Quote
john lomax
I think this is a sensational album. Definitely Keith's best solo album and I am thinking that it may even be the best Stones or Solo stones album since Some Girls. The variety of musical styles, sounds and textures is fantastic, the guitar playing is great and I think this is best singing Keith has ever done.

Definitely the best since tattoo you! An incredible amount of diversity as you say. Not a single "by the numbers" song except for trouble.

Quote
Turner68

Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
Turner68

Quote
keefriffhards
Well lets just say its in the ear of the beholder
To my ears this album is perfect
I think my wife is perfect, you will not
Its just my view of this album, i cant make you see it the way i do
I am just so happy, it feels like Keith made it for me
Cheers keith

Seriously, you've been on this board for several months and you're going to throw out a line like that and not expect some wisecracking? I'm sure she is an awesome woman.

Well she looks good to me turner, in fact she is a head turner lol
She probably looks good to you too
Not much point in spending your life with someone if you think she's a dog

Yeah I was going to say we all think she is perfect ...

That's great she enjoys Keith and the stones with you. My girlfriend does too, but only in the "you have to listen to some of my music next" kind of way...

Hehe yeah i get that too
There is however one thing i would change about her though, her brain
I must clarify. I mean my wife's brain not your girlfriends brain
I always think its after my money
My wife's brain not your girlfriends of course



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-09-19 20:32 by keefriffhards.

I think Crosseyed Heart is Keith's first solo album that doesn't feel like it needs Mick to step in and finish it. Part of that is due to the songs not relying as heavily on Stonesy, open G riffs, and the other is that there's a maturity and depth to the whole production. For example, the title track isn't much of a song at all, but put it into context and suddenly it becomes a kind of Rosetta Stone that explains where the entire album came from and what it's all about. In that sense, I do consider this to be Keith's most developed "album" in the traditional sense.

That's not to say it's better or worse than Talk Is Cheap, but it is very much the flip side or companion to that work. If Talk Is Cheap was Keith attempting to prove a point, Crosseyed Heart is the one that finds him with nothing left to prove. Yeah, his singing isn't as consistently raucous and his preferences are a little older and slower, but there's a deeper confidence in both the delivery and material. Keith is no longer trying to convince anyone he can sing outside of his range and is more content to let the emotion come through naturally. If that results in tracks where he's almost just speaking into the mic, so be it.

I don't think it's a shock that many fans will continue to prefer Talk Is Cheap. That's the slick, polished album that many rocked out to in college or while tailgating on the Stones' supertours. It's the Keith that wasn't that far removed from his prime. You can't compete with that, especially when talking about a new album that many will likely have just listened to on their computer. But at the same time, I don't see how anyone who has enjoyed the Stones' output over the past 25 years could honestly be disappointed by Crosseyed Heart. After a decade of passable collaborations and filler like Infamy, there was no reason to expect an album as assured and developed as Keith has managed to deliver.

Im going to get f_cking crucified for saying this but I think JUST A GIFT is Keith's best lead vocal song ever. It's basic but the lyrics are sensational and emotional almost Dylan like. The song just flows perfectly. I can never recall a song that has made me tear up ever and I just lose it with this. It's simple, heart felt like pining for an old friend. There is something magical in it that I cant describe like remembering old lost friends, and good memories of ones childhood. His whine " that's all right by me" is just killer and the band is great.

Quote
Bashlets
Im going to get f_cking crucified for saying this but I think JUST A GIFT is Keith's best lead vocal song ever. It's basic but the lyrics are sensational and emotional almost Dylan like. The song just flows perfectly. I can never recall a song that has made me tear up ever and I just lose it with this. It's simple, heart felt like pining for an old friend. There is something magical in it that I cant describe like remembering old lost friends, and good memories of ones childhood. His whine " that's all right by me" is just killer and the band is great.

I know exactly what you mean Bashlets, i feel the same about Suspicious too

Nice review Howlingmad much appreciated

I bought the 24/96 high res file on Qobuz today
Playing now on Devialet 400

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"

My wife and I just took a country drive and listened to JUST A GIFT 3 times back to back and we both started sobbing. Although it almost sounds like a song to a girl, it can be related to everyone. This song is about hope, loss, finding the human connection. Truly powerful, and yes SUSPICIOUS is great also. This album gets better and better with every listen.

Cross eyed Heart is #5 on iTunes right now!

[www.apple.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-09-19 21:05 by Turner68.

Wouldn't be surprised if -like Raitt-Clapton-Tina Turner - Keith gets a Grammy out of this.

Quote
TonyMo
Wouldn't be surprised if -like Raitt-Clapton-Tina Turner - Keith gets a Grammy out of this.

I agree, not sure which or the 83 categories, though. A bit eclectic and diverse to be nailed down to a genre really. Keith is probably ready for the Lifetime Achievement Award.

Quote
Bashlets
My wife and I just took a country drive and listened to JUST A GIFT 3 times back to back and we both started sobbing. Although it almost sounds like a song to a girl, it can be related to everyone. This song is about hope, loss, finding the human connection. Truly powerful, and yes SUSPICIOUS is great also. This album gets better and better with every listen.

I sobbed reading this.

Wow - a stunning masterpiece, and I'm not just saying that just as a Keith die-hard , but first and foremost as a Rolling Stones fan.
Just gave it the official first listen start to finish on my traditional 'first listen' drive up the Pacific Coast Highway very loudly. If there are any reports of earthquakes or tsunami warnings, have no fear it was just Keith blasting out of ny car stero. It's a beauthiful day in Southern California, and it was the perfect vibe to take this all in. When the cd came to an end, I pulled over to a secluded beach and went on a short bodysurfing session to soak it all in. The ocean is warm, the waves were nice, and the tunes were floating through my head. Someone mentioned that the sign of a good album is if it's a 'grower', but for me there's nothing really to grow as it's already embedded at high quality with echoes and vibes that seem so familiar yet brand new at the same time. Still lots to discover as far as nuances, lyrics, layers, etc., but for now I'm 100% satisfied. Got back in the car for the drive home and listened again from start to finish. This is no fluke, it's everything I've wished and hoped for from a Keith and/or Stones album since...well since Talk is Cheap.

Quote
Turner68
I would not say this is better than Talk is Cheap but I will say it's the best stones product since then.
Very genuine, excellent songwriting for the most part, great sound, great concept (roots genres).
Disappointed that he doesn't seem to be touring.

One year ago I would have never guessed in 100 years that a rolling stone would give such strong new original work. It has been a long dry spell.

Very very exciting!

Nicely said, but this might even score above Talk is Cheap for me. With that said, You Don't Move Me is my all-time favorite solo Stones tune and probably always will be. That tune resonates with me on a deep personal level in the same way that Dylan's Not Dark Yet from '97 strikes a deep chord. So far, Suspicious might be the one that hits that certain nerve, but still have to digest the entire album as a whole.

Hard to fathom how and why any Stones fan would not like this album. Someone mentioned 'bad production' (?), and another mentioned they dislike anything solo coming from any of the Stones. Everyone has a right to their opinion, but to those who feel this way, perhaps you could embellish your reason for the dislike with more than one or two words? Just curious, and it's always enlightening to hear what the 'other side' has to say, as it usually reinforces my opinions that oppose them.

Round 2 listening party will be tonight at my art studio with a serious stereo system, drinking beer, and BBQ'ing with friends and colleagues - all of whom are Stones fans at one level or another.
Looking forward to cranking it loud, and I'm sure everyone within earshot will be happy as well.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
keefriffhards
Do you think that maybe the similarities in the songs are that they were written and sang by Keith Richards

Would you prefer it if Keith did a take with his voice sounding like Madonna and switch from guitar to a nice flute singing Nothing On Me just to make sure there are no similarities with Demon

You're right kr

Quote
Hairball

Hard to fathom how and why any Stones fan would not like this album.

Glad you are digging it Hairball. I think the answer to your question is pretty simple....because it's not a Stones album. It is obviously quite a bit different from Stones records, lots of Stones fans who don't care for Keith's singing and much prefer Mick on those duties. The record is ballad heavy, introspective and can't really be evaluated in terms of Stones music, this is something that is pure Keith, not a sign of Mick, Ronnie or Charlie to be found.

I kind of wonder if Ronnie was a bit hurt that Keith didn't ask him to guest on at least one song?

I agree. I never said they were carbon copies. Just that they sound very similar. When you start to sing the lyrics of the song it sounds like in your head, you know it's a first or second "cousin".

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Hairball

Hard to fathom how and why any Stones fan would not like this album.

It is obviously quite a bit different from Stones records, lots of Stones fans who don't care for Keith's singing and much prefer Mick on those duties. The record is ballad heavy, introspective and can't really be evaluated in terms of Stones music, this is something that is pure Keith

I respectfully disagree - it screams everything that is great about the Rolling Stones imo- minus Mick's vocals of course. While Keith's vocals aren't everyone's cup of tea in the same way Dylan's voice might not be, I have to say that Keith singing is sounding better than ever. And I wouldn't say it's 'ballad heavy' either, as there is quite a bit of diversity covering all tempo's and types of tunes on this release. And as far the ballads are concerned, these really aren't you your typical sappy ballads ala Street of Love in any way that I can hear. Thanks for your reply though.


I predict a Grammy.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

I love Keith's voice. And there are some great songs on this. But also some quite boring songs too! I played this back to back with Talk is Cheap and it doesn't measure up to TIC in my opinion. A bit too slow and maudlin. I might like it better after a few spins.

.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-11-11 18:16 by DandelionPowderman.

And lest some of us forget, Keith is 50% (or more) of what lies behind the success of the Rolling Stones.
Surely there must be some saving grace and appreciation for this new release for those who dislike and or dismiss it altogether?

In a sense, I'm glad Keith kept it all for himself rather it than being mutated into a Stones album as it might have been
compromised by some outsider producer and/or the urge to make it sound 'contemporary' by others in the band.

Would like to think Mick likes it, and hopefully the sound and vibe will rub off on any future Stones release.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
Hairball
And lest some of us forget, Keith is 50% (or more) of what lies behind the success of the Rolling Stones.
Surely there must be some saving grace and appreciation for this new release for those who dislike and or dismiss it altogether?

In a sense, I'm glad Keith kept it all for himself rather it than being mutated into a Stones album as it might have been
compromised by some outsider producer and/or the urge to make it sound 'contemporary' by others in the band.

Would like to think Mick likes it, and hopefully the sound and vibe will rub off on any future Stones release.

You mean Charlie or Ronnie, right?

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Hairball

Hard to fathom how and why any Stones fan would not like this album.

It is obviously quite a bit different from Stones records, lots of Stones fans who don't care for Keith's singing and much prefer Mick on those duties. The record is ballad heavy, introspective and can't really be evaluated in terms of Stones music, this is something that is pure Keith

I respectfully disagree - it screams everything that is great about the Rolling Stones imo- minus Mick's vocals of course. While Keith's vocals aren't everyone's cup of tea in the same way Dylan's voice might not be, I have to say that Keith singing is sounding better than ever. And I wouldn't say it's 'ballad heavy' either, as there is quite a bit of diversity covering all tempo's and types of tunes on this release. And as far the ballads are concerned, these really aren't you your typical sappy ballads ala Street of Love in any way that I can hear. Thanks for your reply though.


I predict a Grammy.

I think this album has buried the idea that Keith just treads the same path as a solo artist as opposed to Mick trying out more diverse ideas musically
I would go so far as to assume this album has won Naturalust over a bit more towards respecting Keith's abilities as a solo artist
we don't get the feeling that it is missing Micks melodies and lyrics
Its a surprise that it does not give the impression of needing Mick's input this time round
Yes there are a lot of ballads but it only seems to add to the enjoyment of the record imo

Quote
LongBeachArena72

Quote
Hairball
And lest some of us forget, Keith is 50% (or more) of what lies behind the success of the Rolling Stones.
Surely there must be some saving grace and appreciation for this new release for those who dislike and or dismiss it altogether?

In a sense, I'm glad Keith kept it all for himself rather it than being mutated into a Stones album as it might have been
compromised by some outsider producer and/or the urge to make it sound 'contemporary' by others in the band.

Would like to think Mick likes it, and hopefully the sound and vibe will rub off on any future Stones release.

You mean Charlie or Ronnie, right?

Well, I intentionally didn't name any names so will leave that one open.



_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Hairball

Hard to fathom how and why any Stones fan would not like this album.

It is obviously quite a bit different from Stones records, lots of Stones fans who don't care for Keith's singing and much prefer Mick on those duties. The record is ballad heavy, introspective and can't really be evaluated in terms of Stones music, this is something that is pure Keith

I respectfully disagree - it screams everything that is great about the Rolling Stones imo- minus Mick's vocals of course. While Keith's vocals aren't everyone's cup of tea in the same way Dylan's voice might not be, I have to say that Keith singing is sounding better than ever. And I wouldn't say it's 'ballad heavy' either, as there is quite a bit of diversity covering all tempo's and types of tunes on this release. And as far the ballads are concerned, these really aren't you your typical sappy ballads ala Street of Love in any way that I can hear. Thanks for your reply though.


I predict a Grammy.

Hmmm. Yeah we disagree about this, looking at the last few Stones records and this one from Keith it is hard to make a strong connection, imo. It has to do with the way The Stones approach and develop the songs. They seem to work them to a level where they almost seem like a band playing them live while this one from Keith seems much more a pure studio effort, where the embryo's of the songs are still very visible in the final product and the bits ad pieces all added to embellish the embryo as overdubs.

I do think Keith's approach would work very well for a new Stones record however...at least the earthy, organic, acoustic and no aversion to slow numbers part.

What category do you think Keith will win a Grammy in dandie? That is the question of the day. They might have to come up with a new one..."Best New Record by and Artist Over 70" or something....lol

Quote
tomcasagranda

Quote
James Kirk
For the moment Keith is #1 on Amazon

[www.amazon.com]

Is that on listening, or dispatch ? I still haven't had my copy yet.

Yours excluded, the Amazon reviews by those who were more fortunate in receiving their orders on time, are overwhelmingly positive. So which of you other usual suspects out there wrote them? We demand to know!

[www.amazon.co.uk]

[www.amazon.com]

.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-11-11 18:16 by DandelionPowderman.

Substantial Damage sounds like an outtake from the Plastic Fang or Damage albums by the Jon Spencer Blues Explosion... Both of which had Steve Jordan involved in their production

.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-11-11 18:16 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Hairball

Hard to fathom how and why any Stones fan would not like this album.

It is obviously quite a bit different from Stones records, lots of Stones fans who don't care for Keith's singing and much prefer Mick on those duties. The record is ballad heavy, introspective and can't really be evaluated in terms of Stones music, this is something that is pure Keith

I respectfully disagree - it screams everything that is great about the Rolling Stones imo- minus Mick's vocals of course. While Keith's vocals aren't everyone's cup of tea in the same way Dylan's voice might not be, I have to say that Keith singing is sounding better than ever. And I wouldn't say it's 'ballad heavy' either, as there is quite a bit of diversity covering all tempo's and types of tunes on this release. And as far the ballads are concerned, these really aren't you your typical sappy ballads ala Street of Love in any way that I can hear. Thanks for your reply though.


I predict a Grammy.

Hmmm. Yeah we disagree about this, looking at the last few Stones records and this one from Keith it is hard to make a strong connection, imo. It has to do with the way The Stones approach and develop the songs. They seem to work them to a level where they almost seem like a band playing them live while this one from Keith seems much more a pure studio effort, where the embryo's of the songs are still very visible in the final product and the bits ad pieces all added to embellish the embryo as overdubs.

I do think Keith's approach would work very well for a new Stones record however...at least the earthy, organic, acoustic and no aversion to slow numbers part.

What category do you think Keith will win a Grammy in dandie? That is the question of the day. They might have to come up with a new one..."Best New Record by and Artist Over 70" or something....lol

Well I should have been more clear as I wasn't in any way referring to the last few Stones albums all of which are subpar to say the least. Nothing is really great about those imo.
I was thinking more along the lines of the GREAT Stones albums.

And it's worth pondering how great this release is when you put in the context of the current Stones era and consider the band is over 50 years old, Keith's head injury, etc., etc., etc. Miraculous.

As for Grammy award, the skies the limit. Album of the year? Best vocal performance? Best Country Song? Best Rock song? Dylan has won all of these (some more than once), so it's not too far-fetched for Keith to win them also. Not to mention lifetime achievement awards. And then there are the Academy Awards for the documentary...maybe best soundtrack?


And what is the possibility of Keith being inducted in to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame as a solo artist.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-09-20 00:22 by Hairball.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
eraser
Substantial Damage sounds like an outtake from the Plastic Fang or Damage albums by the Jon Spencer Blues Explosion... Both of which had Steve Jordan involved in their production

And, a couple of decades before that, If You Can't Rock Me, of course

If I'd written that riff I'd have recycled it many times before now!

Quote
keefriffhards
I would go so far as to assume this album has won Naturalust over a bit more towards respecting Keith's abilities as a solo artist

Well I never really lost my respect for Keith as a solo artist. I am impressed by Keith's abilities to play, write and create at this stage of his life. I think he definitely came out with a record that is close to his heart and as such the emotional content is close to the surface and easy for some of us to pick up on. There is nothing contrived or fake about this record, it's real music, straight from Keith's heart to ours.

As far as Grammy categories here they all are. Don't even consider Record Of The Year or Song of The Year, those will go out to artists like Bruno Mars, Taylor West and Ed Sheeran. Like it or not Keith is too old school and eclectic to be in the running for most of the categories. I have browsed the list and besides Lifetime Achievement Award I can't really see where this record or any of the songs fit.

[www.grammy.org]