For some reason, I am always facinated by the Stones in this period. Undecover thru Dirty Work. it was like things were different after the 81/82 tour.

i dont know why I think this, but Its funnt to see interviews like this. A very differnt time for the Stones. I think it is maybe because this is the time I really "discovered' them and was facinated.

So when I look back it is really quite cool.

Not as cool as that guy's green jacket. The 80s. Jesus...But I like Mick here. Almost playful, and not as guarded as he usually is.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-11-19 08:03 by 71Tele.

That clip is from the Swedish TV-show "Måndagsbörsen". Probably from 1983. The inteviewer and host of the show is the very excellent Jonas Hallberg. Used to love that show. It had great live-bands (it was aired live), good interviews and all in all good entertainment every monday (måndag). I miss this kind of TV-entertainment, it's rarely seen these days. Instead you get all kind of lifeless, pre-recorded shit-TV licensed from some TV-company in Holland. By the way, I have seen far worse Jagger-interviews than this.

Strange that you discovered the group at it's nadir. I can't look at the Undercover album and Dirty Work without being kind of sad. There's a couple nuggets but an album and a half worth of crap.

Cuddled up tight!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-08 09:34 by Title5Take1.

Quote
71Tele
Not as cool as that guy's green jacket. The 80s. Jesus...But I like Mick here. Almost playful, and not as guarded as he usually is.

He looks stoned.

UNDERCOVER is one of their best albums for sure.

But I like Mick here. Almost playful, and not as guarded as he usually is.

Mick is usually guarded with English rock journalists(who have agenda). He is much more open with French or Swedish, and he is at his best with women interviewers

Quote
24FPS
Strange that you discovered the group at it's nadir. I can't look at the Undercover album and Dirty Work without being kind of sad. There's a couple nuggets but an album and a half worth of crap.

I got into the stones in 1983, aged 12. Undercover was the first Stones album I bought when it came out and I quite liked it. Dirty Work was however a huge disappointment.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-11-19 16:46 by WeLoveYou.

Quote
WeLoveYou

Quote
24FPS
Strange that you discovered the group at it's nadir. I can't look at the Undercover album and Dirty Work without being kind of sad. There's a couple nuggets but an album and a half worth of crap.

I got into the stones in 1983, aged 12. Undercover was the first Stones album I bought when it came out and I quite liked it. Dirty Work was however a huge disappointment.

Nailed it! I hate how some observers lump Undercover and Dirty Work together...Undercover's only crime is to be released so close to Dirty Work, and thereby associated with it.
Undercover of the Night itself is an excellent, very unique track, and I think a 'daring' idea for a single.

Quote
treaclefingers
Undercover of the Night itself is an excellent, very unique track, and I think a 'daring' idea for a single.

it's a great song. the live version not so great.

Don't get me wrong, 'Undercover' the track is incredible, but the rest of the album is pointless, even though 'She Was Hot' was a tour highlight last go round in the States. Dirty Work, IMO, is a better album, if only because there are better songs, 'Harlem Shuffle', 'One Hit', 'Too Rude', 'Winning Ugly' & Sleep Tonight. Add 'Undercover' to that and you have a good half of an album between the two.

Having first seen the Stones on Sullivan in '64, it's hard to fathom discovering them with the Undercover album. But, hey, more power to you. Personally the Undercover album is one of the few CDs pre-Bill's departure that I don't keep a physical copy of. There's something about the overall production I don't care for. Maybe I should go back and listen to the tracks individually. It's hard to listen to the Undercover album with open ears, or the last three albums, knowing what came before them.

Quote
Undercover1
For some reason, I am always facinated by the Stones in this period. Undecover thru Dirty Work. it was like things were different after the 81/82 tour.

i dont know why I think this, but Its funnt to see interviews like this. A very differnt time for the Stones. I think it is maybe because this is the time I really "discovered' them and was facinated.

So when I look back it is really quite cool.

Cool !!! It was the worst ever period of The Stones. Near collapse. No creativity at all. Battle of egoes. Forget the 80's to the exception of Tatoo You and SMU.

I discovered the Stones in the early 80s listening to Rolled Gold, not through buying Undercover. I had borrowed RS No.1 and RS No.2 and SF and got into those. Then I bought Undercover.

I really liked U and still do. Yes, it is quite an 80s sounding album but it's still very inventive, fresh and powerful album, even listening to it now. I enjoy most of the tracks on this album, and I like the crisp snappy production.

I remember borrowing TY in the early 80s and being mostly disappointed with it. In more recent times I got in to SMU and Slave. But I still prefer U to TY. Mostly I don't like the sound of TY, the mid-rangey harsh noise of it. Interesting how ER and SG sound pretty good production-wise but TY somehow doesn't cut it, at least for me.

There are some interesting tunes on DW, Too Rude is pretty good. But overall the recordings are pretty dreadful. I agree that there is potential in the songs on DW, if only they had been redone completely differently etc.

Quote
24FPS
Don't get me wrong, 'Undercover' the track is incredible, but the rest of the album is pointless, even though 'She Was Hot' was a tour highlight last go round in the States. Dirty Work, IMO, is a better album, if only because there are better songs, 'Harlem Shuffle', 'One Hit', 'Too Rude', 'Winning Ugly' & Sleep Tonight. Add 'Undercover' to that and you have a good half of an album between the two.

Having first seen the Stones on Sullivan in '64, it's hard to fathom discovering them with the Undercover album. But, hey, more power to you. Personally the Undercover album is one of the few CDs pre-Bill's departure that I don't keep a physical copy of. There's something about the overall production I don't care for. Maybe I should go back and listen to the tracks individually. It's hard to listen to the Undercover album with open ears, or the last three albums, knowing what came before them.

yeah, give a listen to "Tie You Up," "Feel on Baby," and "Too Much Blood."

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
WeLoveYou

Quote
24FPS
Strange that you discovered the group at it's nadir. I can't look at the Undercover album and Dirty Work without being kind of sad. There's a couple nuggets but an album and a half worth of crap.

I got into the stones in 1983, aged 12. Undercover was the first Stones album I bought when it came out and I quite liked it. Dirty Work was however a huge disappointment.

Nailed it! I hate how some observers lump Undercover and Dirty Work together...Undercover's only crime is to be released so close to Dirty Work, and thereby associated with it.
Undercover of the Night itself is an excellent, very unique track, and I think a 'daring' idea for a single.

No, Undercover's only crime is weak material.

I don't give a rats ass about 80's Stones.

Quote
Bimmelzerbott
I don't give a rats ass about 80's Stones.

noted, thanks.