Roxanne

OK.

So we watched it live (well, not really live; the Grammys air here after the fact, which, in fact, fucking sucks), and then we watched it again. Then we watched a bit more of the "live" show, and then we watched it another two or ten times.

And I want to just say, that in spite of the words I am about to write, I loved it. I had a little knot in my stomach while it was going on: I loved it so much, seeing those three guys on stage, even Stewart with his gray hair (why, Stewart? Dye it!), hearing that awesome song again. It was really exciting, and wonderful, and I LOVED IT.

All that said, it wasn't perfect.

Here are just a few of the notes I took (some of these are Patrick's):

1. Andy was just off. He was behind the beat right from the beginning, and before the first big break, he played a few wrong chords; his playing was not dynamic or interesting. His part needs to be very rhythmic or it just gets muddy. 2. Sting's phrasing was wrong. If you listen to the recorded version of "Roxanne," a lot of the vocals are syncopated... it keeps it interesting, it goes with Andy's part, and it keeps this song moving along. I know they've been playing this song for 30 years and it's their song: of course they can change it however they want to. But those changes should keep it interesting; there was just no tension in this version. Sting put almost everything (except his first big entrance) on the beat, and that was distracting to me.3. Sting's singing. The guy thinks he's a jazz singer or something. I hate to be the one to tell you, Sting, but a jazz singer you are not. There was precious little "rock and roll" about his singing. He sounded good: don't get me wrong. He mostly hit the notes and hit 'em hard, but I think he's moving in the wrong direction. I know, I know: who am I to presume to tell Sting how to sing, but at least I'm consistent: I've never liked his music since the Police, and I think he's just off sometimes with his interpretations.4. Stewart got off a few times. The beat was lost a little, during the song, especially before and after that stupid middle section (more on that in a second). The beginning was weird to me, and in my opinion (don't forget! That's what this blog is all about - MY opinion. If you don't agree, get your own blog!) they got started off weird and it took them a few minutes to get it back together. Patrick thought there were too many fills; I thought he was showing off (his left hand, in between hitting the snare drum, was like up above his head or something. Dude, get it down, 'cause it's making you late). Also, where were the octobans? They were there but did he play them? And the almighty splash cymbal? Pat is very jealous over his Paiste Colorsound cymbal; I guess I know what I'm getting him for Christmas this year.5. That new middle section... Oh, man. What was that? and whose idea was it? Hated it. And the changes into and out of it were just... sloppy. Not what I was expecting. 6. Sting's bass playing was also a little sloppy. I guess he's been practicing the lute a lot more, and I suppose a lute is a lot smaller than a bass guitar, but still. Sting. Anyway, that's my critique. Now I've watched this performance about 10 times already, and Patrick's last comment was "I'm going to commit suicide if I have to watch this again," so I guess I have to chill. He also said, "I want to see them do some more performances like this and get better before I'll commit to paying money to see them live." Not me, man. I'm still excited, I'll still pay big money, they still rocked, it was still awesome, and I loved it.NOTE ADDED AT 11:52 P.M.: Patrick went outside to do something (I think he was doing laundry), and I watched again, for the 11th time.Never mind what I said before. It was awesome. I loved it: everything. The flaws don't matter; this is rock and roll the way it's supposed to be, and sometimes it's not pretty. I loved it. Sting, Stewart, Andy? If you're out there reading this, Irene loves you (maybe Stewart just a little bit more).