Rolling Stones - Heart Breaker

[1970brenz]

They're good, nice tone...

[sidson]

Good interpretation!!

[thesicksadworld]

not bad cover, good vocals

but to list the track as the stones is cheesy and lame, period

you should re-list it

[frietag]

Pretty good. You should of just put Rolling Stones in the Tage not the title.

[Roos15]

guitar sounds great.

[Zardoz99]

Man, this really sucks.

[guitar4jrocks]

they arent saying that they are the rolling stnes you nimrods,they say its the stnes heartbreaker ...not led zep or pat benetar you assholes,and they did a great job

[ricchardo]

@guitar4jrocks No, but if it says Rolling Stones ON the can, you expect to find Rolling Stones IN the can, right?

[snmage]

Actually, not bad for a local pub band, but, nevertheless, putting words 'Rolling Stones' to the title is an unnecessary scam.

[re6ter]

yeah

[aballballball]

oh jeez, bar band crap.

[ricchardo]

@aballballball So they're crap just cuz they're a bar band? What do you think the Rolling Stones were first, a stadium band or a bar band? answers on a postcard please!! lol.

[madmatt1]

well, shabby quality, but the lead easily beats Mick Taylors on the recording. nice job

[shanidachine]

you necky fags, you arent the rolling stones.. so why fucking put your name as rolling stones, you are the shittest thing ive ever seen, go fuck youselfs.

[meatymann]

good raspy voice.ya remind ya of us we cover that song too.we basically got about the same sound - weird!

[parafleet]

ur good. but still. like the rossington/collins band?

[funkmasterflex28]

sounds really good guys. It's a good stones song to make heavy like that

[angelbix]

not bad..

[bsj71]

Singing: a solid C+, but the playing by the band is a good A-

[stonescourt3]

yea the lead is pretty sick, isnt it?