For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
StonesCat
Listened to DW today for the first time in ten years, at least. My God, it is even worse than I remembered. I will take One Hit and Too Rude, the rest are varying shades of garbage.
Quote
LeonidPQuote
StonesCat
Listened to DW today for the first time in ten years, at least. My God, it is even worse than I remembered. I will take One Hit and Too Rude, the rest are varying shades of garbage.
Eggzactly, it's really a poor effort. I still find fascinating that some think of Winning Ugly, Dirty Work and/or Fight as great songs -- they are almost as bad as Back To Zero.
As for Had It With You, i don't see what the fuss is about. If that song was never made, it wouldn't change anything in Stones history. i could easily do without it.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LeonidPQuote
StonesCat
Listened to DW today for the first time in ten years, at least. My God, it is even worse than I remembered. I will take One Hit and Too Rude, the rest are varying shades of garbage.
Eggzactly, it's really a poor effort. I still find fascinating that some think of Winning Ugly, Dirty Work and/or Fight as great songs -- they are almost as bad as Back To Zero.
As for Had It With You, i don't see what the fuss is about. If that song was never made, it wouldn't change anything in Stones history. i could easily do without it.
All the songs you mention feature great guitar playing and sound...
Quote
LeonidPQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LeonidPQuote
StonesCat
Listened to DW today for the first time in ten years, at least. My God, it is even worse than I remembered. I will take One Hit and Too Rude, the rest are varying shades of garbage.
Eggzactly, it's really a poor effort. I still find fascinating that some think of Winning Ugly, Dirty Work and/or Fight as great songs -- they are almost as bad as Back To Zero.
As for Had It With You, i don't see what the fuss is about. If that song was never made, it wouldn't change anything in Stones history. i could easily do without it.
All the songs you mention feature great guitar playing and sound...
Not to me, they don't. They are really poor, imo. I'd have to agree w/ those that call them uninspired tracks, I think that sums it up best.
When I think of Stones rockers w/ great guitar playing, I think of songs like Rocks Off, Respectable, or All Down The Line -- certainly not Fight or Dirty Work. **edit** or how about Stray Cat Blues! It's hard for me to fathom that the band that wrote/played a track like that also came up with Winning Ugly!!
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LeonidPQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LeonidPQuote
StonesCat
Listened to DW today for the first time in ten years, at least. My God, it is even worse than I remembered. I will take One Hit and Too Rude, the rest are varying shades of garbage.
Eggzactly, it's really a poor effort. I still find fascinating that some think of Winning Ugly, Dirty Work and/or Fight as great songs -- they are almost as bad as Back To Zero.
As for Had It With You, i don't see what the fuss is about. If that song was never made, it wouldn't change anything in Stones history. i could easily do without it.
All the songs you mention feature great guitar playing and sound...
Not to me, they don't. They are really poor, imo. I'd have to agree w/ those that call them uninspired tracks, I think that sums it up best.
When I think of Stones rockers w/ great guitar playing, I think of songs like Rocks Off, Respectable, or All Down The Line -- certainly not Fight or Dirty Work. **edit** or how about Stray Cat Blues! It's hard for me to fathom that the band that wrote/played a track like that also came up with Winning Ugly!!
You don't like the songs. That doesn't mean there isn't great guitar playing on them. Everybody can hear Keith's tightest rhythm guitar ever on Had It With You. Great playing, but you don't have to like it
Quote
Come OnQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LeonidPQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LeonidPQuote
StonesCat
Listened to DW today for the first time in ten years, at least. My God, it is even worse than I remembered. I will take One Hit and Too Rude, the rest are varying shades of garbage.
Eggzactly, it's really a poor effort. I still find fascinating that some think of Winning Ugly, Dirty Work and/or Fight as great songs -- they are almost as bad as Back To Zero.
As for Had It With You, i don't see what the fuss is about. If that song was never made, it wouldn't change anything in Stones history. i could easily do without it.
All the songs you mention feature great guitar playing and sound...
Not to me, they don't. They are really poor, imo. I'd have to agree w/ those that call them uninspired tracks, I think that sums it up best.
When I think of Stones rockers w/ great guitar playing, I think of songs like Rocks Off, Respectable, or All Down The Line -- certainly not Fight or Dirty Work. **edit** or how about Stray Cat Blues! It's hard for me to fathom that the band that wrote/played a track like that also came up with Winning Ugly!!
You don't like the songs. That doesn't mean there isn't great guitar playing on them. Everybody can hear Keith's tightest rhythm guitar ever on Had It With You. Great playing, but you don't have to like it
For everybody that dig tight guitarplaying recorded in the eighties: Listen to Hetfields guitar on Metallicas 3 first albums...WOW!
Quote
Come On
Listen to this one from the same year as Dirty Work....F(H)ucking tight....
Hetfield dubbled (played two times) his guitar on every track on this album (Master of Puppets)....
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Come On
Listen to this one from the same year as Dirty Work....F(H)ucking tight....
Hetfield dubbled (played two times) his guitar on every track on this album (Master of Puppets)....
The ol' ABBA-trick
You do like the songs. Similarly that doesn't mean that there is great guitar playing on them. As I said, Had It With You is not really what I would call terrible, but it is certainly forgettable. The playing on the others I mentioned? C'mon, it's really pathetic, doesn't matter if you like the songs or not.Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LeonidPQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LeonidPQuote
StonesCat
Listened to DW today for the first time in ten years, at least. My God, it is even worse than I remembered. I will take One Hit and Too Rude, the rest are varying shades of garbage.
Eggzactly, it's really a poor effort. I still find fascinating that some think of Winning Ugly, Dirty Work and/or Fight as great songs -- they are almost as bad as Back To Zero.
As for Had It With You, i don't see what the fuss is about. If that song was never made, it wouldn't change anything in Stones history. i could easily do without it.
All the songs you mention feature great guitar playing and sound...
Not to me, they don't. They are really poor, imo. I'd have to agree w/ those that call them uninspired tracks, I think that sums it up best.
When I think of Stones rockers w/ great guitar playing, I think of songs like Rocks Off, Respectable, or All Down The Line -- certainly not Fight or Dirty Work. **edit** or how about Stray Cat Blues! It's hard for me to fathom that the band that wrote/played a track like that also came up with Winning Ugly!!
You don't like the songs. That doesn't mean there isn't great guitar playing on them. Everybody can hear Keith's tightest rhythm guitar ever on Had It With You. Great playing, but you don't have to like it
Quote
LeonidPYou do like the songs. Similarly that doesn't mean that there is great guitar playing on them. As I said, Had It With You is not really what I would call terrible, but it is certainly forgettable. The playing on the others I mentioned? C'mon, it's really pathetic, doesn't matter if you like the songs or not.Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LeonidPQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LeonidPQuote
StonesCat
Listened to DW today for the first time in ten years, at least. My God, it is even worse than I remembered. I will take One Hit and Too Rude, the rest are varying shades of garbage.
Eggzactly, it's really a poor effort. I still find fascinating that some think of Winning Ugly, Dirty Work and/or Fight as great songs -- they are almost as bad as Back To Zero.
As for Had It With You, i don't see what the fuss is about. If that song was never made, it wouldn't change anything in Stones history. i could easily do without it.
All the songs you mention feature great guitar playing and sound...
Not to me, they don't. They are really poor, imo. I'd have to agree w/ those that call them uninspired tracks, I think that sums it up best.
When I think of Stones rockers w/ great guitar playing, I think of songs like Rocks Off, Respectable, or All Down The Line -- certainly not Fight or Dirty Work. **edit** or how about Stray Cat Blues! It's hard for me to fathom that the band that wrote/played a track like that also came up with Winning Ugly!!
You don't like the songs. That doesn't mean there isn't great guitar playing on them. Everybody can hear Keith's tightest rhythm guitar ever on Had It With You. Great playing, but you don't have to like it
Quote
pinkfloydthebarber
'had it with you' is about the only song on the record that i like
'one hit' as well
'had it with you' is rootsy, sparse, bare, minimal and aggressive; a great little binge of boogie woogie
other than that the record is absolute garbage, and is the stones trying to assimilate into the 80s with crappy talking heads disco type songs like 'back to zero'
Quote
Come On
Truly Amazing!!! 139 posts about this silly song....
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Come On
Truly Amazing!!! 139 posts about this silly song....
8 more than in the Plundered My Soul-thread.
Fair and square...
Quote
Come OnQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Come On
Truly Amazing!!! 139 posts about this silly song....
8 more than in the Plundered My Soul-thread.
Fair and square...
Let's say that I start a thread about 'Long Long While' and I probably will get only 2 posts, and that's their second best song behind long version of 'Tell Me'...
Quote
MrMonte
well, my views on the album are well known (and I'm not shy about promoting readership):
[montesnewblog.blogspot.com]
As for the song, I consider it the true masterpiece of the album. Like it or not, it's cool they took the risk of recording it without a bass. It's stripped down, genuine, and short and on message. No BS. VERY underappreciated song.
MM
Quote
leatherjacketQuote
MrMonte
well, my views on the album are well known (and I'm not shy about promoting readership):
[montesnewblog.blogspot.com]
As for the song, I consider it the true masterpiece of the album. Like it or not, it's cool they took the risk of recording it without a bass. It's stripped down, genuine, and short and on message. No BS. VERY underappreciated song.
MM
You are right. The lack of the album is the sound and production of some songs. Recorded in '72 sound and vision it would be ragarded completely different
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
leatherjacketQuote
MrMonte
well, my views on the album are well known (and I'm not shy about promoting readership):
[montesnewblog.blogspot.com]
As for the song, I consider it the true masterpiece of the album. Like it or not, it's cool they took the risk of recording it without a bass. It's stripped down, genuine, and short and on message. No BS. VERY underappreciated song.
MM
You are right. The lack of the album is the sound and production of some songs. Recorded in '72 sound and vision it would be ragarded completely different
That is true. Seemingly, a lot of people who don't like DW, is stuck in that feeling, and can't really appreciate anything from it - no matter how good it is.
HIWY rocks!
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
leatherjacketQuote
MrMonte
well, my views on the album are well known (and I'm not shy about promoting readership):
[montesnewblog.blogspot.com]
As for the song, I consider it the true masterpiece of the album. Like it or not, it's cool they took the risk of recording it without a bass. It's stripped down, genuine, and short and on message. No BS. VERY underappreciated song.
MM
You are right. The lack of the album is the sound and production of some songs. Recorded in '72 sound and vision it would be ragarded completely different
That is true. Seemingly, a lot of people who don't like DW, is stuck in that feeling, and can't really appreciate anything from it - no matter how good it is.
HIWY rocks!
It's not that simple. The whole idea if 'such and such' track would have been recorded in, say, 1968-1972, it would have been marvellous, does not work. The same goes for reverse idea that 'such and such' turkey had been good if hadn't been screwed up with day's sound and vision. Creative ideas - songs - do not exist out of certain time and place. They don't time-travel either.
- Doxa
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
leatherjacketQuote
MrMonte
well, my views on the album are well known (and I'm not shy about promoting readership):
[montesnewblog.blogspot.com]
As for the song, I consider it the true masterpiece of the album. Like it or not, it's cool they took the risk of recording it without a bass. It's stripped down, genuine, and short and on message. No BS. VERY underappreciated song.
MM
You are right. The lack of the album is the sound and production of some songs. Recorded in '72 sound and vision it would be ragarded completely different
That is true. Seemingly, a lot of people who don't like DW, is stuck in that feeling, and can't really appreciate anything from it - no matter how good it is.
HIWY rocks!
It's not that simple. The whole idea if 'such and such' track would have been recorded in, say, 1968-1972, it would have been marvellous, does not work. The same goes for reverse idea that 'such and such' turkey had been good if hadn't been screwed up with day's sound and vision. Creative ideas - songs - do not exist out of certain time and place. They don't time-travel either.
- Doxa
Sometimes you can imagine how songs would have suited other albums.
HIWY could very well have been on Emotional Rescue or on Exile because of the stripped-down dirtyness of the track, and with its obvious R&B-style.
If it would enhance the quality of those albums is another matter, though.