other incarnation of him,(yes, I know that it was written during that period). I have listened to the song, since this post started and I guess my problem with it is not so much the words or the sentiment behind them, BUT arrangement of it. His use of the synthesizers take away from the meaning of the song. I have heard him perform this with a band, and it sounds 1000 times better. I also have the version done by Herbie Hancock and Raul Midón and while it does use synths and other electronics, it is not buried by it as much as Stevie's version is. Stevie's use of electronics, just did not do it for me.
That is very well said. I think everything can be improved, and you might be right here. But these “electronics” don’t ruin it at all for me. Perhaps because when I heard it I hadn’t already built up this incredible standard for Stevie (although I'm sure it's far more involved than just that). Ultimately I think he was one of the best, if not the best examples of the 70s (almost unmatched by anyone in history) and overall I do think this song is probably a bit less than the prime beef, but I would argue that this is far from the main proof. And no one could keep doing what Stevie did in the 70s forever, so I think it's really just a matter of being less brilliantly consistent, not being bad. More spots on the glass, but areas that shine just as bright. There's no question that this site is blessed with a lot of people that have technical musical knowledge, including arranging and producing. I think sometimes their ideas are spot on and would make a song better. But all I'm suggesting is that sometimes they might just be improving only for themselves and possibly for those that share similar sensibilities, rather than for those who already love the song (and a few of them just might not be sentimental saps who enjoy awful music).  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
graecophilos said: Graycap23 said: 100% correct! Wrong. If the Beatles would have written this, most probably Paul McCartney, people would say: Look, he REALLY writes SILLY LOVE SONGS. Whoever claims IJCTSILY would have been okay with the B's fans/critics/themselves doesn't know anything about the Bs. Paul was widely criticzed for his pop-throwaways, just think of Ebony and Ivory. To each their own. "Silly Love Songs" is one of my favorite McCartney compositions. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
graecophilos said: Graycap23 said: 100% correct! Wrong. If the Beatles would have written this, most probably Paul McCartney, people would say: Look, he REALLY writes SILLY LOVE SONGS. Whoever claims IJCTSILY would have been okay with the B's fans/critics/themselves doesn't know anything about the Bs. Paul was widely criticzed for his pop-throwaways, just think of Ebony and Ivory. I'd say that if the Beatles had done it in 1964 it would have been accepted, and if Paul had done it in 1974 it would have been dismissed as trash. I think that's part of the reason it was dismissed as beneath Stevie's talents, it came not from an innocent young songwriter, but from the guy who did Living for the City & Big Brother. My Legacy
http://prince.org/msg/8/192731 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
And the guy who a decade earlier than that created all those Motown classics "Uptight", "My Cherie Amour", "Yester You, Yester Me, Yesterday", "I Was Made to Love Her", "Shoo-Be-Doo-Be-Do-Da-Day", "For Once in My Life", "Signed, Sealed, Delivered (I'm Yours)" and "We Can Work It Out".
Stevie was a different artist in the decades he reigned. Early '60s: he was a Ray Charles/blues prodigy. Mid-Late '60s: he became a soul stylist/teen idol. 1970s: adult visionary who mixed funk, soul and pop. 1980s: a mixed bag of urban contemporary and same every other decade since. [Edited 10/21/09 11:04am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
NDRU said: graecophilos said: Wrong. If the Beatles would have written this, most probably Paul McCartney, people would say: Look, he REALLY writes SILLY LOVE SONGS. Whoever claims IJCTSILY would have been okay with the B's fans/critics/themselves doesn't know anything about the Bs. Paul was widely criticzed for his pop-throwaways, just think of Ebony and Ivory. I'd say that if the Beatles had done it in 1964 it would have been accepted, and if Paul had done it in 1974 it would have been dismissed as trash. I think that's part of the reason it was dismissed as beneath Stevie's talents, it came not from an innocent young songwriter, but from the guy who did Living for the City & Big Brother. that's the point | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Timmy84 said: And the guy who a decade earlier than that created all those Motown classics "Uptight", "My Cherie Amour", "Yester You, Yester Me, Yesterday", "I Was Made to Love Her", "Shoo-Be-Doo-Be-Do-Da-Day", "For Once in My Life", "Signed, Sealed, Delivered (I'm Yours)" and "We Can Work It Out".
Stevie was a different artist in the decades he reigned. Early '60s: he was a Ray Charles/blues prodigy. Mid-Late '60s: he became a soul stylist/teen idol. 1970s: adult visionary who mixed funk, soul and pop. 1980s: a mixed bag of urban contemporary and same every other decade since. [Edited 10/21/09 11:04am] We Can Work It Out is no Motown classic. SW's version is great, but it's unfair to claim it was a Motown clasic, Timothy? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Stevie is tops when it comes to songwriting... I mean, this dude came up with a two part song, "Superwoman(where were you when I needed you) which is just impressive lyrically as well musically. A lot of his songs kind of touch on things as matter of fact; See "Dont You Worry Bout a Thing" "Golden Lady" "Livin' for the City" but the fact that it was so accessible meant it reached many people from many background. At the same time he could be intensely personal, "Heaven Is" is definitely more Christian centered, but if taken the religious undertones.. its message is someone anyone who wants peace and love can feel.
My favorite lyrics is where he uses a turn of phrase, a saying to get his message across, like "Knocks me off My Feet" or "Moon Blue" genius stuff really. At this point in history, we have a choice to make
To either, walk the path of love, or be crippled by our hate -Stevie Wonder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CoolTarik1 said: Stevie is tops when it comes to songwriting... I mean, this dude came up with a two part song, "Superwoman(where were you when I needed you) which is just impressive lyrically as well musically. A lot of his songs kind of touch on things as matter of fact; See "Dont You Worry Bout a Thing" "Golden Lady" "Livin' for the City" but the fact that it was so accessible meant it reached many people from many background. At the same time he could be intensely personal, "Heaven Is" is definitely more Christian centered, but if taken the religious undertones.. its message is someone anyone who wants peace and love can feel.
My favorite lyrics is where he uses a turn of phrase, a saying to get his message across, like "Knocks me off My Feet" or "Moon Blue" genius stuff really. Yeah, Moon Blue is underrated. I recently noticed how many songs on A Time To Love seem to be influenced by classic songwriting a la Cole Porter. Moon Blue, How Will I Know and others. Btw, was Moon Blue influenced by Blue Moon (by Al Bowlly)? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
graecophilos said: Timmy84 said: And the guy who a decade earlier than that created all those Motown classics "Uptight", "My Cherie Amour", "Yester You, Yester Me, Yesterday", "I Was Made to Love Her", "Shoo-Be-Doo-Be-Do-Da-Day", "For Once in My Life", "Signed, Sealed, Delivered (I'm Yours)" and "We Can Work It Out".
Stevie was a different artist in the decades he reigned. Early '60s: he was a Ray Charles/blues prodigy. Mid-Late '60s: he became a soul stylist/teen idol. 1970s: adult visionary who mixed funk, soul and pop. 1980s: a mixed bag of urban contemporary and same every other decade since. [Edited 10/21/09 11:04am] We Can Work It Out is no Motown classic. SW's version is great, but it's unfair to claim it was a Motown clasic, Timothy? For Once In My Life is also a cover but I would consider a Motown classic. He didn't say it was a Motown original. We Can Work It Out may be a cover, but I also consider it the definitive version. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
theAudience said: It's such a shame that when someone (in this instance, Threadbare) does make the effort to try and initiate an intelligent discussion of actual MUSIC around here, it ends up getting derailed by bullshit...
http://prince.org/msg/8/321309?&pg=1 ...exits soapbox An interesting point that did come up was Stevie Wonder's arrangement of I Just Called To Say I Love You. As a Pop song it's not really that bad at all. Imo, it's the arrangement that takes it to, what some might consider, the hokey/sappy side of the street. Now take the arrangement, Greg Phillinganes helped to create for the version that appears on Herbie Hancock's Possibilities album... ...vocal/vocalese by Raul Midon In my opinion, a much more heartfelt interpretation that shows the actual depth the song has given a different presentation. tA  Tribal Disorder
http://www.soundclick.com...dID=182431 That was just beautiful!
I've always liked the original for the purpose it served, to get on the charts. There was fierce competition then and the style of the song was totally different than what most Stevie Wonder fans were used to. The critics ridiculed it from the start, however, that didn't stop it from going Number 1 here and in the UK. and winning a Golden Globe and Oscar for Best Original Song. I knew from the start that I loved you with all my heart. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Superstition said: graecophilos said: We Can Work It Out is no Motown classic. SW's version is great, but it's unfair to claim it was a Motown clasic, Timothy? For Once In My Life is also a cover but I would consider a Motown classic. He didn't say it was a Motown original. We Can Work It Out may be a cover, but I also consider it the definitive version. I'm still not sure which version I like better. But FOIML is a Jobete song, isn't it? So it was written by some Motown songwriter? Anyway, if I'd name you 30 typical SW or 30 typical Motown songs, We Can Work It Out would not be on the list. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |