Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Doxa

Quote
walkingthedog
I quite like DW, although it is probably one of my least favourite Stones albums. Like someone said, I think it is very "guitar driven". I don't know any Stones albums where the guitars sound quite as agressive as on DW. Another good thing about DW is that it does not contain many "Stones-by-the-numbers" songs. What I found shocking when I first heard it, is the lack of melody and the fact that Mick is shouting instead of singing. On the other hand, one can also think of this as yet another variation of style in their rather huge repertoire, spanning everything from psychedelia to country music.

This is a good point. Other way to say it is that the band was still then an artistically driven band: they wanted update their sound, to an extent follow the trends and try to find a new angle to their doings. That it didn't work too well this time around or anymore is a bad thing but still I find DIRTY WORK much more insteresting album to listen than the albums from VOODOO LOUNGE on that are 95 % "Stones-by-numbers" kind of stuff. Listening to DIRTY WORK is a bit like SATANIC MAJESTIES: even when the band seemingly fails, it is still fascinating to listen but wheras VOODOO LOUNGE, BRIDGES TO BABYLON or A BIGGER BANG offers 100% safe and sure Stones pastishe music stylistically that it leaves me mostly cold, and just makes to find the albums in where that kind of music is fresh and inspired and original. Whatever DIRTY WORK lacks it certainly doesn't lack originality. By contrast, STEEL WHEELS, even though being as 80's produced as it can be, is much more classical sounding album, and the band uses pretty famliar ideas there (some of them going pretty far back). But that was the whole thing in 1989 "come back": a fresh nostalgia.

- Doxa

The only thing Dirty Work was missing, was good songs with good lyrics competently performed. I would prefer 'Stones by numbers' because presumably at least they can do that well. It's ok for the stones to have a worst album, and I believe this to be it.

Yeah, DIRTY WORK seriously lacks good songs if anything. I think one part of it is Jagger's disinterest. "Winning Ugly" and "Back to Zero" sound leftovers's from SHE'S THE BOSS (which neither wasn't any holy grail for good songs), and he didn't bother to finish Keith's songs properly, and just added formally his contribution. The drive to be 'current' was somehow half-hearted deal. Like not really having a full haert and inspiration. I think "One Hit" is a symptom of that. Theoretically everything is okay there - all the material for a mid-80's stadium hard rock band, but I don't hear any inspiration. Jagger is totally out of fire and focus (makes a lot of noise but without a point), and Keith sounds like trying desperately update his classical riffage to modern surroundings. I don't even mention poor Charlie here. Jimmy Page seems to sound to be the only guy who knows what is doing. And this supposedly is the strongest original cut in the album.

I also remember listening the labum at first "wow, how different and modern the Stones sound". The full-blown 80's sounds - nothing of the muddiness and circled riffs of UNDERCOVER left (think of "It must Be Hell"). UNDERCOVER tried to update the sound of the band but actually that was just adding lipstick to the classical Pathe Marconi/SOME GIRLS era sound, into which the band was seemingly a bit tired by then, or had emptied their pockets of fresh ideas. DIRTY WORK was something totally different - they really broke themselves free of the recent past. At first that sounded interesting and fresh but I have to admit that the honey moon didn't last long. The cost how they broke free was to give up all the best things they had. That swing. That roll. By the time STEEL WHEELS was released that sounded like a relief - "aah, The Stones sounding like the Stones again!". The simple opener "Sad Sad Sad" sounded so fresh and natural in compared to forced sounds of "One Hit".

But thinking now, decades later, I still rate DIRTY WORK over their three last albums (with STEEL WHEELS I am not so sure). I don't agree that any "The Stones by-numbers" could be better. No, I always valuate interesting mistakes, and not being afraid of making riskies, over safe and sure trivialities. For example, I find "One Hit" actually a contribution in The Stones catalog and enrichening their musical vocabulary whereas, say, "Love Is Strong" or "Rough Justice" are rather insignificant things. But it is The Stones and their incredible journey through the decades, that learned me to appreciate that point in music. "Who wants Yesterday's Papers? Who wants Yesterday's Girl?"...

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-19 20:28 by Doxa.

Winning Ugly is a great song with so-so execution. Why 'I was brought up to cheat, as long as the referee isn't looking' is cliche I don't quite get. Wouldn't it have to be an overused concept to be cliche? I think the boys let Mick down on this one.

One Hit is classic rusty razor blade Stones. Harlem Shuffle their last great cover. Hold Back, another great set of lyrics with crap instrumentation. Back to Zero is a mess. Fight/Dirty Work/Had It With You proves that bringing Ron Wood in on the song credit produces throwaway suckery. Too Rude and Sleep Tonight have sweet vocals. It's an orphan album no one seems that concerned with finishing. You can hear the seams in places. Not a great listening experience.

never understood what others hear in 'one hit.' dull as dishwater...and it reeeeeeeks of that faux-macho jagger vocal persona....like the page solo, but that's about all there is that's of interest to me....

i agree with skippy on winning ugly. if that's not a horrible song, then there's no such thing as a horrible song. the title should read:

Winning Ugly (this is a horrible song)

Quote
StonesTod
i agree with skippy on winning ugly. if that's not a horrible song, then there's no such thing as a horrible song. the title should read:

Winning Ugly (this is a horrible song)

or, "Winning Ugly (but Losing Beautifully)"

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
StonesTod
i agree with skippy on winning ugly. if that's not a horrible song, then there's no such thing as a horrible song. the title should read:

Winning Ugly (this is a horrible song)

or, "Winning Ugly (but Losing Beautifully)"

yeah, but with my suggestion, the listener is given due notice and warning. alternatively, they could have issued the album with a warning label, like they do the ones with explicit lyrics...only in this case: Warning! This Album Contains Songs Not Suitable for Listening



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-19 21:29 by StonesTod.

I would guess that most people in this thread who made positive or half-positive posts about the Dirty Work album got into Rolling Stones in 1982-1988, and didn't really "compare it" with the golden era or anything, when starting to appreciate parts of the album.

I still like 3-4 songs on Dirty Work, but I remember I used to listen to the entire album....or cassette in the 80s, and did dig everything there; except for Back To Zero and Winning Ugly. Something I probably wouldn't have, if I had been digesting the great Rolling Stones albums before that



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-19 21:25 by Erik_Snow.

Just dropped into this thread after a while off. It reminded me of a simliar subject Why Dirty Work Is Bashed a few months ago.
So, here is what I wrote (with slight changes, to be precise) then:


"It is bashed because it is a Keith solo album. Consider no WW III shit going between Mick and him, the ideas they had in mind when they met in the studio must have been She's the Boss in Mick's mind and more or less this in Keith's.

Let me suggest it would have sounded like this and Dirty Work still would have been a good title despite the song being dropped from it:

1 One Hit (To The Body)
2 Fight
3 Harlem Shuffle
4 Hard Woman
5 Too Rude

6 Lonely At The Top
7 Just Another Night
8 Lucky In Love
9 Had It With You
10 Sleep Tonight / Key To The Highway

Criteria are:
Ratio between Mick and Keith songs
(plus Ronnie influence - see Pretty Beat Up of the the album before),
song released on single,
played live (Mick played Harlem Shuffle and One Hit on his solo tour!),
played on tv,
video existing.

If you audio-translate this in a Glimmer Twins produced record, everybody here on the board would still cheer on that ultra successful album and the magazines would announce any successor as the best Stones album since - no, not Some Girls... - Dirty Work!"



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-19 21:42 by JJHMick.

Quote
Erik_Snow
I would guess that most people in this thread who made positive or half-positive posts
about the Dirty Work album got into Rolling Stones in 1982-1988

smile: always glad to be an exception to a generalization! thanks Erik_Snow honey :E
you're right that i didn't compare it with anything, though. that kind of comparison doesn't come natural to me -
and i'm glad it doesn't



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-19 21:44 by with sssoul.

again with the erik honey...

Quote
StonesTod
again with the erik honey...

I think it has a nice ring to it...! The name "StonesTod" on the other hand doesn't fit with the "honey"-word. This is no offense, it's all about phonetics



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-19 21:49 by Erik_Snow.

... right.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-19 22:07 by with sssoul.

I like that!


WARNING! THIS ALBUM CONTAINS SONGS NOT SUITABLE FOR LISTENING

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
StonesTod
again with the erik honey...

I think it has a nice ring to it...! The name "StonesTod" on the other hand doesn't fit with the "honey"-word. This is no offense, it's all about phonetics

ok...well, how does "stonestod jackass" work, phonetically speaking? i just don't wanna be left out....

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
StonesTod
again with the erik honey...

I think it has a nice ring to it...! The name "StonesTod" on the other hand doesn't fit with the "honey"-word. This is no offense, it's all about phonetics

ok...well, how does "stonestod jackass" work, phonetically speaking? i just don't wanna be left out....

The "ja" and "ck" doesn't fit with Stonestod, at all, I'm afraid. But "Stonestod lamppost" for instance would be OK



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-19 23:17 by Erik_Snow.

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
I like that!


WARNING! THIS ALBUM CONTAINS SONGS NOT SUITABLE FOR LISTENING

coulda been a great marketing gimmick, too. think of all the casual fans who maybe wouldn't have been interested in buying...but they see a warning like this and they just gotta see if they can find out wtf the stones are talking about...then they hear back to zero, winning ugly, hold back....and they go, "those dudes are right!" another missed opportunity....

Quote
StonesTod
never understood what others hear in 'one hit.' dull as dishwater...and it reeeeeeeks of that faux-macho jagger vocal persona....like the page solo, but that's about all there is that's of interest to me....

But...it reminds so many people of Street Fighting Man!

I loved DIRTY WORK when it came out right from the start. It was an album I got never tiered with, to hear it loud and louder, on an on. It still has pressure, power and drive. So much more than Voodoo lounge or Bridges to Babylon. And for me, "Sleep tonight" was the last good Keith-song on an Stones-album!

I remember, when it came out most critics loved it! But suddenly - I do not remember when - 10, 15 or 20 years later most critics found out, that it was an bad album! Why so suddenly? I guess, it is because most critics write and read all that shit one from another. And if it has an image, than some fans do believe them, too!

In the old days "Exile" had not the IMAGE to be the best Stones album ever! This was written and declared for truth by critics around the Voodoo Lounge period. And I remember that Voodoo L. was declared to be the 2nd best album after "Exile"! Bullshit! Mick said, that EXILE was overrated.
A little bit true!

DIRTY WORK was underrated. Very true!

Quote
mabo
I loved DIRTY WORK when it came out right from the start. It was an album I got never tiered with, to hear it loud and louder, on an on. It still has pressure, power and drive. So much more than Voodoo lounge or Bridges to Babylon. And for me, "Sleep tonight" was the last good Keith-song on an Stones-album!

I remember, when it came out most critics loved it! But suddenly - I do not remember when - 10, 15 or 20 years later most critics found out, that it was an bad album! Why so suddenly? I guess, it is because most critics write and read all that shit one from another. And if it has an image, than some fans do believe them, too!

In the old days "Exile" had not the IMAGE to be the best Stones album ever! This was written and declared for truth by critics around the Voodoo Lounge period. And I remember that Voodoo L. was declared to be the 2nd best album after "Exile"! Bullshit! Mick said, that EXILE was overrated.
A little bit true!

DIRTY WORK was underrated. Very true!

hey...maybe you're right...if we could only find that one @#$%& journalist that changed his mind on the album, convincing all the other journalists in the world, and thereby convincing us that Dirty Work was a bad album...if we could get that bastard to print a retraction...well, this could actually be their best album!

If only we knew who it was...

sigh. okay, i confess.

Quote
StonesTod
sigh. okay, i confess.

It's OK. This album is very mickscarey.

Ok, I give up. Still think WU is a good song.

But one or two stupid lines don't ruin a whole song for me. Even Under The Radar has one: "I phoned your mother... she tried to date me".



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-20 04:39 by Hillside Blues.

Quote
Hillside Blues
Ok, I give up. Still think WU is a good song.

But one or two stupid lines don't ruin a whole song for me. Even Under The Radar has one: "I phoned your mother... she tried to date me".

That's a funny line actually, given how old Mick is.

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
I like that!


WARNING! THIS ALBUM CONTAINS SONGS NOT SUITABLE FOR LISTENING

Haha, wish I'd have paid attention to that, would have saved me lots of time!

It's amusing how folks that claim to dislike DW discuss it so compulsively.

The lady doth protest too much, me thinks.

Quote
Glam Descendant
It's amusing how folks that claim to dislike DW discuss it so compulsively.

The lady doth protest too much, me thinks.

exactly and they do over and over in thread after thread about it.

It has been fun/amusing to peruse this thread (and other similar threads) reading the preaching disdain for this album (and a couple of other Stones albums)... it is funny to imagine some with pencils tighly clinched in teeth, noses pointed to the sky, as they blather on and on telling us how to feel about this album, and if we dont agree/submit then we must be a particular type of fan. LOL, uh OK.... anyway.... if you are not too busy, could you tell us a couple of hundred more times how you demand us to feel about "Dirty Work"? pencils set?... noses up?... ready?... GO!!

Quote
JJHMick
Just dropped into this thread after a while off. It reminded me of a simliar subject Why Dirty Work Is Bashed a few months ago.
So, here is what I wrote (with slight changes, to be precise) then:


"It is bashed because it is a Keith solo album. Consider no WW III shit going between Mick and him, the ideas they had in mind when they met in the studio must have been She's the Boss in Mick's mind and more or less this in Keith's.

Let me suggest it would have sounded like this and Dirty Work still would have been a good title despite the song being dropped from it:

1 One Hit (To The Body)
2 Fight
3 Harlem Shuffle
4 Hard Woman
5 Too Rude

6 Lonely At The Top
7 Just Another Night
8 Lucky In Love
9 Had It With You
10 Sleep Tonight / Key To The Highway

Criteria are:
Ratio between Mick and Keith songs
(plus Ronnie influence - see Pretty Beat Up of the the album before),
song released on single,
played live (Mick played Harlem Shuffle and One Hit on his solo tour!),
played on tv,
video existing.

If you audio-translate this in a Glimmer Twins produced record, everybody here on the board would still cheer on that ultra successful album and the magazines would announce any successor as the best Stones album since - no, not Some Girls... - Dirty Work!"

Good suggestion, but imo Lucky In Love is even worse than Back To Zero. With Hard Woman instead you'll have a good album.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
JJHMick
Just dropped into this thread after a while off. It reminded me of a simliar subject Why Dirty Work Is Bashed a few months ago.
So, here is what I wrote (with slight changes, to be precise) then:


"It is bashed because it is a Keith solo album. Consider no WW III shit going between Mick and him, the ideas they had in mind when they met in the studio must have been She's the Boss in Mick's mind and more or less this in Keith's.

Let me suggest it would have sounded like this and Dirty Work still would have been a good title despite the song being dropped from it:

1 One Hit (To The Body)
2 Fight
3 Harlem Shuffle
4 Hard Woman
5 Too Rude

6 Lonely At The Top
7 Just Another Night
8 Lucky In Love
9 Had It With You
10 Sleep Tonight / Key To The Highway

Criteria are:
Ratio between Mick and Keith songs
(plus Ronnie influence - see Pretty Beat Up of the the album before),
song released on single,
played live (Mick played Harlem Shuffle and One Hit on his solo tour!),
played on tv,
video existing.

If you audio-translate this in a Glimmer Twins produced record, everybody here on the board would still cheer on that ultra successful album and the magazines would announce any successor as the best Stones album since - no, not Some Girls... - Dirty Work!"

Good suggestion, but imo Lucky In Love is even worse than Back To Zero. With Hard Woman instead you'll have a good album.

So you'd want "Hard Woman" on *both* sides? Granted there were 2 versions but that seems like overkill, non?

DW is a greta little album, it ain't Exile but it pisses over everything else done that year. And DW, Hold Back, BTZ, HIWY and Fight are masterpieces.

IT IS AN ANGRY record for God's sake. Ain't suppose to listen to it when you're happy an' in love, but when the sh*t hits the fan it is a GREAT album to recieve strenght from.

Are all you IORRians happily married, rich play boys or what?!?!?!

You're a rag trade girl, You're the queen of porn, You're the easiest lay on the white house lawn!!

Quote
Glam Descendant

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
JJHMick
Just dropped into this thread after a while off. It reminded me of a simliar subject Why Dirty Work Is Bashed a few months ago.
So, here is what I wrote (with slight changes, to be precise) then:


"It is bashed because it is a Keith solo album. Consider no WW III shit going between Mick and him, the ideas they had in mind when they met in the studio must have been She's the Boss in Mick's mind and more or less this in Keith's.

Let me suggest it would have sounded like this and Dirty Work still would have been a good title despite the song being dropped from it:

1 One Hit (To The Body)
2 Fight
3 Harlem Shuffle
4 Hard Woman
5 Too Rude

6 Lonely At The Top
7 Just Another Night
8 Lucky In Love
9 Had It With You
10 Sleep Tonight / Key To The Highway

Criteria are:
Ratio between Mick and Keith songs
(plus Ronnie influence - see Pretty Beat Up of the the album before),
song released on single,
played live (Mick played Harlem Shuffle and One Hit on his solo tour!),
played on tv,
video existing.

If you audio-translate this in a Glimmer Twins produced record, everybody here on the board would still cheer on that ultra successful album and the magazines would announce any successor as the best Stones album since - no, not Some Girls... - Dirty Work!"

Good suggestion, but imo Lucky In Love is even worse than Back To Zero. With Hard Woman instead you'll have a good album.

So you'd want "Hard Woman" on *both* sides? Granted there were 2 versions but that seems like overkill, non?

LOL! I didn't notice

Bring on Secrets, then...