It was the longest we had to wait for a new cd/lp at the time, just as Undercover had been the longest wait before it. And coming off the so-so ER, the great but-patched-together from older material TY and SIT70's, a lameass live release SL whose single was a cover, and the so-so Undercover, there was a lot of pressure/expectations for DW to see if the Stones still 'had it'.

The Stones hadn't delivered a 'fresh' classic for years, and what do they do? the first single was a covertune, which let you know right off the bat that there weren't any better original rockers for radio on the cd/lp. Bad omen. Really bad omen. When you got to hear DW, there was lame production and non-dynamic stock drum and guitar parts, and you wanted to hide after listening to Back 2 Zero. It's a shame b'cuz mick had the feel of some really good lyrics, and I found the yelling vocals a welcome change of pace, amusing and a sign he wasn't slowing down. Sure, there was a few good moments, but the music was weak just like Undercover. They had never released 2 in a row before with such long waits in between and with such weak tunes (the best of Buttons and Satanic beats the best of Undercover/DW), Stu had died and there was again no tour, so DW hurt more and was properly maligned. Repeated listens of Back To Zero made it worse with hindsight, despite the best efforts of One Hit, Too Rude, Hold Back, Sleep, and Had It w/ You.

The worst part of Dirty WOrk is that Sir Mick is sleep walking and not intersted and that is an integral part of the band. He wanted to be off on his own and was clearly sick of the Stones at the time.

Not a good record at all in my opinion, One hit amd Too Rude are ok, but I can't stand the rest. Steel Wheels is the only Stones studio album I would rate lower.

This thread made ma want to blast the good old DW. So I did: back home, dug the original LP out and turned the volume up to be sure to share the pleasure with the whole neighborhood.

Its a mean album. Made on purpose to sound hard and aggressive. That is including Jagger's vocals. He sang like this because that's the attitude he wanted to give to the LP. You all know of those wonderful ballads that lie in the vaults, with truly committed emotional singing, it is not that they didn't have other choices of material to publish). This is the only bad point (those ballads cry to see the light of sun).

Of course, if you didn't live the music of those years, the production is enough to turn you off. But if, like me, at the time you were into music like Prince, Talking Heads, Police etc. Dirty Work is the Stones' take of the times.

And its a good effort too. Once again, it is very diverse, you have rock, rock and roll, reggea, r&b, ballads, and disco funk. The guitar work is consistently great.

Sounds somehow like a stripped down version of Undercover.

How can I explain it? I've partied so many times over this LP that it is hard to see why others don't like it.

Ok, Back To Zero sounds like something that could have been on the soundtrack of an Eddy Murphy's Beverly Hills Cop, but so what?

Ah, yes, one more critic. Wood's sax is too low in the mix in Had it With you.

C

Half of it is DREADFUL !!!

Decent/Very Good Songs:

ONE HIT
HAD IT WITH YOU
DIRTY WORK
HARLEM SHUFFLE
SLEEP TONIGHT


rest can go in the trash basically.....

I like:

One Hit
Fight
Harlem Shuffle
Hold Back
Too Rude
Dirty Work
Had It With You
Sleep Tonight
+ the Key To The Highway exerpt

IMO, a good album with great guitar playing. A bit uneven when looking at the songs put in, but all in all a good stones album.

Apart from the horrible front cover, the main problem is the 80´s production with the thin/metallic kind of sound - especially on the drums.
Many of the songs could of course have been better too... (That, though, is true of all Stones albums since Undercover - and some before!)
However, listening to it these days, it´s not as bad as I thought back then.
The tracks I like now are:
One Hit
Fight
Hold Back
Too Rude
Sleep Tonight

Quote
liddas
How can I explain it? I've partied so many times over this LP that it is hard to see why others don't like it.

try listening to it sober sometime and you'll see....

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
liddas
How can I explain it? I've partied so many times over this LP that it is hard to see why others don't like it.

try listening to it sober sometime and you'll see....

that would take the fun right out of now wouldnt it?

To me and this is onlt me One Hit is the only song that is up to snuff

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Four Stone Walls
well done? Stone Waals always lend their support for poorly understood and much-maligned snarling Dirty UnderDogs

and it's the (raw) passion in the DW album that stimulates such stalwart defense of an album whose ATTACK is its own best defense.

Too bad that many find its attitude so offensive.

drivel....gotta know when to quit....

Once you Start Me Up ...........

I listened to Hold Back again (after a long abstinence) just to be sure ...

drums did annoy in a way that they didn't use to (but partly due to different sound system ......

but what impressed and totally compensated was Keith's utterly urgent and wired guitar ... (excuse following lame cliche but ..) like a stud kicking at the stalls.

I think on this track and on mmost of DW he'd rediscovered his passion for his playing. He's not done better since then - except some of his lead playing on SW.

and the track has some great lyrics - whose delivery and timing interplay wonderfully with Keith's guitar.

Ronnie's distorted and wiry leads ain't half bad too, ......

infact I consider it an all-round good egg of a track, old chum .......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-30 01:23 by Four Stone Walls.

the saddest part of DW (and SW, to a lesser extent) is that the guitarists had their chops still, but the insipid song-writing gave them very little opportunity to provide much in the way of memorable moments.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-30 01:29 by StonesTod.

"insipid song writing"

imo songs can be overwritten, overworked

in a way i know what you mean. But what I mean, to an extent, is 'who cares?' as long as the spirit is strong an honest.

(Man smoking a pipe - "er, excuse me Mister Rotten, but your songs are incredibly insipidid, compositionally speaking")

Hold Back and and Winning Ugly are bursting with exuberance - and the latter isn't weakly composed. Neither are insipid in spirit.

Now take for example Keith's two solo albums - many of the 'songs' are incredibly weak compositionally speaking - Struggle, Whip it Up, Locked Away, Will But You Won't, Wicked As It Seems - infact the majority of them! - simple lyrically and musically.

I suspect that I won't hear you complaining about those two albums!

Hold Back is no weaker than virtually all of those Keith tracks. Infact it probably is a Keith track - even lyrically for the most part. But it gains from Keith's 'champing at the bit' approach, where (for me) much of TIC is too controlled.

DW, inspite of its main sonic 'failing' of overloud and echoey drums, has a live band intensity (and real guitar interaction) - which is lacking on TIC (except on SHSYUBID - which is the strongest song, compositionally too).

I think that OH, WU, BTZ, ST are strong compositionally, whereas F, HB, DW & HIWY are just flat out, spirited energy blasts with some insired lyrics (DW and H.

So, overall all, with a couple of tasty cover numbers, a well-balanced (dirty) work.

Don't get me started on SW. You will be horrified to learn that I think it's compositionally strong and their other really good eighties' album!

Good night from Blighty.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-30 02:51 by Four Stone Walls.

okay - not insipid in spirit, only in execution. reminds me of the late great football coach John McKay's retort to reporters following yet another loss by his woeful tampa bay buccanneers in the 1980's - reporter asks what he thought of his team's execution, to which he replied: "i'm in favor of it."

Hold Back is a tuneless mess. One of their worst tunes ever, in The Mez's Humble opinion. MEZ

<Don't get me started on SW. You will be horrified to learn that I think it's compositionally strong and their other really good eighties' album!>

Actually, I think many agree here. But the album was butchered by the production (and Matt Clifford!).

listening to HOLD BACK on the remastered 2009 version;, It rocksssssssssss !!
such a great guitar during the break. Only the drums sound too clear. maybe woody behind them. I don't remember.
Anger in it, great !!

A very spirited and interesting discussion. Some are attempting career revisionism by painting Dirty Work as a compelling (if flawed) Stones album of its time - others are trying to bury it in the past and leave it there...

Nearly 3 years ago to the day there was a similar discussion about Dirty Work on this board. I have very strong feelings about the album and I expressed them in that forum. I look back and I stand by my words...

Early Spring 1986, and the new Stones album comes out - rock and roll lives again! - in a mid-80's musical landscape littered with the ashes of fallen Rock Gods and the rotting carcasses of the Rock era's dinosaurs the most cartilaginous of the species still stalk the terrain...the Stones are back! The blessed moment has come when hackneyed, innocuous sorts like Phil Collins, and Wham! and Genesis and all their ilk spewing insipid tripe over our faces will be blown away and rendered mute...salvation - in the form of these indestructible life forms called the Stones - is ours at last...and the music begins to roar and I'm hearing the firestorm of guitars and the angry, hateful lyrics spat out in rage and...where' Charlie? The supple, cracking, swinging rhythms that normally under-gird the Stones sound and fury have been mutated into a stiff, swerving, echo-laden and angry bang...and Keef's gloriously ragged backup vocals have been replaced by a choir of faceless Elay Quincy Jones backup-vocal hacks, and the guitar solo is Jimmy Page from Zep [why?] and Mick doesn't sing so much as disgorge and retch...and the lyrics are mean and nasty and trite and formless...Fight, Had It With You, Dirty Work...gotta get into a fight, can't get out of it, wanna do it in the broad daylight I'm a truck I'm a suicide, you lazy mother, there's something filthy living in your mouth, find some fcuker find some jerk to do your dirty work, always shouting out instructions, I had it with you...not really lyrics so much as Keef and Mick's internal dialogue...as if they distilled all of their furious squabbles from the last 15 years and put them to song...and where's Charlie? And what the hell are these synths doping all over the place? And Winning Ugly and Back to Zero and Hold Back...and, Christ...what the HELL is this? And where's Charlie? By the time Keef sings Sleep Tonight I'm ready to lie down myself...gotta think this over...guitar attack is vicious and in top form and they're singing ABOUT SOMETHING, which they don't always bother to do, but somehow something is amiss...sounds like impostors have seeded themselves throughout the album...and, well, where the hell is Charlie? Gotta find Charlie...and Mick's old voice...and Bill...is Bill here? And Steve Lillywhite...can you get outta the control room pleeeze...go home...get away from these guys, OK? Gotta find the Stones...put 'em back together in one room and let 'em play...they could save a LOT of these songs...I know they can...guess I'll wake up tomorrow and try again...wish me luck...

Nothing more to add.

Quote
toomuchforme
listening to HOLD BACK on the remastered 2009 version;, It rocksssssssssss !!

It does. Sadly though, there's absolutely no "roll".

As Keith once said "I want the roll. Fúck the rock. I've had enough of it."

DW is a great album:


Excellent:

One Hit - Hold Back - Dirty Work - Sleep Tonight

Very Good:

Fight - Harlem Shuffle - Had It With You

So so:

Too Rude - Winning Ugly - Back to Zero

My take:


Excellent:

One Hit - Dirty Work - Harlem Shuffle
Very Good:

Fight - Sleep Tonight - Had It With You - Back To Zero

So so:

Too Rude - Winning Ugly

Unlistenable*:

Hold Back







*At least until I get the newly remastered version.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
toomuchforme
listening to HOLD BACK on the remastered 2009 version;, It rocksssssssssss !!

It does. Sadly though, there's absolutely no "roll".

As Keith once said "I want the roll. Fúck the rock. I've had enough of it."

Sad (Sad, Sad) for you perhaps Gazza.

Ofcourse Roll is good - and it largely re-appeared on SW - but that Keith loves his soundbites, and what he says and what he does don't truly marry.

Not much roll since SW - and not much on his solo albums - infact could he have found a more 'roll-less' drummer than Steve 'basher' Jordan? Perhaps so, if he'd only taken the trouble to look.

Ofcourse it's not Keith's fault that Bill left or that Darryl was chosen in his place.


Great piece you wrote in 1986, Turd On The Run



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-07-31 03:34 by Four Stone Walls.

this is a great lp---period.

STONES JAM!! MICKEYS RULES!!! (burp) NADER IN 2016!!!!! GO GIANTS!!