Tell Me :
Talk
Spot on
That's your view. My problem with punk music in general is that at the time it didn't matter that they couldn't play, it was all about the message. But now, 25 years later, the message has become obsolete, and all that's left is music played by people who couldn't play. I find 90% of punk music just totally outdated and unlistenable.
Mathijs
I think that's a valid point, especially about the records since '89. In fact I agree with everything you say here. I just think the material on Undercover isn't very strong.
Better than Some Girls or Tattoo You? Really?
Nonsense. Hard rock / metal is as big as ever, just like the Stones and the Beatles. (The Stones and Beatles had a bigger percentage of the young music biz in the 60s, but their number of fans and their musical legacy is huge today.)
Music from the pre-internet-era may be "prehistoric", but to me it seems like little new music has been invented during the last 15 years, and the internet has made all the artists of the '60s/70s/80s popular among a bigger audience. You have tons of kids -- and adults -- watching youtube clips from bygone eras, while the new music of today is influenced by "prehistoric" artists more than ever.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 11:18 by LieB.
I adore those albums but yeah, absolutely: UC is More dangerous, more adventurous, better lyrics ... a band exploring their options rather than playing it safe. With the possible exception of parts of B2B, they never really have gone there since.
SG is a near-perfect record but it's *safe*, it plays within certain well-established boundaries. It's not as daring as UC.
YMMV of course.
Edited to add: it sounds like I'm just echoing what Mathijs already wrote but I had not yet read his comments when I wrote this; I guess we're just on the same page.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 11:30 by Glam Descendant.
Yes, I agree with Mathijs's point as well. But as with yours as well that the problem with UNDERCOVER was that the material was not strong enough to make the drive to make something novel to be resulted with remarkable results. Like I said before, to me most of the renventions of sound and music are more little tricks: the band is so rooted on its basic sound of Pathe marconi era that it jus can't transform itself convincingly enough. And when it does, it sounds somehow forced and unnatural. I think the key tracks to say something novel are "Undercover of The Night" and "Too Much Blood" (I think it is not co-incidental that both sides of the album start with these two). And as far as I know those are Jagger's songs. That's where Jagger's heart is - where he sees the sound of the day, and how whe wants to develop the Stones sound further (which will continue and end up in his solo career). The rest of the material is mostly mediocre and typical Pathe Marconi stuff; probably more down to earth it is, more Richards contribution there is in it. Most of the new production ideas to make a difference to familiar stuff are, like I said, just little tricks to color old ideas (seitan gave us nice examples of those). I suppose the tension between Mick's will to be current, and Keith's more close to roots, didn't any longer resulted in inspired music. No, I would call most of it as a compromise solution (and some of the things, like "Feel On Baby", sounding like early incarnations of "Mighty Well Get Juiced" (or how that horrible piece is called)- two realms meeting other non-convincly and leaving an artificial impression).
In a way the Stones continued this tendency to dare something novel still in DIRTY WORK that is the last album they actually tried to update their sound and music and reinvent themselves according to the times. But that time the results were clearly worse, even terrible in Stonesian terms. And Jagger seemingly had lost his hope on the band, and seemingly was not any longer artistically caring the results. Whereas in UNDERCOVER Jagger songs are key songs and heading the band to new horizons, here they are fillers and sound like his solo album left-overs. Keith's ideas - clearly the leading ones of the album - to update his music to suit to the current guitar rock tendencies resulted mostly unconvincing and forced results (especially "One Hit"), and Jagger contributed "couldn't care less" attitude to them. Keith Richards was almost totally 'out' or 'confused' in 1986, and he contributed to killing of 'classical' Stones groove and swing at least as efficiently as Jagger had tried with his trendy tendencies. Was that his mid-life crisis to to be current (or impress Jagger?), but what he did in DIRTY WORK and as in Aretha's "Jumpin Jack Flash" that he produced (?), shows that he was totally lost in the sounds of the day. Against that background the wonderful, down-to-earth, earthy space-capturing TALK IS CHEAP was almost like the original "Jumpin Jack Flash" compared to soundscape of SATANIC MAJESTIES.
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 11:55 by Doxa.
If you take "Feel on Baby" (I simply can't stand it) out of the list, that's the best songs of the album you have there. Yeah, they are "well-crafted", that is, technically properly written, but that doesn't make them great songs. I don't find, for example, "Undercover of the Night" musically very inspiring. It has nice lyrics, and helluva drive, but somehow musically thin core as a composition. In that particual song the current trics actaully lift up the song musically. Without its sound experiments it would be rather mediocre tune. For a good reason, it never reached a classical status in Stones canon. I think the same basically hold to other hit potential song - "Too Much Blood" - To me its nice arrangement and production ideas, exotic sound experiments hides some of its musical emptiness. There is something annoying or cheap in its melody lines. The rap part is good one, but still somehow tricky (and not so natural as in "Shattered"). But seemingly these two songs - that are alright an sich - are the ones with which the album will live or die. There some much invested in them, and since they don't fully hit their mark, the album is doomed to fall with them.
"She Was Hot", like 71Tele said in his own words, belongs to their safe and sure notalgia area. I also love its melodic chorus which interestingly breaks the form of trad. Chuck Berry rocker. An equalevent of "Star Star" (that already was a nostalgia cut already in 1973!). For a trad. Rolling Stones fan that is easily the easiest piece to love in the album. Even its video emphasized its nostalgic nature. (It sounds like all the songs I have talked so far were written a specific MTV video in their mind). Probably the best song in the album, even though its lyrical main line starts to sound annoying to a mature mind. It nastily points out to banality we will hear some day in VOODOO LOUNGE.
"Too Tough" and "All The Way Down" are what I called typical Pathe Marconi rockers. The band smokes even though the tunes are rather mediocre ones. Not much inspiration in creating them. The danger of autopolitism is quite near here. In better album these would have been good fillers. Now they are the best of the rest.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 12:43 by Doxa.
"Undercover being a thin composition"... By that criteria, most of the Stones's songs are that, too.
I'm not enjoying Shake Your Hips because of Harpo's interesting composition, I just love the sound, the groove, the use of words and the swing. SWH has the same effect on me.
That goes for numerous Stones-numbers as well. GS has three chords, but the arranging and the energy is ace. Tumbling Dice is a very standard-written song. Still it's one of the best tracks they ever wrote. There is nothing unique about the songwriting on All Down The Line, but the performance is stellar. And list could go on and on...
She Was Hot seemingly is a Berry rocker, but in no way have Berry made a chorus like that, nor have the Stones. And we should be able to agree on a chorus being an important part of the song. Also, on the verses, Mick is singing fantastically, and contributes to this song being way superior to other three chord-rockers as Star Star and Respectable (I like both of those songs, btw).
Undercover goes in the same bag as Miss You, Hot Stuff, Dance and Fingerprint File. What I find interesting is that all of those songs are great, despite their lack of normal composition structure. The reason? The groove and the performance.
I always see SWH as a development of Neighbors. Also Neighbors is based on a classic I - V - IV progression for the verses and a strong melodic chorus in minor. In Hot the contrast is more dramatic because the verse is an even simpler I - V progression and the melody of chorus is underlied by the lead guitar.
C
Yeah, you have the change to the minor chord in the bridge on Neighbours as well, but I find the chorus on She Was Hot more intricate and well-crafted, way more melodic than the Stones use to write. I also like the rhythm change in the chorus in the ending. Awesome rhythm guitars as well (just love that analogue delay - gonna get me one of those)
Um, the songs...
I mean we all like what we like, but how have songs like Feel On Baby and the others you mentioned really stood up in the canon? How many times have the Stones performed them in all the hundreds of shows and years of touring since UC came out? That would be none (excepting She Was Hot). I think these songs are mediocre. So in the case of the songs you mentioned, to answer your question, both the songs and the production are wanting, imo.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 17:53 by 71Tele.
Yes, that´s my view - who´s view do you want me to say ?
Let´s talk about your view then - you are trying to tell me that the message of punk bands have become obsolete, - so can you tell me - when did human rights, fight against racism and terrorism, helping the homeless and respecting the environment, become obsolete ideas ? - That seems to be your view !!
So speakin of your view - are you a right wing nazi or are you just talkin rubbish here ??
Woah...no need to bring out the Nazi analogies over a difference of opinion about music!
Youre right - but it´s so stupid - so idiotic - to go that far as to say that messages of entire genre of music has become obsolete. specially when you consider that punks were against fasicism.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 18:53 by seitan.
I think whether or not punk lived up to its early brash promise and energy is a good subject for debate. My own view is that its like any other genre: The cream rose to the top. The truly talented people and groups lasted and some of the trendier stuff that was musically weaker was forgotten or now sounds dated. Music is about more than attitude, though admittedly attitude can go a long way in rock 'n roll. Just look at the Stones. But in their case they had the musical and songwriting chops to go with it.
I agree with you. There was lot talented songwriters and great musicians in the punk scene, and lot of crap too...but lot of the songs from the punk era are still relevant to this day. The world hasnt gotten that much better. all you have to do is look around...
It´s like what punk rocker Stiv Bators wrote back then:
Video games train the kids for war.
Army chic in high-fashion stores.
Law and order has done their job.
Prisons are filled while the rich still rob.
cause ignorance is their power tool.
You only know what they want you to know.
You think television cannot lie.
but they control media with smokescreen eyes.
They scare us all with threats of war.
So we forget just how bad things are.
The silence of conspiracy.
Slaughtered on the altar of apathy.
Open your eyes - and see the lies right in front of ya !
It´s not obsolete.
Let´s meet here on 22th february 2030 here at 9:30 CET. We will see who is right now.
Nuts
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: February 22, 2012 10:10
Quote
DoxaQuote
Palace Revolution 2000
Is it the last real Stones record?
And I think with this album he [Mick] discovered that the band just couldn't transform enough its sound or cope with the times so efficiently as before.
- Doxa
Spot on
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: February 22, 2012 10:12
Quote
seitan
The ’80s were a turbulent decade as the rich got richer and the poor hung on for dear life. Alternative punk bands railed against the political policies of neo nazis like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, while bores like Jagger had no real conscience about pandering to things like violence and sexism.
That's your view. My problem with punk music in general is that at the time it didn't matter that they couldn't play, it was all about the message. But now, 25 years later, the message has become obsolete, and all that's left is music played by people who couldn't play. I find 90% of punk music just totally outdated and unlistenable.
Mathijs
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: February 22, 2012 10:24
Quote
MathijsQuote
71Tele
I think the comment above which most rings true for me is that they had gone so far away from anything with blues or country roots. So much artifice and production.
What I like is that they dared to stray away from the tried and tested, been there and done it, blues and country roots. In that field they just didn't have to say, nor could they say anything anymore, as has been proven by each and every record since 1989. Every record since '89 is cliche Stones music, really nothing new, and lacking any danger and inspiration. Undercover is from a time when they where still a band that musically mattered, that had not yet involved yet into this Stones Tribute Nostalgia act. For that alone I admire the album.
Mathijs
I think that's a valid point, especially about the records since '89. In fact I agree with everything you say here. I just think the material on Undercover isn't very strong.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
Glam Descendant
()
Date: February 22, 2012 10:27
UNDERCOVER is their best post-EXILE album imo.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: February 22, 2012 10:33
Quote
Glam Descendant
UNDERCOVER is their best post-EXILE album imo.
Better than Some Girls or Tattoo You? Really?
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
emotionalbarbecue
()
Date: February 22, 2012 10:35
Quote
MathijsQuote
seitan
I find 90% of punk music just totally outdated and unlistenable.
Mathijs
Let alone heavy metal....(and all its by-products...death metal, trash metal, speed metal, daisy metal, melted metal, mother in law metal and so on...).
May be in the next decades just litle bunch of Beatles and Stones songs will be remembered. And it will be almost impossible to hear them knowing the context in which they were composed (this late thing may be presently happening ...).
Everything belonging to preinternet era it will be viewed as "prehistoric"....
Dust in the wind...
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
KeithNacho
()
Date: February 22, 2012 11:10
KR was dissapointed and angry because of the mixes of this album
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
LieB
()
Date: February 22, 2012 11:17
Quote
emotionalbarbecueQuote
Mathijs
I find 90% of punk music just totally outdated and unlistenable.
Mathijs
Let alone heavy metal....(and all its by-products...death metal, trash metal, speed metal, daisy metal, melted metal, mother in law metal and so on...).
May be in the next decades just litle bunch of Beatles and Stones songs will be remembered. And it will be almost impossible to hear them knowing the context in which they were composed (this late thing may be presently happening ...).
Everything belonging to preinternet era it will be viewed as "prehistoric"....
Dust in the wind...
Nonsense. Hard rock / metal is as big as ever, just like the Stones and the Beatles. (The Stones and Beatles had a bigger percentage of the young music biz in the 60s, but their number of fans and their musical legacy is huge today.)
Music from the pre-internet-era may be "prehistoric", but to me it seems like little new music has been invented during the last 15 years, and the internet has made all the artists of the '60s/70s/80s popular among a bigger audience. You have tons of kids -- and adults -- watching youtube clips from bygone eras, while the new music of today is influenced by "prehistoric" artists more than ever.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 11:18 by LieB.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
Glam Descendant
()
Date: February 22, 2012 11:18
Quote
71TeleQuote
Glam Descendant
UNDERCOVER is their best post-EXILE album imo.
Better than Some Girls or Tattoo You? Really?
I adore those albums but yeah, absolutely: UC is More dangerous, more adventurous, better lyrics ... a band exploring their options rather than playing it safe. With the possible exception of parts of B2B, they never really have gone there since.
SG is a near-perfect record but it's *safe*, it plays within certain well-established boundaries. It's not as daring as UC.
YMMV of course.
Edited to add: it sounds like I'm just echoing what Mathijs already wrote but I had not yet read his comments when I wrote this; I guess we're just on the same page.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 11:30 by Glam Descendant.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
wandering spirit
()
Date: February 22, 2012 11:34
I agree with those of you who consider Undercover the last stones album where they tried to be be inovative and relevant, to take new paths. its one of my (admittingly many
)) favourite stones records. and one more thing i like about it: it is a very rocking album, without ballads and slow songs....
1. Undercover - 10. great vocals by Mick and great guitars. this song i love though the stones dont sound like the stones))
2. She Was Hot - 9. nice, i like it, more tradional stones rocker.
3.Tie You Up - 9. More great vocals by Mick, great guitars, fantastic break.
4. Wanna Hold You 5.- A bit boring.
5. Feel On Baby 7. - for me maybe the best stones reggae, great bass.
6. Too Much Blood 6. - nasty lyrics, inovative, but not really my cup of tea.
7. Pretty Beat Up - 5. one more more typical stones rocker, but not really my cup of coffee...
8. Too Tough - 10. Great tradional stones rocker, great vocal delivery.
All The Way Down - 8. Great chorus, great vocals, great guitars.
It Must Be Hell - 8. like someone already stated, it is the same riff as Honky Tonk and Soul Survivor, but it its good!
)) favourite stones records. and one more thing i like about it: it is a very rocking album, without ballads and slow songs....1. Undercover - 10. great vocals by Mick and great guitars. this song i love though the stones dont sound like the stones
))2. She Was Hot - 9. nice, i like it, more tradional stones rocker.
3.Tie You Up - 9. More great vocals by Mick, great guitars, fantastic break.
4. Wanna Hold You 5.- A bit boring.
5. Feel On Baby 7. - for me maybe the best stones reggae, great bass.
6. Too Much Blood 6. - nasty lyrics, inovative, but not really my cup of tea.
7. Pretty Beat Up - 5. one more more typical stones rocker, but not really my cup of coffee...
8. Too Tough - 10. Great tradional stones rocker, great vocal delivery.
All The Way Down - 8. Great chorus, great vocals, great guitars.
It Must Be Hell - 8. like someone already stated, it is the same riff as Honky Tonk and Soul Survivor, but it its good!
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: February 22, 2012 11:37
Quote
71TeleQuote
MathijsQuote
71Tele
I think the comment above which most rings true for me is that they had gone so far away from anything with blues or country roots. So much artifice and production.
What I like is that they dared to stray away from the tried and tested, been there and done it, blues and country roots. In that field they just didn't have to say, nor could they say anything anymore, as has been proven by each and every record since 1989. Every record since '89 is cliche Stones music, really nothing new, and lacking any danger and inspiration. Undercover is from a time when they where still a band that musically mattered, that had not yet involved yet into this Stones Tribute Nostalgia act. For that alone I admire the album.
Mathijs
I think that's a valid point, especially about the records since '89. In fact I agree with everything you say here. I just think the material on Undercover isn't very strong.
Yes, I agree with Mathijs's point as well. But as with yours as well that the problem with UNDERCOVER was that the material was not strong enough to make the drive to make something novel to be resulted with remarkable results. Like I said before, to me most of the renventions of sound and music are more little tricks: the band is so rooted on its basic sound of Pathe marconi era that it jus can't transform itself convincingly enough. And when it does, it sounds somehow forced and unnatural. I think the key tracks to say something novel are "Undercover of The Night" and "Too Much Blood" (I think it is not co-incidental that both sides of the album start with these two). And as far as I know those are Jagger's songs. That's where Jagger's heart is - where he sees the sound of the day, and how whe wants to develop the Stones sound further (which will continue and end up in his solo career). The rest of the material is mostly mediocre and typical Pathe Marconi stuff; probably more down to earth it is, more Richards contribution there is in it. Most of the new production ideas to make a difference to familiar stuff are, like I said, just little tricks to color old ideas (seitan gave us nice examples of those). I suppose the tension between Mick's will to be current, and Keith's more close to roots, didn't any longer resulted in inspired music. No, I would call most of it as a compromise solution (and some of the things, like "Feel On Baby", sounding like early incarnations of "Mighty Well Get Juiced" (or how that horrible piece is called)- two realms meeting other non-convincly and leaving an artificial impression).
In a way the Stones continued this tendency to dare something novel still in DIRTY WORK that is the last album they actually tried to update their sound and music and reinvent themselves according to the times. But that time the results were clearly worse, even terrible in Stonesian terms. And Jagger seemingly had lost his hope on the band, and seemingly was not any longer artistically caring the results. Whereas in UNDERCOVER Jagger songs are key songs and heading the band to new horizons, here they are fillers and sound like his solo album left-overs. Keith's ideas - clearly the leading ones of the album - to update his music to suit to the current guitar rock tendencies resulted mostly unconvincing and forced results (especially "One Hit"), and Jagger contributed "couldn't care less" attitude to them. Keith Richards was almost totally 'out' or 'confused' in 1986, and he contributed to killing of 'classical' Stones groove and swing at least as efficiently as Jagger had tried with his trendy tendencies. Was that his mid-life crisis to to be current (or impress Jagger?), but what he did in DIRTY WORK and as in Aretha's "Jumpin Jack Flash" that he produced (?), shows that he was totally lost in the sounds of the day. Against that background the wonderful, down-to-earth, earthy space-capturing TALK IS CHEAP was almost like the original "Jumpin Jack Flash" compared to soundscape of SATANIC MAJESTIES.
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 11:55 by Doxa.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: February 22, 2012 11:47
Some people like cupcakes better. I for one care less for them!
2 1 2 0
2 1 2 0
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 22, 2012 11:48
What exactly wasn't strong with the material on UC? This is really interesting, I think.
Songs like Undercover, She Was Hot, Feel On Baby, Too Much Blood, Too Tough and All The Way Down are to me well-crafted song, and also brilliantly performed.
Are you sure about the songs not being up to par, or is it within the production (synths, drum machines etc.) the critics have a beef with this album? Would be interesting to know.
She Was Hot has maybe the best chorus the Stones ever have written, imo. Rocking, melodic, dynamic and edgy.
Songs like Undercover, She Was Hot, Feel On Baby, Too Much Blood, Too Tough and All The Way Down are to me well-crafted song, and also brilliantly performed.
Are you sure about the songs not being up to par, or is it within the production (synths, drum machines etc.) the critics have a beef with this album? Would be interesting to know.
She Was Hot has maybe the best chorus the Stones ever have written, imo. Rocking, melodic, dynamic and edgy.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
Glam Descendant
()
Date: February 22, 2012 11:53
>Better than Some Girls or Tattoo You? Really?
I failed to acknowledge TY: "Heaven" was exceptional.
I failed to acknowledge TY: "Heaven" was exceptional.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
Glam Descendant
()
Date: February 22, 2012 11:59
> What exactly wasn't strong with the material on UC?
I concur, I don't comprehend that complaint either. If anything it seemed to me like a reinvigoration.
I concur, I don't comprehend that complaint either. If anything it seemed to me like a reinvigoration.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: February 22, 2012 12:26
Quote
DandelionPowderman
What exactly wasn't strong with the material on UC? This is really interesting, I think.
Songs like Undercover, She Was Hot, Feel On Baby, Too Much Blood, Too Tough and All The Way Down are to me well-crafted song, and also brilliantly performed.
Are you sure about the songs not being up to par, or is it within the production (synths, drum machines etc.) the critics have a beef with this album? Would be interesting to know.
She Was Hot has maybe the best chorus the Stones ever have written, imo. Rocking, melodic, dynamic and edgy.
If you take "Feel on Baby" (I simply can't stand it) out of the list, that's the best songs of the album you have there. Yeah, they are "well-crafted", that is, technically properly written, but that doesn't make them great songs. I don't find, for example, "Undercover of the Night" musically very inspiring. It has nice lyrics, and helluva drive, but somehow musically thin core as a composition. In that particual song the current trics actaully lift up the song musically. Without its sound experiments it would be rather mediocre tune. For a good reason, it never reached a classical status in Stones canon. I think the same basically hold to other hit potential song - "Too Much Blood" - To me its nice arrangement and production ideas, exotic sound experiments hides some of its musical emptiness. There is something annoying or cheap in its melody lines. The rap part is good one, but still somehow tricky (and not so natural as in "Shattered"). But seemingly these two songs - that are alright an sich - are the ones with which the album will live or die. There some much invested in them, and since they don't fully hit their mark, the album is doomed to fall with them.
"She Was Hot", like 71Tele said in his own words, belongs to their safe and sure notalgia area. I also love its melodic chorus which interestingly breaks the form of trad. Chuck Berry rocker. An equalevent of "Star Star" (that already was a nostalgia cut already in 1973!). For a trad. Rolling Stones fan that is easily the easiest piece to love in the album. Even its video emphasized its nostalgic nature. (It sounds like all the songs I have talked so far were written a specific MTV video in their mind). Probably the best song in the album, even though its lyrical main line starts to sound annoying to a mature mind. It nastily points out to banality we will hear some day in VOODOO LOUNGE.
"Too Tough" and "All The Way Down" are what I called typical Pathe Marconi rockers. The band smokes even though the tunes are rather mediocre ones. Not much inspiration in creating them. The danger of autopolitism is quite near here. In better album these would have been good fillers. Now they are the best of the rest.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 12:43 by Doxa.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 22, 2012 12:44
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
What exactly wasn't strong with the material on UC? This is really interesting, I think.
Songs like Undercover, She Was Hot, Feel On Baby, Too Much Blood, Too Tough and All The Way Down are to me well-crafted song, and also brilliantly performed.
Are you sure about the songs not being up to par, or is it within the production (synths, drum machines etc.) the critics have a beef with this album? Would be interesting to know.
She Was Hot has maybe the best chorus the Stones ever have written, imo. Rocking, melodic, dynamic and edgy.
If you take "Feel on Baby" (I simply can't stand it) out of the list, that's the best songs of the album you have there. Yeah, they are "well-crafted", thay is, techically properly written, but that doesn't make them great songs. I don't find, for example, "Undercover of the Night" musically very inspiring. It has nice lyrics, and helluva drive, but somehow musically thin core as a composition. In that particual song the current trics actaully lift up the song musically. Without its sound experiments it would be rather mediocre tune. For a good reason, it never reached a classical status in Stones canon. I think the same basically hold to other hit potential song - "Too Much Blood" - To me its nice arrangemnet and production ideas, exotic sound experiments hides some of its musical emptiness. There is something annoying or cheap in its melody lines. The rap part is good one, but still somehow tricky. But seemingly these two songs - that are alright an sich - are the ones with which the album will live or die. There some much invested in them, and since they don't fully hit their mark, the album is doomed to fall with them.
"She Was Hot", like 71Tele said in his own words, belongs to their safe and sure notalgia area. I also love its melodic chorus which interestingly breaks the form of trad. Chuck Berry rocker. An equalevent of "Star Star" (that already was a nostalgia cut already in 1973!). For a trad. Rolling Stones fan that is easily the easiest piece to love in the album. Even its video emphasized its nostalgic nature. (It sounds like all the songs I have talked so far were written a specific MTV video in their mind). Probably the best song in the album, even though its lyrical main line starts to sound annoying to a mature mind. It nastily points out to banality we will hear some day in VOODOO LOUNGE.
"Too Tough" and "All The Way Down" are what I called typical Pathe Marconi rockers. The band smokes even though the tunes are rather mediocre ones. Not much inspiration in creating them. The danger of autopolitism is quite near here. In better album these would have been good fillers. Now they are the best of the rest.
- Doxa
"Undercover being a thin composition"... By that criteria, most of the Stones's songs are that, too.
I'm not enjoying Shake Your Hips because of Harpo's interesting composition, I just love the sound, the groove, the use of words and the swing. SWH has the same effect on me.
That goes for numerous Stones-numbers as well. GS has three chords, but the arranging and the energy is ace. Tumbling Dice is a very standard-written song. Still it's one of the best tracks they ever wrote. There is nothing unique about the songwriting on All Down The Line, but the performance is stellar. And list could go on and on...
She Was Hot seemingly is a Berry rocker, but in no way have Berry made a chorus like that, nor have the Stones. And we should be able to agree on a chorus being an important part of the song. Also, on the verses, Mick is singing fantastically, and contributes to this song being way superior to other three chord-rockers as Star Star and Respectable (I like both of those songs, btw).
Undercover goes in the same bag as Miss You, Hot Stuff, Dance and Fingerprint File. What I find interesting is that all of those songs are great, despite their lack of normal composition structure. The reason? The groove and the performance.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 22, 2012 12:49
<"She Was Hot", like 71Tele said in his own words, belongs to their safe and sure notalgia area.>
Yeah, together with Star Star, Rocks Off, Rip This Joint, Respectable, All Down The Line and others, only with a great, great chorus that sounds nothing but contemporary - far from nostalgic.
Yeah, together with Star Star, Rocks Off, Rip This Joint, Respectable, All Down The Line and others, only with a great, great chorus that sounds nothing but contemporary - far from nostalgic.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
liddas
()
Date: February 22, 2012 13:51
Quote
DandelionPowderman
She Was Hot seemingly is a Berry rocker, but in no way have Berry made a chorus like that, nor have the Stones.
I always see SWH as a development of Neighbors. Also Neighbors is based on a classic I - V - IV progression for the verses and a strong melodic chorus in minor. In Hot the contrast is more dramatic because the verse is an even simpler I - V progression and the melody of chorus is underlied by the lead guitar.
C
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 22, 2012 13:54
Quote
liddasQuote
DandelionPowderman
She Was Hot seemingly is a Berry rocker, but in no way have Berry made a chorus like that, nor have the Stones.
I always see SWH as a development of Neighbors. Also Neighbors is based on a classic I - V - IV progression for the verses and a strong melodic chorus in minor. In Hot the contrast is more dramatic because the verse is an even simpler I - V progression and the melody of chorus is underlied by the lead guitar.
C
Yeah, you have the change to the minor chord in the bridge on Neighbours as well, but I find the chorus on She Was Hot more intricate and well-crafted, way more melodic than the Stones use to write. I also like the rhythm change in the chorus in the ending. Awesome rhythm guitars as well (just love that analogue delay - gonna get me one of those)
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: February 22, 2012 17:52
Quote
DandelionPowderman
What exactly wasn't strong with the material on UC? This is really interesting, I think.
Songs like Undercover, She Was Hot, Feel On Baby, Too Much Blood, Too Tough and All The Way Down are to me well-crafted song, and also brilliantly performed.
Are you sure about the songs not being up to par, or is it within the production (synths, drum machines etc.) the critics have a beef with this album? Would be interesting to know.
She Was Hot has maybe the best chorus the Stones ever have written, imo. Rocking, melodic, dynamic and edgy.
Um, the songs...
I mean we all like what we like, but how have songs like Feel On Baby and the others you mentioned really stood up in the canon? How many times have the Stones performed them in all the hundreds of shows and years of touring since UC came out? That would be none (excepting She Was Hot). I think these songs are mediocre. So in the case of the songs you mentioned, to answer your question, both the songs and the production are wanting, imo.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 17:53 by 71Tele.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: February 22, 2012 18:38
Quote
MathijsQuote
seitan
The ’80s were a turbulent decade as the rich got richer and the poor hung on for dear life. Alternative punk bands railed against the political policies of neo nazis like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, while bores like Jagger had no real conscience about pandering to things like violence and sexism.
That's your view. My problem with punk music in general is that at the time it didn't matter that they couldn't play, it was all about the message. But now, 25 years later, the message has become obsolete, and all that's left is music played by people who couldn't play. I find 90% of punk music just totally outdated and unlistenable.
Mathijs
Yes, that´s my view - who´s view do you want me to say ?
Let´s talk about your view then - you are trying to tell me that the message of punk bands have become obsolete, - so can you tell me - when did human rights, fight against racism and terrorism, helping the homeless and respecting the environment, become obsolete ideas ? - That seems to be your view !!
So speakin of your view - are you a right wing nazi or are you just talkin rubbish here ??
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: February 22, 2012 18:44
Quote
seitanQuote
MathijsQuote
seitan
The ’80s were a turbulent decade as the rich got richer and the poor hung on for dear life. Alternative punk bands railed against the political policies of neo nazis like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, while bores like Jagger had no real conscience about pandering to things like violence and sexism.
That's your view. My problem with punk music in general is that at the time it didn't matter that they couldn't play, it was all about the message. But now, 25 years later, the message has become obsolete, and all that's left is music played by people who couldn't play. I find 90% of punk music just totally outdated and unlistenable.
Mathijs
Yes, that´s my view - who´s view do you want me to say ?
Let´s talk about your view then - you are trying to tell me that the message of punk bands have become obsolete, - so can you tell me - when did human rights, fight against racism and terrorism, helping the homeless and respecting the environment, become obsolete ideas ? - That seems to be your view !!
So speakin of your view - are you a right wing nazi or are you just talkin rubbish here ??
Woah...no need to bring out the Nazi analogies over a difference of opinion about music!
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: February 22, 2012 18:50
Calm down guys.
Can we bring the topic back to wigs please.
Thanks.
Can we bring the topic back to wigs please.
Thanks.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: February 22, 2012 18:52
Quote
71TeleQuote
seitanQuote
MathijsQuote
seitan
The ’80s were a turbulent decade as the rich got richer and the poor hung on for dear life. Alternative punk bands railed against the political policies of neo nazis like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, while bores like Jagger had no real conscience about pandering to things like violence and sexism.
That's your view. My problem with punk music in general is that at the time it didn't matter that they couldn't play, it was all about the message. But now, 25 years later, the message has become obsolete, and all that's left is music played by people who couldn't play. I find 90% of punk music just totally outdated and unlistenable.
Mathijs
Yes, that´s my view - who´s view do you want me to say ?
Let´s talk about your view then - you are trying to tell me that the message of punk bands have become obsolete, - so can you tell me - when did human rights, fight against racism and terrorism, helping the homeless and respecting the environment, become obsolete ideas ? - That seems to be your view !!
So speakin of your view - are you a right wing nazi or are you just talkin rubbish here ??
Woah...no need to bring out the Nazi analogies over a difference of opinion about music!
Youre right - but it´s so stupid - so idiotic - to go that far as to say that messages of entire genre of music has become obsolete. specially when you consider that punks were against fasicism.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-22 18:53 by seitan.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: February 22, 2012 19:16
Quote
seitanQuote
71TeleQuote
seitanQuote
MathijsQuote
seitan
The ’80s were a turbulent decade as the rich got richer and the poor hung on for dear life. Alternative punk bands railed against the political policies of neo nazis like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, while bores like Jagger had no real conscience about pandering to things like violence and sexism.
That's your view. My problem with punk music in general is that at the time it didn't matter that they couldn't play, it was all about the message. But now, 25 years later, the message has become obsolete, and all that's left is music played by people who couldn't play. I find 90% of punk music just totally outdated and unlistenable.
Mathijs
Yes, that´s my view - who´s view do you want me to say ?
Let´s talk about your view then - you are trying to tell me that the message of punk bands have become obsolete, - so can you tell me - when did human rights, fight against racism and terrorism, helping the homeless and respecting the environment, become obsolete ideas ? - That seems to be your view !!
So speakin of your view - are you a right wing nazi or are you just talkin rubbish here ??
Woah...no need to bring out the Nazi analogies over a difference of opinion about music!
Youre right - but it´s so stupid - so idiotic - to go that far as to say that messages of entire genre of music has become obsolete. specially when you consider that punks were against fasicism.
I think whether or not punk lived up to its early brash promise and energy is a good subject for debate. My own view is that its like any other genre: The cream rose to the top. The truly talented people and groups lasted and some of the trendier stuff that was musically weaker was forgotten or now sounds dated. Music is about more than attitude, though admittedly attitude can go a long way in rock 'n roll. Just look at the Stones. But in their case they had the musical and songwriting chops to go with it.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: February 22, 2012 19:44
Quote
71TeleQuote
seitanQuote
71TeleQuote
seitanQuote
MathijsQuote
seitan
The ’80s were a turbulent decade as the rich got richer and the poor hung on for dear life. Alternative punk bands railed against the political policies of neo nazis like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, while bores like Jagger had no real conscience about pandering to things like violence and sexism.
That's your view. My problem with punk music in general is that at the time it didn't matter that they couldn't play, it was all about the message. But now, 25 years later, the message has become obsolete, and all that's left is music played by people who couldn't play. I find 90% of punk music just totally outdated and unlistenable.
Mathijs
Yes, that´s my view - who´s view do you want me to say ?
Let´s talk about your view then - you are trying to tell me that the message of punk bands have become obsolete, - so can you tell me - when did human rights, fight against racism and terrorism, helping the homeless and respecting the environment, become obsolete ideas ? - That seems to be your view !!
So speakin of your view - are you a right wing nazi or are you just talkin rubbish here ??
Woah...no need to bring out the Nazi analogies over a difference of opinion about music!
Youre right - but it´s so stupid - so idiotic - to go that far as to say that messages of entire genre of music has become obsolete. specially when you consider that punks were against fasicism.
I think whether or not punk lived up to its early brash promise and energy is a good subject for debate. My own view is that its like any other genre: The cream rose to the top. The truly talented people and groups lasted and some of the trendier stuff that was musically weaker was forgotten or now sounds dated. Music is about more than attitude, though admittedly attitude can go a long way in rock 'n roll. Just look at the Stones. But in their case they had the musical and songwriting chops to go with it.
I agree with you. There was lot talented songwriters and great musicians in the punk scene, and lot of crap too...but lot of the songs from the punk era are still relevant to this day. The world hasnt gotten that much better. all you have to do is look around...
It´s like what punk rocker Stiv Bators wrote back then:
Video games train the kids for war.
Army chic in high-fashion stores.
Law and order has done their job.
Prisons are filled while the rich still rob.
cause ignorance is their power tool.
You only know what they want you to know.
You think television cannot lie.
but they control media with smokescreen eyes.
They scare us all with threats of war.
So we forget just how bad things are.
The silence of conspiracy.
Slaughtered on the altar of apathy.
Open your eyes - and see the lies right in front of ya !
It´s not obsolete.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
emotionalbarbecue
()
Date: February 22, 2012 19:49
Quote
LieBQuote
emotionalbarbecueQuote
Mathijs
I find 90% of punk music just totally outdated and unlistenable.
Mathijs
Let alone heavy metal....(and all its by-products...death metal, trash metal, speed metal, daisy metal, melted metal, mother in law metal and so on...).
May be in the next decades just litle bunch of Beatles and Stones songs will be remembered. And it will be almost impossible to hear them knowing the context in which they were composed (this late thing may be presently happening ...).
Everything belonging to preinternet era it will be viewed as "prehistoric"....
Dust in the wind...
Nonsense. Hard rock / metal is as big as ever, just like the Stones and the Beatles. (The Stones and Beatles had a bigger percentage of the young music biz in the 60s, but their number of fans and their musical legacy is huge today.)
Music from the pre-internet-era may be "prehistoric", but to me it seems like little new music has been invented during the last 15 years, and the internet has made all the artists of the '60s/70s/80s popular among a bigger audience. You have tons of kids -- and adults -- watching youtube clips from bygone eras, while the new music of today is influenced by "prehistoric" artists more than ever.
Let´s meet here on 22th february 2030 here at 9:30 CET. We will see who is right now.
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: February 22, 2012 20:21
Mathijs
When you say that the message of eighties punk rock has become obsolete,
then here we go...here´s punk rock lyrics from the 80´s...It´s written years before 9/11 attacks, before Bush, Obama, Newt and Romney, and it´s great example of the punk rock message of 80´s. Tell me ..is this really obsolete.
this is the Reagan era:
While you were looking at me
The world passed you by
You held your prejudice sacred
And left your dreams behind
While you were looking at me
The homeless stayed in the streets
You learned to drink poisoned water
But never learned how to read
While you were looking at me
Airport security dies
And the smugglers and the terrorists
Just walk right by
'Cause they don't dress like me
They dress like you
They wear suits and ties
Like all you hypocrites do
While you were looking at me
Businessmen bled you dry
You lost control of your government
It's getting scary outside!
While you were looking at me
Your children took the fall
Trying to be Mommy and Daddy
With dope and alcohol
You censor people like me
But it won't do you no good
The truth's gonna get through
No matter what you do
- Michael Monroe on his first solo album
just two years after Undercover was being released..
When you say that the message of eighties punk rock has become obsolete,
then here we go...here´s punk rock lyrics from the 80´s...It´s written years before 9/11 attacks, before Bush, Obama, Newt and Romney, and it´s great example of the punk rock message of 80´s. Tell me ..is this really obsolete.
this is the Reagan era:
While you were looking at me
The world passed you by
You held your prejudice sacred
And left your dreams behind
While you were looking at me
The homeless stayed in the streets
You learned to drink poisoned water
But never learned how to read
While you were looking at me
Airport security dies
And the smugglers and the terrorists
Just walk right by
'Cause they don't dress like me
They dress like you
They wear suits and ties
Like all you hypocrites do
While you were looking at me
Businessmen bled you dry
You lost control of your government
It's getting scary outside!
While you were looking at me
Your children took the fall
Trying to be Mommy and Daddy
With dope and alcohol
You censor people like me
But it won't do you no good
The truth's gonna get through
No matter what you do
- Michael Monroe on his first solo album
just two years after Undercover was being released..
Re: Undercover revisited
Posted by:
michel
()
Date: February 22, 2012 20:25
Quote
seitan
Mathijs
When you say that the message of eighties punk rock has become obsolete,
then here we go...here´s punk rock lyrics from the 80´s...It´s written years before 9/11 attacks, before Bush, Obama, Newt and Romney, and it´s great example of the punk rock message of 80´s. Tell me ..is this really obsolete.
this is the Reagan era:
While you were looking at me
The world passed you by
You held your prejudice sacred
And left your dreams behind
While you were looking at me
The homeless stayed in the streets
You learned to drink poisoned water
But never learned how to read
While you were looking at me
Airport security dies
And the smugglers and the terrorists
Just walk right by
'Cause they don't dress like me
They dress like you
They wear suits and ties
Like all you hypocrites do
While you were looking at me
Businessmen bled you dry
You lost control of your government
It's getting scary outside!
While you were looking at me
Your children took the fall
Trying to be Mommy and Daddy
With dope and alcohol
You censor people like me
But it won't do you no good
The truth's gonna get through
No matter what you do
- Michael Monroe on his first solo album
just two years after Undercover was being released..
Nuts
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
dishevelmentblues , filoca , FloresMuertas , keefmick , kidquick185 , lickskeith , micha063 , NedKellyBandit , Papo , paulspendel , rebelhipi , Spud , StonedRambler , tommycharles
Guests:
1828
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10