Tripping On Your Love

[Dave Pinch]

I know I don't make sense to anybody

but Sean I've gotta say you're one of the few on here that makes any fooking sense to me.

he does make sense 999 times out of 1000 to me. but on this occasion he doesn`t imo.no matter how many times i listen to the staple singers i still think its average and dull and never get to the end of it. to be honest. arthur miles version isnt that brilliant. either. in 1990, i bought that originally for the a side ` helping hand` which is still a top tune..mind u, i love the ultimates on b roma. i know sean is not as fond of it lol

dave

[Sean Hampsey]

he does make sense 999 times out of 1000 to me. but on this occasion he doesn`t imo.no matter how many times i listen to the staple singers i still think its average and dull and never get to the end of it. to be honest. arthur miles version isnt that brilliant. either. in 1990, i bought that originally for the a side ` helping hand` which is still a top tune..mind u, i love the ultimates on b roma. i know sean is not as fond of it lol

dave

I'll settle for 999 out of 1,000, Dave.

Even me and the Missus don't agree that often mate!

Sean

[Cunnie]

Staples to listen to.

Arthur Miles to dance to.

AWOL & Kenny Thomas to ignore I suppose.

One thing to remember though is all these covers generate revenue for the writers, producers & original artists so not a bad thing.

[Lfcjunkie]

Which question is that the answer to?

#3 NO CHANCE

[jocko]

Yes. That is how I remember it. Very fond memories of that era. It's important to remember these things in context, as it were.....

I think the point is I have it completely in context, of course they were great times and sure I loved the huggy vibe while bopping around to things like this, just lots of the music hasn't aged as well as the memories and in reality its shite when taken in context, against other better records. Thats always going to happen with any dance scene.

of course it is the best/much more soulful

howerver...

AWOL made it into a completely different record with their version. In its own right, it is a damn good soulful record

It is only when the comparison are made that one shines over the other.

The whole thing about this is that there is in reality a whole lot of difference between soul and soulful, not going to argue your definition of soulful, that is definitely open to debate, Pavarotti is soulful to lots, but its not a soul vocal and thats what I am judging it on, in that context its a piss poor anaemic version and nothing is going to change that.