Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: Previous123
Current Page: 3 of 3
Re: Undercover
Posted by: Munichhilton ()
Date: May 21, 2013 23:33

Quote
24FPS
All The Way Down for the first time in 30 years. It really suffers from 80s-itis. It hurt to listen to it.

You should do some stretching first...

Re: Undercover
Posted by: stonehearted ()
Date: May 21, 2013 23:58

Even though he refused to tour behind the album, Mick was certainly proud of at least some aspects of Undercover, particularly the video for the single that Julien Temple shot for them, which, once again, made The Stones relevant as a controversial and naughty band of bad boys with their new video that was too rough for television and for which they were asked tough questions about during this interview clip with music journalist Muriel Gray in 1983 for The Tube. There's Mick, then 40, reprising and clearly relishing his role as a dangerous, edgy influence and lightheartedly shrugging off the controversy and brushing aside the question of social responsibility as a celebrity the way he did when sitting down for his "World In Action" interview with the British establishment in July 1967. The Undercover era was really his last opportunity to pull off this role convincingly.




Re: Undercover
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: May 22, 2013 00:02

Quote
24FPS
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
24FPS
Bottom line is that the Undercover album is the first Stones album I listened to, maybe once, maybe twice, and then never listened to it again. Even now when a cut is re-introduced, like in Pretty Beat Up a few posts back, my ears don't like it. There are novels you can re-read years later and get an entirely different perspective. Nothing changes with hearing the Undercover album, except to gain even more respect for 'Undercover of the Night' as the last great, original sounding Rolling Stones single.

Try amping it up to 30 FPS, even 60 FPS.

That could be all the difference.

So....All The Way Down as sung by Alvin & the Chipmunks? Actually I first listened to the Undercover album in its entirety after transferring it from record to cassette. When I got bored I would fast forward the tape and I was shocked how many times they kept repeating the titles of the songs over and over. I just made myself go to YouTube and listen All The Way Down for the first time in 30 years. It really suffers from 80s-itis. It hurt to listen to it.

Look man, I'm just trying to be constructive, brainstorming to help you get through this.

No need to get all, "Alvin & the Chipmunks" on me.

On a separate note, Monk was a great show.

Re: Undercover
Posted by: sonomastone ()
Date: May 22, 2013 02:11

Quote
24FPS
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
24FPS
Bottom line is that the Undercover album is the first Stones album I listened to, maybe once, maybe twice, and then never listened to it again. Even now when a cut is re-introduced, like in Pretty Beat Up a few posts back, my ears don't like it. There are novels you can re-read years later and get an entirely different perspective. Nothing changes with hearing the Undercover album, except to gain even more respect for 'Undercover of the Night' as the last great, original sounding Rolling Stones single.

Try amping it up to 30 FPS, even 60 FPS.

That could be all the difference.

So....All The Way Down as sung by Alvin & the Chipmunks? Actually I first listened to the Undercover album in its entirety after transferring it from record to cassette. When I got bored I would fast forward the tape and I was shocked how many times they kept repeating the titles of the songs over and over. I just made myself go to YouTube and listen All The Way Down for the first time in 30 years. It really suffers from 80s-itis. It hurt to listen to it.

i just did the same too, and tend to agree. but more than anything it made me miss jimmy miller's influence on them. i think all the way down does have a dated sound, but more than anything, it's just the wrong production values for the rolling stones.

Re: Undercover
Posted by: liddas ()
Date: May 22, 2013 02:33

Based on today's discussions I can safely declare that one between me and Mr. 24FPS have ears that just don't work ...

C

Re: Undercover
Posted by: REMChicagoBOY ()
Date: May 22, 2013 02:39

I would simply love to hear this song live on this tour.

PLAY "UNDERCOVER OF THE NIGHT" !!!!

Re: Undercover
Posted by: 24FPS ()
Date: May 22, 2013 04:12

Quote
REMChicagoBOY
I would simply love to hear this song live on this tour.

PLAY "UNDERCOVER OF THE NIGHT" !!!!

That might be difficult. They don't really have a talented bassist to handle such a thing. I'm not even sure who's on the studio version, Bill, or Robbie Shakespeare.

Re: Undercover
Posted by: stonehearted ()
Date: May 22, 2013 04:27

Quote
24FPS
Quote
REMChicagoBOY
I would simply love to hear this song live on this tour.

PLAY "UNDERCOVER OF THE NIGHT" !!!!

That might be difficult. They don't really have a talented bassist to handle such a thing. I'm not even sure who's on the studio version, Bill, or Robbie Shakespeare.

Robbie Shakespeare? Who is that, William's great-great-great-great, etc., grand-nephew? "The whole of my bass is f^cked!"

It should be easy enough to figure out by comparing the studio with the live 1989 version. Bill had some surprisingly funkadelic moments, from his years hanging out in the dance clubs.








Re: Undercover
Posted by: ifyacantrockme ()
Date: May 22, 2013 05:53

I think Undercover is a great album, not so much because of hits or anything, but the dark lyrics, edgy dub style mixes,rough guitars and a great rhythm through the whole album. The big review Kammpberg gave says it all, i agree with it 100%. The album shocked me as a kid when it came out to the sexuality of the cover art to the song titles and ultimately the lyrics. Love the Stones!

Re: Undercover
Posted by: Thrylan ()
Date: May 22, 2013 06:30

I think it's a bipolar album, I either love a song, UC, SWH, or I don't ...TMB, FOB.

Re: Undercover
Date: May 22, 2013 08:52

Definitely think this album flows better than IORR, BAB & Emotional Rescue. That said, the highlights of IORR ("Time Waits For No One," "IORR," "Fingerprint File" ) are better than anything on Undercover and I'd say the same goes for BAB & Emotional Rescue. Those albums are disjointed as hell but I love 'em quite a bit--the diversity of styles and the funky jams get me every time. I LOVE Emotional Rescue, so there! Back to Undercover, where it succeeds is in being an ALBUM that FLOWS together really well and makes sense as a whole much stronger than its parts. I agree with earlier posts in this thread that "Too Much Blood" and "Tie You Up" are clear standouts, but other than those and the title track, where this album succeeds is in how well the songs play well next to each other, not in being played separately. Dirty Work was a much better album though, IMHO. Feel free to comment on my "Does anyone find Dirty Work underrated" thread if you agree or if you don't!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-05-22 08:54 by CanYouHearTheMusic.

Re: Undercover
Posted by: Thrylan ()
Date: May 22, 2013 09:05

ER was my first album purchase.....it's an emotional connection

Re: Undercover
Date: May 22, 2013 09:32

Quote
Thrylan
ER was my first album purchase.....it's an emotional connection

It's a great album, even if Indian Girl sucks. The rest is awesome, tossed off quick or not, who cares? I'm not interested in the HOW, I'm interested in the WHAT. And in this context, I think they took far more chances on this album than on the overrated-if-great predecessor. The first four songs on Some Girls are all in A; it gets a little monochromatic at times. It's also a little too much in a rock-all-the-time kind of mode, exception being Miss You. Emotional Rescue is all over the place stylistically and I like it!

Re: Undercover
Posted by: Thrylan ()
Date: May 22, 2013 09:41

Yeah, and I must admit, after 5 shows and 5 Miss Yous, I am begging for Dance, I've always liked it better!

Re: Undercover
Date: May 22, 2013 09:45

Quote
stonehearted
Even though he refused to tour behind the album, Mick was certainly proud of at least some aspects of Undercover, particularly the video for the single that Julien Temple shot for them, which, once again, made The Stones relevant as a controversial and naughty band of bad boys with their new video that was too rough for television and for which they were asked tough questions about during this interview clip with music journalist Muriel Gray in 1983 for The Tube. There's Mick, then 40, reprising and clearly relishing his role as a dangerous, edgy influence and lightheartedly shrugging off the controversy and brushing aside the question of social responsibility as a celebrity the way he did when sitting down for his "World In Action" interview with the British establishment in July 1967. The Undercover era was really his last opportunity to pull off this role convincingly.



The decision not to tour behind it had more to do with the chemistry within the band at the time + the shape some band members were in - than the quality of the songs, I think.

Re: Undercover
Date: May 22, 2013 10:32

Quote
Thrylan
Yeah, and I must admit, after 5 shows and 5 Miss Yous, I am begging for Dance, I've always liked it better!

Yeah!

Dance >>>> Miss You smileys with beer

Re: Undercover
Posted by: uhbuhgullayew ()
Date: May 24, 2013 21:30

Not touring for this album was tragic.

Re: Undercover
Date: May 24, 2013 21:43

Quote
Munichhilton
How the hell did GHS get dragged into this twist n shout?
It's brilliance is unrivaled...

Their best album!

smileys with beer

Goto Page: Previous123
Current Page: 3 of 3


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1705
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home