Quote
Doxa

Quote
mr_dja



I've heard Keith say that it's his job to inspire Mick.

I think you hit the nail here.
- Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Maybe the new album predictions and expectations should be posted here rather than in the CH-thread?

Quote
DandelionPowderman
There you go. Even my wife likes the album

Quote
GasLightStreet
It's odd. The whole BRIDGES sessions is just one giant head scratch especially after the "band" vibe of VOODOO. Then there's just nothing for years until they decide to do something in 2002, and to which WHY I've never really read anything about that can be attributed to being realistic. They record a bunch of tunes and use 4 out of 20 some ideas, 2 of which are absolutely horrible (Keys To Your Love and Stealing My Heart) and the other 2 are OK but didn't need to go on a hits album.

Then... they do A BIGGER BANG. And then nothing until two tracks in 2012? Really? So... 1997-2005 for ONE ALBUM!!?? With some reminders in 2002 that they aren't such old bags yet with FORTY LICKS having 4 songs take the place of 4 classics of whatever choice... a dumb move.

Clearly CLEARLY not interested. It seems A BIGGER BANG was a last attempt at doing something together, with OK results (Let Me Down Slow, Biggest Mistake, Dangerous Beauty, Rough Justice, It Won't Take Long, She Saw Me Coming, Laugh... and This Place Is Empty - which is good enough, really, and should've been the album).

Keith recorded a solo album. That's better than nothing and it's certainly - positively - better than another Stones album of the quality we've been handed with the Don Was era.

Quote
GasLightStreet
Played Trouble, Robbed Blind and Love Overdue last night for two friends. They were floored. "He sounds like he's 50!" they said. They had difficulty believing it's Keith at 71 years old. Both talked about getting the album. They thought it sounded incredible and they really liked the musicianship.

Quote
Turner68

Quote
DandelionPowderman
There you go. Even my wife likes the album

even mine!

it's a great album. and i think it does involve creative risks. i listen to "lover's plea" and think "where did that come from?"

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Turner68

Quote
DandelionPowderman
There you go. Even my wife likes the album

even mine!

it's a great album. and i think it does involve creative risks. i listen to "lover's plea" and think "where did that come from?"

My wife likes it as well but she's a cool chick. She has her own copy of STICKY FINGERS, EOMS and EMOTIONAL RESCUE. And maybe a couple of others, I can't remember all of them.

On vinyl.

She got HOT ROCKS on CD (the 2002 reissue) because she wore the vinyl one out I guess. Or she just bought it because.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
Doxa

Quote
mr_dja



I've heard Keith say that it's his job to inspire Mick.

I think you hit the nail here. The reason for the downhill for Stones music in quality and quantity for the last 35 years or so: Keith just doesn't inspire Mick any longer. I think the problem was obvious by the time of making EMOTIONAL RSECUE but it could be that the hailed EXILE was teh last time The Glimmer Twins had a creative respect towards each other - or Mick was actually paying attention into what Keith did,and being even excited about it.

Usually this is seen that the reason is that Mick and Keith had developed very different tastes for what they consider good music; Mick being a trend follower, and Keith a rootsman (which is to say: Keith creatively stopped to the musical premises of EXILE, Mick not). That partly is true, but the style or a genre of music is not the whole point: the question is has someone something to say, that is, can one form inspiring, great music from a given genre? If one digs blues or country that alone will not constitute great, authentic music - something the Stones actually did during their heyday (The Big Four), and excelled and completed in EXILE.

So if we consider this from Mick's point of view - not popular here - after EXILE or so Keith's music just weren't exciting for him - just repitive and seemingly going downhill in quality (and in quantity as well). And remember: Mick had seen what this man once was - how great, unique, fresh stuff he could have come up with. But he also saw and understood the change in creativity. As the 70's go further, it was clear that there were no any longer any gimmesheltesr, honkytonkwomens or streetfightingmans to be born. There were half-baked riffs saying the same thing over and again, the recording processes just taking longer and longer, when a certain right 'feel' was waited to be come, and the result of all that time, money and drugs wasted would be something as mind-blowing as "Dance Little Sister".

I don't think the music in CROSSEYED HEART means much to Jagger (or, like hoped here, "open his eyes"). I guess for him it is stuff he has seen Keith doing for decades (he probably knows this man musically better than anyone else). He once commented TALK IS CHEAP or MAIN OFFENDER by a telling remark that it sounds the same as the half-finished songs Keith does for the Stones. Probably he is just pleased that Keith get it out by himself and he doesn't need to bother himself with it...

It is no any wonder that their most fruitful colloboration of the last decades happens to be the one on which Keith made his contribution almost 40 years earlier - Jagger sounds surprisingly inspired in "Plundered My Soul", and probably put more effort into it than to any Keith song for ages.

So this was just some food for thought to those who see the artistic downhill of the Stones solely as a fault of Mick Jagger, and if Keith had more say on things, Mick would listen him more, etc the things would have been better or even so great again. Bullshit. The guy just stopped delivering the goods. It takes two to a tango..

- Doxa

A post Ive been waiting for. Good read. Thank you. Just one thing though: Dance little sister is great! But yes, it's a lucky strike, a groove that happens to be great. It's a throw-away but they were very good at producing those back then.

Have you forgotten about the sleazy funk and the reggae that came later on? I thought you loved the 75/76 Stones the most? None of that existed in the Stones in 1971.

And now you agree with a statement that says Keith stopped evolving musically by Exile On Main Street

Also, Doxa's post is (albeit excellently subtle) a slap in the face to all of us who love SG, ER, TY and Undercover.

He's got a point, though, but he should know that A LOT of the material on SF and Exile is from 1968-1970. So, if the inspiration wore thin it started even earlier than that.

Sorry for continuing this in the wrong thread, btw

Quote
Redhotcarpet
No it isnt, and I didnt read that in his post.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Maybe the new album predictions and expectations should be posted here rather than in the CH-thread?

Quote
DandelionPowderman
You missed the "it was clear that it was half-baked riffs"-paragraph, then? Your own favourite era

Quote
Naturalust
Well to provide a little balance in the wife department, my wife's response after hearing the record..."Well it's not very good is it?". She's a huge music fan with southern roots in bands like the Allman Brothers and also a fan of the Stones up to Tattoo You.

I tried to explain some of the subtleties of the record and songs that might give her more of an appreciation of it. She understood some of them and actually admitted the music was OK but she couldn't get past her dislike of Keith's singing. I told her that it was probably an acquired taste, like good whiskey, with a similar calming effect for those who digested it properly. Left it at that, perhaps she will come around eventually but I'm not very optimistic. LOL.

Quote
Naturalust
Yeah Turner good points. I actually used some of the very words you write like vulnerable plus genuine and heartfelt and honest to try to get her on board but she wasn't having any of it. I think the singing is the clear line in the sand for people who do or don't like Keith's record. He's not quite poetic enough to get the pass Dylan often gets, not quite out there enough (or something) to get the pass Tom Waits gets, he's somewhere in the middle. In any case I thought the vocals were actually very well recorded and produced on CH, kudos to the engineers for recording, EQ'ing and mixing them so well. Maybe not so great compared to my favorite singers but for Keith they are pretty damn good.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Back to CH. Have you noticed the wrong number of bars twice in Irene? A too early key-change, and he just keeps on singing. Disturbing in the beginning, but now it sort of belongs in there

Quote
StonesCat

Quote
Naturalust
Yeah Turner good points. I actually used some of the very words you write like vulnerable plus genuine and heartfelt and honest to try to get her on board but she wasn't having any of it. I think the singing is the clear line in the sand for people who do or don't like Keith's record. He's not quite poetic enough to get the pass Dylan often gets, not quite out there enough (or something) to get the pass Tom Waits gets, he's somewhere in the middle. In any case I thought the vocals were actually very well recorded and produced on CH, kudos to the engineers for recording, EQ'ing and mixing them so well. Maybe not so great compared to my favorite singers but for Keith they are pretty damn good.

For me, the "interesting" went out of Keith's voice by the late 70s. The beautiful backup vocalist of SF and Exile era songs was pretty much gone. Even by the 81-82 tours, him and RW's vocals are almost funnier to hear on boots than adding to the songs. At the same time, I'll admit he sings better live now than he has for a long time. He at least is trying to get the words out correctly, which is an improvement over 10-15 years ago.