Quote
DandelionPowderman
All the three videos from Undercover were banned, and had to be edited before being televised. That gave Mick a lot of space to talk about the thought behind two of those songs (Undercover and Too Much Blood).

I won't over-estimate Mick, but I'm sure he saw that coming, and it could very well have been part of the strategy behind the launch of this album - using the political aspect of it.

I disagree strongly about Undercover being "standard Pathe Marconi-jams". Firstly, the songs sound very different. It's an odd collection of songs, really. Undercover, Wanna Hold You, Feel On Baby and Too Much Blood are not typical Stones songs.

Secondly, I find it baffling that you find the songs being weakly produced and finalised. To me, the production is very good, but also very different from what we're used to from the Stones. Do some of the songs sound dated? Yes, of course. But at the time, they were fresh - something all the reviews I read at the time confirmed.

This album is probably one of the albums by the Stones I've listened to the most. I know every little detail on it like the back of my hand. Some of my favourite songs are on it, and I'm sure I'll defend its quality, how it was written, recorded, mixed and finalised till my dying day

Quote
DandelionPowderman
All the three videos from Undercover were banned, and had to be edited before being televised. That gave Mick a lot of space to talk about the thought behind two of those songs (Undercover and Too Much Blood).

I won't over-estimate Mick, but I'm sure he saw that coming, and it could very well have been part of the strategy behind the launch of this album - using the political aspect of it.

I disagree strongly about Undercover being "standard Pathe Marconi-jams". Firstly, the songs sound very different. It's an odd collection of songs, really. Undercover, Wanna Hold You, Feel On Baby and Too Much Blood are not typical Stones songs.

Secondly, I find it baffling that you find the songs being weakly produced and finalised. To me, the production is very good, but also very different from what we're used to from the Stones. Do some of the songs sound dated? Yes, of course. But at the time, they were fresh - something all the reviews I read at the time confirmed.

This album is probably one of the albums by the Stones I've listened to the most. I know every little detail on it like the back of my hand. Some of my favourite songs are on it, and I'm sure I'll defend its quality, how it was written, recorded, mixed and finalised till my dying day

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
All the three videos from Undercover were banned, and had to be edited before being televised. That gave Mick a lot of space to talk about the thought behind two of those songs (Undercover and Too Much Blood).

I won't over-estimate Mick, but I'm sure he saw that coming, and it could very well have been part of the strategy behind the launch of this album - using the political aspect of it.

I disagree strongly about Undercover being "standard Pathe Marconi-jams". Firstly, the songs sound very different. It's an odd collection of songs, really. Undercover, Wanna Hold You, Feel On Baby and Too Much Blood are not typical Stones songs.

Secondly, I find it baffling that you find the songs being weakly produced and finalised. To me, the production is very good, but also very different from what we're used to from the Stones. Do some of the songs sound dated? Yes, of course. But at the time, they were fresh - something all the reviews I read at the time confirmed.

This album is probably one of the albums by the Stones I've listened to the most. I know every little detail on it like the back of my hand. Some of my favourite songs are on it, and I'm sure I'll defend its quality, how it was written, recorded, mixed and finalised till my dying day

That's your right and duty, Dandie (I guess it is for you what TATTOO YOU is to me)! Keep up the good work!

But some comments. Yoou can cope with them...

There are some new things in UNDERCOVER, for sure. Of the songs you mentioned, two are those Jagger video sketches I mentioned, and in those two - "Undercover of The Night" and "Too Much Blood" - one can hear a full-engaged Jagger, and also the direction his muse was heading at (we would hear soon more). Starting the both sides with these songs, also gave an impression of the Stones almost radically reinventing their sound. "Feel On Baby" also, no doubt, is a new experiment. But the rest? Yeah, probably a poppish "Wanna Hold You" is in the sense that they haven't released such a weak song for ages, and Keith Richards number ever. "She Was Hot" is a nice retro rocker.

What I think of 'typical Pathe Marconi jams' are "Pretty Beat up", "Too Tough", "All The Way Down", "It Must Be Hell", "Pain of Love" (did I miss any?)- the very bulk of the album, of which none actually widens up their musical horizon, but relies very much to the band sound they have mastered in the previous five years or so. Routine songs (but like said above, the groove in most of them is timeless, and they would never so hot again as a band). Of course, one can find many great and novel things in some individual instrumental - or lyrical - contributions, but that alone cannot save the songs as a whole - or what kind of musical 'statement' they make.

I think the production in this album is very uneven. Parts of it are over-produced (especially Jagger songs), and some of its like not at all (the latter consisting mostly of those edited Pathe Marconi jams, of which I think "It Must Be Hell" is the worst - have the Stones ever have such a weak album ending?)

Sorry...

- Doxa

Quote
GasLightStreet
Mixed Emotions and Terrifying sound like the LP takes just not finished obviously. Awesome to finally hear these. Thanks!

Quote
flacnvinyl
Steel Wheels was butchered in post-production. We all love hearing the guys together in a room grooving together. Hold On To Your Hat is a great example of what went wrong. I do not have the recording handy (currently redoing my RAID server at home) but there is a great version of HOTYH where you can actually hear the rhythm guitar which SLAYS. Keith's fills are ok, but the rhythm drives it like crazy. The studio version puts snare and vocals up front with guitars in the background... ruins it.

The other hidden thing is that the main problem with the record is the drum sound. Charlie's snare sounds like a nail being driven by a hammer. Give me the sound off Emotional Rescue or Voodoo Lounge for Charlie ANYDAY! Steel Wheels gives us the thinnest and worst drum mix of any album aside from the early 60s material.

Guitars are no longer prominent. The production blends everything together. Sad Sad Sad is a great example... by far my favorite track on the record. The guitars are great but still too low in the mix and often very thin. If you have a decent stereo you can make some adjustments to bring out the hidden/buried guitars in the mix and tune them to the surround speakers. Dolby M (music) does this PERFECTLY. Great little guitar fills across the spectrum and just buried in the mix!!

FX - That is the main thing that destroys the vibe. I have thought many times that I would love for the Stones to do what the Beatles did with Let It Be... 'naked'. Get rid of the Spector stuff on it, and present the tracks as originally recorded. Steel Wheels without the 80s sheen could be a fantastic record. Heck, let Don Was at it but make him use a good mastering engineer who wont destroy the dynamic range.

EQ - It is just too bright and thin. Listen to She's So Cold, then listen to Mixed Emotions. The drum sound is most startling.. a decade later and they managed to RUIN the great sound the Stones had over in Parthe.

Quote
lem motlow

Quote
flacnvinyl
Steel Wheels was butchered in post-production. We all love hearing the guys together in a room grooving together. Hold On To Your Hat is a great example of what went wrong. I do not have the recording handy (currently redoing my RAID server at home) but there is a great version of HOTYH where you can actually hear the rhythm guitar which SLAYS. Keith's fills are ok, but the rhythm drives it like crazy. The studio version puts snare and vocals up front with guitars in the background... ruins it.

The other hidden thing is that the main problem with the record is the drum sound. Charlie's snare sounds like a nail being driven by a hammer. Give me the sound off Emotional Rescue or Voodoo Lounge for Charlie ANYDAY! Steel Wheels gives us the thinnest and worst drum mix of any album aside from the early 60s material.

Guitars are no longer prominent. The production blends everything together. Sad Sad Sad is a great example... by far my favorite track on the record. The guitars are great but still too low in the mix and often very thin. If you have a decent stereo you can make some adjustments to bring out the hidden/buried guitars in the mix and tune them to the surround speakers. Dolby M (music) does this PERFECTLY. Great little guitar fills across the spectrum and just buried in the mix!!

FX - That is the main thing that destroys the vibe. I have thought many times that I would love for the Stones to do what the Beatles did with Let It Be... 'naked'. Get rid of the Spector stuff on it, and present the tracks as originally recorded. Steel Wheels without the 80s sheen could be a fantastic record. Heck, let Don Was at it but make him use a good mastering engineer who wont destroy the dynamic range.

EQ - It is just too bright and thin. Listen to She's So Cold, then listen to Mixed Emotions. The drum sound is most startling.. a decade later and they managed to RUIN the great sound the Stones had over in Parthe.

this is exactly what i was thinking,though you expressed it better than i ever could have.listening to these tracks really brought out something that i had been suspecting for years-the stones are the stones,its the production thats killing these latter day records.

i'm not saying they could've made let it bleed in the 80's but these records seem like they could've held up against maybe a goats head or an emotional rescue if they were recorded properly.
when you said "listen to she's so cold, then listen to mixed emotions" that was perfect.

people think i'm joking when i say i like dirty work,but its the same kind of thing.listen to the actual guitar playing on DW ,they are playing their asses off on that record.
at the time keith said dirty work "cooked just below the surface,its built for the road" -looking back,the production IS that surface.without it,it would've just cooked.
[-and you guys, spare me the "its micks vocals on DW,its the lyrics, it just sucks blah blah.i know its a badge of honor to outdo each other about not liking the record but its redundant at this point]

theres a thread about"should the stones make another record" -i've actually changed my mind about it-yes they should,just dont make it sound like it was recorded through the filter in my fishtank.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Wild Slivovitz
The production of Hearts For Sale is dreadful, but the song it's pretty good on its own right.

It's the same with several songs on the album. The echo, the reverb, the delay, the synths, the sequencers. You name it...

Heart For Sale is beautiful, and Keith's guitar (not the lead rhythm guitar filled to the unrecognisable with echo) and Mick's harp in particular. I love the verses and the bridge. Great stuff

Quote
stonehearted
As a neophyte, Mick likes to think he's keeping on top of trends and remaining current, but he is often short-sighted in not realizing that today's flavor of the month is tomorrow's Salmonella.

Quote
stonehearted
As someone mentioned above, later Stones albums would have sounded a lot better without the dated, gimmicky production values of the times.

As a neophyte, Mick likes to think he's keeping on top of trends and remaining current, but he is often short-sighted in not realizing that today's flavor of the month is tomorrow's Salmonella.

Mick should take stock in what makes The Stones great and just capture the sounds they make when in a room together, rather than diluting their chemistry in the latest over-the-top production formula.

What we want is to hear them through their amps, not through some state-of-the-art production console.

People think they want the next Stones album to be a collection of old blues covers, when what they really want is to put on a record that sounds like the band is playing right there in the room with them, which is the feeling they got when first becoming enamored with the music of The Stones.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
stonehearted
As someone mentioned above, later Stones albums would have sounded a lot better without the dated, gimmicky production values of the times.

As a neophyte, Mick likes to think he's keeping on top of trends and remaining current, but he is often short-sighted in not realizing that today's flavor of the month is tomorrow's Salmonella.

Mick should take stock in what makes The Stones great and just capture the sounds they make when in a room together, rather than diluting their chemistry in the latest over-the-top production formula.

What we want is to hear them through their amps, not through some state-of-the-art production console.

People think they want the next Stones album to be a collection of old blues covers, when what they really want is to put on a record that sounds like the band is playing right there in the room with them, which is the feeling they got when first becoming enamored with the music of The Stones.

He understood this on Wandering Spirit, with imo excellent results.

However, maybe the album didn't sell well enough for him?

Quote
Doxa
But, if I may continue the theme, and if we step little out of the 'perfect Rolling Stones realm, where their recordings are compared only to their other recordings, and of which we have a rather clear picture which sounds good and which not decades later', one nice feature of Jagger's insistance in sounding current, is that the records of the Stones represents funnily the times they've done and produced. The whole Rolling Stones catalogue is like a mirror how the sounds and the ideals of them have developed and changed along the years. In a way albums like STEEL WHEELS or tracks like "Undercover of The Night" or "Anybody Seen My Baby?" are more authentic now than if they'd been done, say, to sound like, say, SOME GIRLS or STICKY FINGERS or BEGGARS BANQUET.

Lastly, even though I see that kind of idea popping here sometimes, I don't think any great Stones album is ever lost due to the poor producing or trying to sound current. Even though we might be some day get a "naked" LET IT BE kind of version of, say, STEEL WHEELS, that would not make it a masterpiece in Stones catalogue.

- Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa
But, if I may continue the theme, and if we step little out of the 'perfect Rolling Stones realm, where their recordings are compared only to their other recordings, and of which we have a rather clear picture which sounds good and which not decades later', one nice feature of Jagger's insistance in sounding current, is that the records of the Stones represents funnily the times they've done and produced. The whole Rolling Stones catalogue is like a mirror how the sounds and the ideals of them have developed and changed along the years. In a way albums like STEEL WHEELS or tracks like "Undercover of The Night" or "Anybody Seen My Baby?" are more authentic now than if they'd been done, say, to sound like, say, SOME GIRLS or STICKY FINGERS or BEGGARS BANQUET.

Lastly, even though I see that kind of idea popping here sometimes, I don't think any great Stones album is ever lost due to the poor producing or trying to sound current. Even though we might be some day get a "naked" LET IT BE kind of version of, say, STEEL WHEELS, that would not make it a masterpiece in Stones catalogue.

- Doxa

IORR suffers badly from poor producing.

The problem with trying to get the Stones to sound current is actually within the guitar department. Keith's guitar sound and style was "old-fashioned" from the get-go. It's brilliant, and I love it, but it sounds out of place in, for instance, techno flirts (Juiced) and disco (on ER it is mixed way, way down).

Paradoxically, Keith's guitar sounds brilliant on Back To Zero and other slick pop songs. Then again, he really likes Curtis Mayfield's touch, so he can draw on that.

The only times the Stones succeeded with sounding convincing with a contemporary sound was when they were young, or relatively young. and more connected to the young audience (Aftermath/Buttons/Satanic and Some Girls/TY/Undercover).

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
stonehearted
As someone mentioned above, later Stones albums would have sounded a lot better without the dated, gimmicky production values of the times.

As a neophyte, Mick likes to think he's keeping on top of trends and remaining current, but he is often short-sighted in not realizing that today's flavor of the month is tomorrow's Salmonella.

Mick should take stock in what makes The Stones great and just capture the sounds they make when in a room together, rather than diluting their chemistry in the latest over-the-top production formula.

What we want is to hear them through their amps, not through some state-of-the-art production console.

People think they want the next Stones album to be a collection of old blues covers, when what they really want is to put on a record that sounds like the band is playing right there in the room with them, which is the feeling they got when first becoming enamored with the music of The Stones.

He understood this on Wandering Spirit, with imo excellent results.

However, maybe the album didn't sell well enough for him?

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
stonehearted
As someone mentioned above, later Stones albums would have sounded a lot better without the dated, gimmicky production values of the times.

As a neophyte, Mick likes to think he's keeping on top of trends and remaining current, but he is often short-sighted in not realizing that today's flavor of the month is tomorrow's Salmonella.

Mick should take stock in what makes The Stones great and just capture the sounds they make when in a room together, rather than diluting their chemistry in the latest over-the-top production formula.

What we want is to hear them through their amps, not through some state-of-the-art production console.

People think they want the next Stones album to be a collection of old blues covers, when what they really want is to put on a record that sounds like the band is playing right there in the room with them, which is the feeling they got when first becoming enamored with the music of The Stones.

He understood this on Wandering Spirit, with imo excellent results.

However, maybe the album didn't sell well enough for him?

No, he understood that after the flop of PRIMITIVE COOL and the relative success of TALK IS CHEAP and a huge success of STEEL WHEELS. WANDERING SPIRIT was a safe bet for him with which he cleared his name, and showed he can also do Stones-type of music by his own of which the (conservative) Rolling Stones fans like. And it did well. A mission accomplished.

Actually he put so much effort into it that VOODOO LOUNGE sounded damn lame after it.

- Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

IORR suffers badly from poor producing.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

IORR suffers badly from poor producing.

Yes, it does, but its problems lie much deeper. Their focus is gone, and, for example, the they had seemingly problems with the muse as well. To an extent, GOATS HEAD SOUP had shown similar problems as well, but their song-writing was still excellent in that album (as TATTOO YOU shows as well). Actually that album - GHS - might have been a masterpiece if they had more focus in it, and had it been produced better. But I guess they were artistically tired after EXILE and other previous albums. And Jimmy Miller was a used card by then. That's human.

But yeah, IORR must be their worst sounding album ever. It is incredible how great BLACK AND BLUE sounds, just after two years later.

- Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman


I bet Rick Rubin kept him on a leash. Most likely, Mick wanted to sound contemporary on WS as well...

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

IORR suffers badly from poor producing.

Yes, it does, but its problems lie much deeper. Their focus is gone, and, for example, the they had seemingly problems with the muse as well. To an extent, GOATS HEAD SOUP had shown similar problems as well, but their song-writing was still excellent in that album (as TATTOO YOU shows as well). Actually that album - GHS - might have been a masterpiece if they had more focus in it, and had it been produced better. But I guess they were artistically tired after EXILE and other previous albums. And Jimmy Miller was a used card by then. That's human.

But yeah, IORR must be their worst sounding album ever. It is incredible how great BLACK AND BLUE sounds, just after two years later.

- Doxa

Was their focus really gone?

Fingerpring File - an excellent song, as well as an excellent report from the times.
Luxury - a brilliant mix of styles, done in an innovative way
If You Can't Rock Me - could have been one of their best songs ever, but it sounds like it was recorded in a woollen cardboard-room
If You Really Want To Be My Friend - A very nice soul-tune - one of the few that actually sounds good on the album
Ain't Too Proud To Beg - A great soul-cover that sound like it's pasted on top of something. There is no air in the recording/mixing
IORR - A classic that unfortunately sounds like it was mixed by a kindergarten-kid.

What do we have? Lots of great songs, poorly produced (some of the songs are way too long and generic) as well as badly mixed (unusual leveling, weird effects as well as woollen sound throughout the album).

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

IORR suffers badly from poor producing.

Yes, it does, but its problems lie much deeper. Their focus is gone, and, for example, the they had seemingly problems with the muse as well. To an extent, GOATS HEAD SOUP had shown similar problems as well, but their song-writing was still excellent in that album (as TATTOO YOU shows as well). Actually that album - GHS - might have been a masterpiece if they had more focus in it, and had it been produced better. But I guess they were artistically tired after EXILE and other previous albums. And Jimmy Miller was a used card by then. That's human.

But yeah, IORR must be their worst sounding album ever. It is incredible how great BLACK AND BLUE sounds, just after two years later.

- Doxa

Was their focus really gone?

Fingerpring File - an excellent song, as well as an excellent report from the times.
Luxury - a brilliant mix of styles, done in an innovative way
If You Can't Rock Me - could have been one of their best songs ever, but it sounds like it was recorded in a woollen cardboard-room
If You Really Want To Be My Friend - A very nice soul-tune - one of the few that actually sounds good on the album
Ain't Too Proud To Beg - A great soul-cover that sound like it's pasted on top of something. There is no air in the recording/mixing
IORR - A classic that unfortunately sounds like it was mixed by a kindergarten-kid.

What do we have? Lots of great songs, poorly produced (some of the songs are way too long and generic) as well as badly mixed (unusual leveling, weird effects as well as woollen sound throughout the album).

Well, those are great songs compared anything they have done since, say, early 80's, but not so excellent and inspired if compared to what they had just done in their previous records and earlier. Remember the context! No, no matter how the great production had been, IT'S ONLY ROCK'N'ROLL would have never been a STICKY FINGERS or EXILE ON MAIN STREET. If you don't hear the artistic downhill and boredom, you don't.

- Doxa

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa
But, if I may continue the theme, and if we step little out of the 'perfect Rolling Stones realm, where their recordings are compared only to their other recordings, and of which we have a rather clear picture which sounds good and which not decades later', one nice feature of Jagger's insistance in sounding current, is that the records of the Stones represents funnily the times they've done and produced. The whole Rolling Stones catalogue is like a mirror how the sounds and the ideals of them have developed and changed along the years. In a way albums like STEEL WHEELS or tracks like "Undercover of The Night" or "Anybody Seen My Baby?" are more authentic now than if they'd been done, say, to sound like, say, SOME GIRLS or STICKY FINGERS or BEGGARS BANQUET.

Lastly, even though I see that kind of idea popping here sometimes, I don't think any great Stones album is ever lost due to the poor producing or trying to sound current. Even though we might be some day get a "naked" LET IT BE kind of version of, say, STEEL WHEELS, that would not make it a masterpiece in Stones catalogue.

- Doxa

IORR suffers badly from poor producing.

The problem with trying to get the Stones to sound current is actually within the guitar department. Keith's guitar sound and style was "old-fashioned" from the get-go. It's brilliant, and I love it, but it sounds out of place in, for instance, techno flirts (Juiced) and disco (on ER it is mixed way, way down).

Paradoxically, Keith's guitar sounds brilliant on Back To Zero and other slick pop songs. Then again, he really likes Curtis Mayfield's touch, so he can draw on that.

The only times the Stones succeeded with sounding convincing with a contemporary sound was when they were young, or relatively young. and more connected to the young audience (Aftermath/Buttons/Satanic and Some Girls/TY/Undercover).

I would like to add to these points by saying that when you go to a live show to see and hear the band in concert and they play a track from Undercover or Steel Wheels or whatever, you are not getting the production of those albums at the live show, you are getting the sound as mixed by the sound man. The live sound is somehow more pure because it is not the work of a producer or the post-production effects of studio technicians, it is just the musicians playing through their sound system, with a bit of help in balancing this through the work of the sound man. There is more excitement and energy coming through in the unfettered sonic experience of a live performance.

This is what I was alluding to in my earlier post, that a new Stones album could benefit from a more unfettered approach, a live in the studio type of recording if you will. The Stones are known for the spirit and energy they bring to their live performances--in later years, this is how they have built their reputation. Why not bring that spirit and energy to their studio albums?

Quote
DandelionPowderman
He wasn't a contemporary producer in the musical sense. He was "contemporary" because he took the bands he worked with back to their roots and stripped them down. Listen to what he did with the Cult. Amazing!

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
He wasn't a contemporary producer in the musical sense. He was "contemporary" because he took the bands he worked with back to their roots and stripped them down. Listen to what he did with the Cult. Amazing!

And you think Jagger didn't know that when hiring him?

Sorry, but you sound like you really don't evaluate mr. Jagger very high (like he is a stupid puppet of his producers, the latter given by record companies), and you also seem to underestimate his sense of 'being contemporary' as well. What Rubín did was back then was in fact very contemporary and he was one of those people who was leading the trends back then, and getting us out of the 80's production ideals. I think Jagger exactly knew what he would get when getting him involved, which was a rather "hip" thing to do.

In the early 90's there were lots of things happening in the music world (like always), and there were many trends to follow (one of them being back to more rough sounds in rock, plus a certain retro element). I have got the picture that people here seem to have a rather narrow picture of what 'being contemporary' might be all about. Certainly more narrow than what Mick Jagger seems to have.

- Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman


However, making songs ready to play live is the way to go. Still, the whiners will complain about the songs sounding generic on record, but so what - IORR!

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman


However, making songs ready to play live is the way to go. Still, the whiners will complain about the songs sounding generic on record, but so what - IORR!

A-ha, that very word belongs to your vocabulary as well. I hope everything's alright in the cheerleaders' section...

- Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman


However, making songs ready to play live is the way to go. Still, the whiners will complain about the songs sounding generic on record, but so what - IORR!

A-ha, that very word belongs to your vocabulary as well. I hope everything's alright in the cheerleaders' section...

- Doxa

Everything's all right in the FAN section

You have never heard me criticise anything about the Stones, right?