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: PreviousFirst...245246247248249250251252253254255...LastNext
Current Page: 250 of 257
Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: Maindefender ()
Date: January 10, 2017 13:35

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
matxil
Quote
DandelionPowderman

Seemingly, it's the musical differences/differences in taste between Mick and Keith that blocks this.

I hope I'm wwrong, though.

Well, I think you most certainly are right about that. My point was actually that it's not necessarily a bad thing that Mick and Keith have musical differences, it only becomes a bad/sad thing when they limit themselves to keep on working together. They could still do the occasional concert/blues album/exposition together, but meanwhile concentrating on their solo projects. I feel that would have been better for everyone, including us Stones fans.
But maybe I am wrong too. Keith says he's a slow writer and doesn't produce a lot of songs (anymore), so maybe 3 albums was all that was in him. In that case, I am glad Steve Jordan made it happen.

It's also the element of not having any more to prove. They don't really HAVE TO to do anything anymore. They're old.

But I agree that it isn't necessarily a bad thing that Mick and Keith have their differences. I'm not sure if those differences will light a «creative spark» in their collaboration anymore, though..

I'm of the opinion that if performers don't have anything to prove anymore they should just hang it up. the Stones are active artists and still have to be judged on their merits regardless of age.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Date: January 10, 2017 13:55

Quote
Maindefender
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
matxil
Quote
DandelionPowderman

Seemingly, it's the musical differences/differences in taste between Mick and Keith that blocks this.

I hope I'm wwrong, though.

Well, I think you most certainly are right about that. My point was actually that it's not necessarily a bad thing that Mick and Keith have musical differences, it only becomes a bad/sad thing when they limit themselves to keep on working together. They could still do the occasional concert/blues album/exposition together, but meanwhile concentrating on their solo projects. I feel that would have been better for everyone, including us Stones fans.
But maybe I am wrong too. Keith says he's a slow writer and doesn't produce a lot of songs (anymore), so maybe 3 albums was all that was in him. In that case, I am glad Steve Jordan made it happen.

It's also the element of not having any more to prove. They don't really HAVE TO to do anything anymore. They're old.

But I agree that it isn't necessarily a bad thing that Mick and Keith have their differences. I'm not sure if those differences will light a «creative spark» in their collaboration anymore, though..

I'm of the opinion that if performers don't have anything to prove anymore they should just hang it up. the Stones are active artists and still have to be judged on their merits regardless of age.

There might be a slight difference in having to prove something and still having something to say? Let's hope they still have the urge to do both smiling smiley



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-01-10 13:55 by DandelionPowderman.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: Spud ()
Date: January 10, 2017 14:17

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Maindefender
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
matxil
Quote
DandelionPowderman

Seemingly, it's the musical differences/differences in taste between Mick and Keith that blocks this.

I hope I'm wwrong, though.

Well, I think you most certainly are right about that. My point was actually that it's not necessarily a bad thing that Mick and Keith have musical differences, it only becomes a bad/sad thing when they limit themselves to keep on working together. They could still do the occasional concert/blues album/exposition together, but meanwhile concentrating on their solo projects. I feel that would have been better for everyone, including us Stones fans.
But maybe I am wrong too. Keith says he's a slow writer and doesn't produce a lot of songs (anymore), so maybe 3 albums was all that was in him. In that case, I am glad Steve Jordan made it happen.

It's also the element of not having any more to prove. They don't really HAVE TO to do anything anymore. They're old.

But I agree that it isn't necessarily a bad thing that Mick and Keith have their differences. I'm not sure if those differences will light a «creative spark» in their collaboration anymore, though..

I'm of the opinion that if performers don't have anything to prove anymore they should just hang it up. the Stones are active artists and still have to be judged on their merits regardless of age.

There might be a slight difference in having to prove something and still having something to say? Let's hope they still have the urge to do both smiling smiley

thumbs upthumbs up

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: HMS ()
Date: January 10, 2017 14:31

Quote
GasLightStreet
Obviously you have a huge void of understanding things. Let's say some of them are leftovers from his previous solo albums. So what? They were original and creative when they were written and recorded. Just as with the excellent TATTOO YOU, when they were started and when they were finished has zero relevance.

The usual stuff? That's what Keith is good at doing. Pretty much follows the path of the last 35 years of solo and Stones work? What, you want him to lay a turd and do something like Jagger did with PRIMITIVE COOL or SHE'S THE BOSS? Sounds like it. Afterall, you do love bad albums and bad music.

Should some CH-songs indeed be leftovers from TIC/MO it certainly makes them not "worse" songs than material written in 2012-14. But how about originality, creativity when an artist has to reach back decades to find enough songs to stitch an album together. To me it matters when the songs were written. Digging out some great songs from decades ago and mixing them with some maybe mediocre new songs is a fake portrait of the artist at the actual point of time. It doesn´t really show his creativity and craft in the present. That´s the main problem with TY: Some or even most of it´s best moments come from a time long ago but they didn´t tell us about it. Back in 1981 one might have thought "Wow... Slave, Tops, Worried About You... such great songs, the Stones are a major creative force even now in 1981." But those songs were almost ten years old. I don´t care if they use 2-3 years old songs to build an album, but 10 years-old songs, no, that is too much.

You can praise CH for being an album of mostly good-very good songs (even a few great ones) and I´ll agree anytime. But you can´t really praise it as an overwhelming statement of originality and creativity. All he´s been doing on CH was varying the well-known. He did not go to some place he wasn´t before, musically. That´s good, btw, he doesnt need to leave his "musical cosmos", doing unfitting things. But it isn´t that creative either, it´s treading water more or less, even if the results are enjoyable. So I praise CH for giving us high-quality stuff that sounds familiar, but I dont praise it for creativity. Bowie was a "creative" artist, always exploring, reaching out, stretching out, going to places he´s not been before, Keith isn´t that type of artist. Mick would love to be like Bowie, but he isn´t in that major laegue artistically.

Recently Mick was talking about the new album of originals "maybe going in a completely different direction". What does that mean? Mixing Superheavy and the Stones, bringing out the worst of both worlds? On B&L they sound so fresh and excited about the music, most of all Mick, so why @#$%& up this mood? Please no Bridges To Babylon Vol.2... Not another bunch of Mick/Keith-solo-recordings, recorded in different rooms and marketed as a new Stones-album.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: nightskyman ()
Date: January 10, 2017 15:37

Quote
HMS
Quote
GasLightStreet
Obviously you have a huge void of understanding things. Let's say some of them are leftovers from his previous solo albums. So what? They were original and creative when they were written and recorded. Just as with the excellent TATTOO YOU, when they were started and when they were finished has zero relevance.

The usual stuff? That's what Keith is good at doing. Pretty much follows the path of the last 35 years of solo and Stones work? What, you want him to lay a turd and do something like Jagger did with PRIMITIVE COOL or SHE'S THE BOSS? Sounds like it. Afterall, you do love bad albums and bad music.

Should some CH-songs indeed be leftovers from TIC/MO it certainly makes them not "worse" songs than material written in 2012-14. But how about originality, creativity when an artist has to reach back decades to find enough songs to stitch an album together. To me it matters when the songs were written. Digging out some great songs from decades ago and mixing them with some maybe mediocre new songs is a fake portrait of the artist at the actual point of time. It doesn´t really show his creativity and craft in the present. That´s the main problem with TY: Some or even most of it´s best moments come from a time long ago but they didn´t tell us about it. Back in 1981 one might have thought "Wow... Slave, Tops, Worried About You... such great songs, the Stones are a major creative force even now in 1981." But those songs were almost ten years old. I don´t care if they use 2-3 years old songs to build an album, but 10 years-old songs, no, that is too much.

You can praise CH for being an album of mostly good-very good songs (even a few great ones) and I´ll agree anytime. But you can´t really praise it as an overwhelming statement of originality and creativity. All he´s been doing on CH was varying the well-known. He did not go to some place he wasn´t before, musically. That´s good, btw, he doesnt need to leave his "musical cosmos", doing unfitting things. But it isn´t that creative either, it´s treading water more or less, even if the results are enjoyable. So I praise CH for giving us high-quality stuff that sounds familiar, but I dont praise it for creativity. Bowie was a "creative" artist, always exploring, reaching out, stretching out, going to places he´s not been before, Keith isn´t that type of artist. Mick would love to be like Bowie, but he isn´t in that major laegue artistically.

Recently Mick was talking about the new album of originals "maybe going in a completely different direction". What does that mean? Mixing Superheavy and the Stones, bringing out the worst of both worlds? On B&L they sound so fresh and excited about the music, most of all Mick, so why @#$%& up this mood? Please no Bridges To Babylon Vol.2... Not another bunch of Mick/Keith-solo-recordings, recorded in different rooms and marketed as a new Stones-album.

I agree about no "Bridges To Babylon Vol. 2," on the other hand I think what they did recently is not a bad way to get back into the swing of things, get the creative juices flowing. The Beatles did it towards the end of their career, maybe not to too much success but they ended up doing the Abbey Road album (which was considered good at the time as has aged well, particularly the Lennon and Harrison songs).

So you never know...maybe the Stones come up with something creative, current, and cool now.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: January 13, 2017 18:21

Quote
Maindefender
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
matxil
Quote
DandelionPowderman

Seemingly, it's the musical differences/differences in taste between Mick and Keith that blocks this.

I hope I'm wwrong, though.

Well, I think you most certainly are right about that. My point was actually that it's not necessarily a bad thing that Mick and Keith have musical differences, it only becomes a bad/sad thing when they limit themselves to keep on working together. They could still do the occasional concert/blues album/exposition together, but meanwhile concentrating on their solo projects. I feel that would have been better for everyone, including us Stones fans.
But maybe I am wrong too. Keith says he's a slow writer and doesn't produce a lot of songs (anymore), so maybe 3 albums was all that was in him. In that case, I am glad Steve Jordan made it happen.

It's also the element of not having any more to prove. They don't really HAVE TO to do anything anymore. They're old.

But I agree that it isn't necessarily a bad thing that Mick and Keith have their differences. I'm not sure if those differences will light a «creative spark» in their collaboration anymore, though..

I'm of the opinion that if performers don't have anything to prove anymore they should just hang it up. the Stones are active artists and still have to be judged on their merits regardless of age.

Well then, the Stones should've hung it up after UNDERCOVER.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: January 13, 2017 18:36

Quote
HMS
Quote
GasLightStreet
Obviously you have a huge void of understanding things. Let's say some of them are leftovers from his previous solo albums. So what? They were original and creative when they were written and recorded. Just as with the excellent TATTOO YOU, when they were started and when they were finished has zero relevance.

The usual stuff? That's what Keith is good at doing. Pretty much follows the path of the last 35 years of solo and Stones work? What, you want him to lay a turd and do something like Jagger did with PRIMITIVE COOL or SHE'S THE BOSS? Sounds like it. Afterall, you do love bad albums and bad music.

Should some CH-songs indeed be leftovers from TIC/MO it certainly makes them not "worse" songs than material written in 2012-14. But how about originality, creativity when an artist has to reach back decades to find enough songs to stitch an album together. To me it matters when the songs were written. Digging out some great songs from decades ago and mixing them with some maybe mediocre new songs is a fake portrait of the artist at the actual point of time. It doesn´t really show his creativity and craft in the present. That´s the main problem with TY: Some or even most of it´s best moments come from a time long ago but they didn´t tell us about it. Back in 1981 one might have thought "Wow... Slave, Tops, Worried About You... such great songs, the Stones are a major creative force even now in 1981." But those songs were almost ten years old. I don´t care if they use 2-3 years old songs to build an album, but 10 years-old songs, no, that is too much.

Fortunately your opinion doesn't matter. How long a song has been on tape has zero relevance with now, now being when it's released. TATTOO YOU is one of their greatest albums, now possibly their second to last greatest album thanks to BLUE AND LONESOME, because it is a great collection of fantastic songs (duh - an album). Even Helen Keller can see and hear that obviousness.

How someone can be so deaf to the fact that they liked something they didn't finish and finished it is astounding. But then again, you think their worst album is fantastic so that always helps to explain your arrogant ignorance.

Quote
HMS
You can praise CH for being an album of mostly good-very good songs (even a few great ones) and I´ll agree anytime. But you can´t really praise it as an overwhelming statement of originality and creativity. All he´s been doing on CH was varying the well-known. He did not go to some place he wasn´t before, musically. That´s good, btw, he doesnt need to leave his "musical cosmos", doing unfitting things. But it isn´t that creative either, it´s treading water more or less, even if the results are enjoyable. So I praise CH for giving us high-quality stuff that sounds familiar, but I dont praise it for creativity. Bowie was a "creative" artist, always exploring, reaching out, stretching out, going to places he´s not been before, Keith isn´t that type of artist. Mick would love to be like Bowie, but he isn´t in that major laegue artistically.

Keith loves blues, reggae, country, ballads, rockers, rollers. He's not like Bowie and he's not like Queen and he's not like Nine Inch Nails and so on. So that means, in your demented world, that Hank Williams didn't have "originality and creativity" because he just did the same kind of music over and over again. Pink Floyd wasn't full of "originality and creativity" after their 2nd album then. Keith doing what he loves to do, the kind of music he loves to do, and doing it, is "originality and creativity".

You fail, as usual, with this new instance, to understand what artistic identity is.


Quote
HMS
Recently Mick was talking about the new album of originals "maybe going in a completely different direction". What does that mean? Mixing Superheavy and the Stones, bringing out the worst of both worlds? On B&L they sound so fresh and excited about the music, most of all Mick, so why @#$%& up this mood? Please no Bridges To Babylon Vol.2... Not another bunch of Mick/Keith-solo-recordings, recorded in different rooms and marketed as a new Stones-album.

HOLY CRAP. I agree with you.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: VoodooLounge13 ()
Date: April 27, 2017 04:12

Quote
Catfishguitar
I am french, sorry for my english!

But Bob Marley is not THE reggae. The french rock is like the english wine! But here we have one reggae album from Serge Gainsbourg (amazing artist) which is a masterpiece of reggae. Peter Tosh was incredible, Fela Kuti is a monument of this music. I love Marley but we can't say that reggae is just him. Is the same way to say Blues is BB king, no there is muddy, john lee etc...

I love the strategy too, i have listen all the tracks slowly and it's a better thing than all in a way.
For me Trouble is a Stones song, can be a on the keith set, amazing open G rhythmic. Substantial damage is a cool track, a band track, a track you compose when you are jamming, it's sound like the final of Can't your here me knocking when keith is playing. Robbed Blind is my favorite, a very very keith track, very personal and i have to say one thing : keith is an incredible singer now, with a lot of interpretation, a lot of true in is voice. Amnesia is a super rock n roll track with many guitar, it's sound great. I love the 4 tracks because there is very different style like keith, the man is like this.


Can you please let me know what that album is Catfishguitar?
thanks!
VL13

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: Rockman ()
Date: April 27, 2017 05:47

Aux Armes Et Cætera



ROCKMAN

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: VoodooLounge13 ()
Date: April 27, 2017 07:28

Why thank ye kindly oh man of Rock smiling smiley

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: RoughJusticeOnYa ()
Date: April 27, 2017 14:42

YEAH - with the wonderful Sly & Robbie on D'n'B -
Majestic sound, mos' def...

Do check this one out for sure: ...


Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: Hairball ()
Date: April 28, 2017 11:27

Great thread. thumbs up

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

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: stone4ever ()
Date: April 28, 2017 11:45

Wow this is a good thread after all the Mick solo bullshit trying to capture Mozart from a turd basically.

The thing that strikes me the most and never gets picked up on on iorr is that Mick is seen as this musician who wants to branch out from the Stones and do other things. Keith is seen as the musician who keeps repeating himself doing the same old music.
It's evident from their solo work that it is Glimmer Twin Keith who branches out more into Soul, Reggae, Country, Blues, and dare i say it tries more contemporary avenues with tracks like "Substantial Damage" and "Amnesia".

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: matxil ()
Date: April 28, 2017 12:00

Mick tried to branch out into more mainstream, pop, "new" music. It's a pity he wasn't secure enough of himself to really try to make that work.
Keith branched out in the music-styles he likes, "roots-music", and indeed, gave it a lot of new feeling to it, especially his personal brand of soul. I think if he would have done a few more albums, he could have gotten himself a real name as a sort of underground songwriter, in the line of Tom Waits, Leonard Cohen, Nick Cave, etc... I guess his loyalty to the Stones got in the way.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Date: April 28, 2017 14:08

Quote
Hairball
Great thread. thumbs up

It was a classic thread, but the enthusiastic vibe was too much for some posters, seemingly.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: HMS ()
Date: April 28, 2017 15:26

Quote
matxil
I think if he would have done a few more albums, he could have gotten himself a real name as a sort of underground songwriter, in the line of Tom Waits, Leonard Cohen, Nick Cave, etc...

Keith co-wrote some of the best songs in R n R (a long long time ago) but there is a huge gap artistically between him and aritists like Waits, Cave, Cohen especially.

"A few more albums" wouldn´t have produced anything real outstandig, I guess. His three albums are overall quite enjoyable, but far from greatness. Post-1986-Stones-albums are quite enjoyable too (if you skip the fillers), but far from former greatnesss. So I cannot see any hint that Keith would have done better on his own.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: April 28, 2017 15:56

Quote
HMS
Quote
matxil
I think if he would have done a few more albums, he could have gotten himself a real name as a sort of underground songwriter, in the line of Tom Waits, Leonard Cohen, Nick Cave, etc...

Keith co-wrote some of the best songs in R n R (a long long time ago) but there is a huge gap artistically between him and aritists like Waits, Cave, Cohen especially.

Fail AGAIN. Do you purposely not understand things? You're just an ignorant savant, as explained by your astounding ability to not understand what matxill said, as pointed out above and now below:

Quote
HMS
"A few more albums" wouldn´t have produced anything real outstandig, I guess. His three albums are overall quite enjoyable, but far from greatness. Post-1986-Stones-albums are quite enjoyable too (if you skip the fillers), but far from former greatnesss. So I cannot see any hint that Keith would have done better on his own.

There's no demand for an encore, because it will just continue to happen.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: HMS ()
Date: April 28, 2017 16:18

Keith doesn´t stand "in the line of Cave, Waits, Cohen". He never did, never will. And he isn´t some "sort of underground writer". Never was and never will be. Cave, Waits, Cohen are artists. Poets if you will. Keith is a Rock n Roll musician. That´s all he is and ever was.

My comments are easy to understand for everybody but you. If you should think Keith is artistically in the same league as Cohen, then you are ignorant.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: April 28, 2017 16:24

Quote
HMS
Keith doesn´t stand "in the line of Cave, Waits, Cohen". He never did, never will. And he isn´t some "sort of underground writer". Never was and never will be. Cave, Waits, Cohen are artists. Poets if you will. Keith is a Rock n Roll musician. That´s all he is and ever was.

My comments are easy to understand for everybody but you. If you should think Keith is artistically in the same league as Cohen, then you are ignorant.

Oh I understood your comments. The problem is your failure to understand what you're commenting on, which always seems to illuminate your ignorance like a thousand watt light bulb.

You don't think Keith Richards is an artist. Your stupidity is brilliant.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Date: April 28, 2017 16:36

Quote
stone4ever
Wow this is a good thread after all the Mick solo bullshit trying to capture Mozart from a turd basically.

The thing that strikes me the most and never gets picked up on on iorr is that Mick is seen as this musician who wants to branch out from the Stones and do other things. Keith is seen as the musician who keeps repeating himself doing the same old music.
It's evident from their solo work that it is Glimmer Twin Keith who branches out more into Soul, Reggae, Country, Blues, and dare i say it tries more contemporary avenues with tracks like "Substantial Damage" and "Amnesia".

LOL, Exactly. If the Stones had ever drafted a mission statement, it would be something like your last sentence; what Keith has carried on.
So when reviews say that Keith's solo albums stayed closer to the Stones path - they are correct. It's up to you then to interpret what a Stones' path is. The short and narrow minded version sees it as uptempo, sus-chord rockers about partying. But at essence the Stones are about root music; and bringing it up through the years.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: HMS ()
Date: April 28, 2017 17:09

Quote
GasLightStreet
Quote
HMS
Keith doesn´t stand "in the line of Cave, Waits, Cohen". He never did, never will. And he isn´t some "sort of underground writer". Never was and never will be. Cave, Waits, Cohen are artists. Poets if you will. Keith is a Rock n Roll musician. That´s all he is and ever was.

My comments are easy to understand for everybody but you. If you should think Keith is artistically in the same league as Cohen, then you are ignorant.

Oh I understood your comments. The problem is your failure to understand what you're commenting on, which always seems to illuminate your ignorance like a thousand watt light bulb.

You don't think Keith Richards is an artist. Your stupidity is brilliant.


There are artists and artists.
The Rolling Stones are rather very very successful entertainers than artists.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: Hairball ()
Date: April 28, 2017 19:13

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Hairball
Great thread. thumbs up

It was a classic thread, but the enthusiastic vibe was too much for some posters, seemingly.

True, but that was their problem really. Some of the negative 'rain on the parade' vibe became overkill and came across as bitter and obnoxious after repeated rants.
The positive truth lies within the grooves of a standout classic (CH)- something that some failed to grasp probably due to their being committed to continuously spewing vitriol.
Still, a great thread, and I had a great time discussing the album - even when going up against the irrational hatred.

smiling smiley

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

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Date: April 28, 2017 19:15

Quote
Hairball
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Hairball
Great thread. thumbs up

It was a classic thread, but the enthusiastic vibe was too much for some posters, seemingly.

True, but that was their problem really. Some of the negative 'rain on the parade' vibe became overkill and came across as bitter and obnoxious after repeated rants.
The positive truth lies within the grooves of a standout classic (CH)- something that some failed to grasp probably due to their being committed to continuously spewing vitriol.
Still, a great thread, and I had a great time discussing the album - even when going up against the irrational hatred.

smiling smiley

thumbs up

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: matxil ()
Date: April 28, 2017 19:36

Quote
HMS
Quote
matxil
I think if he would have done a few more albums, he could have gotten himself a real name as a sort of underground songwriter, in the line of Tom Waits, Leonard Cohen, Nick Cave, etc...

Keith co-wrote some of the best songs in R n R (a long long time ago) but there is a huge gap artistically between him and aritists like Waits, Cave, Cohen especially.

As far as lyrics are concerned, he's not in the same league (but then again, he's not in the same league as Chuck Berry or 60's/early 70's Mick Jagger either, in that respect).
But as far as music and atmosphere go, yes, I would put him in that "compartment", despite the obvious differences in musical style (but not in quality). "The heartbroken troubadours of the lonely dark hours after midnight", to give it a name.

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: matxil ()
Date: April 28, 2017 19:37

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Hairball
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Hairball
Great thread. thumbs up

It was a classic thread, but the enthusiastic vibe was too much for some posters, seemingly.

True, but that was their problem really. Some of the negative 'rain on the parade' vibe became overkill and came across as bitter and obnoxious after repeated rants.
The positive truth lies within the grooves of a standout classic (CH)- something that some failed to grasp probably due to their being committed to continuously spewing vitriol.
Still, a great thread, and I had a great time discussing the album - even when going up against the irrational hatred.

smiling smiley

thumbs up

thumbs up

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: Doxa ()
Date: April 28, 2017 19:53

Quote
matxil
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Hairball
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Hairball
Great thread. thumbs up

It was a classic thread, but the enthusiastic vibe was too much for some posters, seemingly.

True, but that was their problem really. Some of the negative 'rain on the parade' vibe became overkill and came across as bitter and obnoxious after repeated rants.
The positive truth lies within the grooves of a standout classic (CH)- something that some failed to grasp probably due to their being committed to continuously spewing vitriol.
Still, a great thread, and I had a great time discussing the album - even when going up against the irrational hatred.

smiling smiley

thumbs up

thumbs up

Oh, how sweet. I'm touched.

- Doxa

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: LongBeachArena72 ()
Date: April 28, 2017 20:07

Quote
Doxa
Quote
matxil
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Hairball
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Hairball
Great thread. thumbs up

It was a classic thread, but the enthusiastic vibe was too much for some posters, seemingly.

True, but that was their problem really. Some of the negative 'rain on the parade' vibe became overkill and came across as bitter and obnoxious after repeated rants.
The positive truth lies within the grooves of a standout classic (CH)- something that some failed to grasp probably due to their being committed to continuously spewing vitriol.
Still, a great thread, and I had a great time discussing the album - even when going up against the irrational hatred.

smiling smiley

thumbs up

thumbs up

Oh, how sweet. I'm touched.

- Doxa

it's a bitch indeed when irrational hatred meets inexplicable hero worship.

FREE KEITH!

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: shortfatfanny ()
Date: April 28, 2017 21:16

Quote
HMS
Quote
GasLightStreet
Quote
HMS
Keith doesn´t stand "in the line of Cave, Waits, Cohen". He never did, never will. And he isn´t some "sort of underground writer". Never was and never will be. Cave, Waits, Cohen are artists. Poets if you will. Keith is a Rock n Roll musician. That´s all he is and ever was.

My comments are easy to understand for everybody but you. If you should think Keith is artistically in the same league as Cohen, then you are ignorant.

Oh I understood your comments. The problem is your failure to understand what you're commenting on, which always seems to illuminate your ignorance like a thousand watt light bulb.

You don't think Keith Richards is an artist. Your stupidity is brilliant.




There are artists and artists.
The Rolling Stones are rather very very successful entertainers than artists.

What about successful entertaining artists ?
That's what the Stones have been,are and probably will be...at least for me.
And Keith as well,especially with CH which is a joy to listen to.


Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: stone4ever ()
Date: April 28, 2017 21:30

Quote
matxil
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Hairball
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Hairball
Great thread. thumbs up

It was a classic thread, but the enthusiastic vibe was too much for some posters, seemingly.

True, but that was their problem really. Some of the negative 'rain on the parade' vibe became overkill and came across as bitter and obnoxious after repeated rants.
The positive truth lies within the grooves of a standout classic (CH)- something that some failed to grasp probably due to their being committed to continuously spewing vitriol.
Still, a great thread, and I had a great time discussing the album - even when going up against the irrational hatred.

smiling smiley

thumbs up

thumbs up

thumbs up

Re: Keith Richards solo album 'Crosseyed Heart' - out September 18
Posted by: stone4ever ()
Date: April 28, 2017 22:15

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Quote
stone4ever
Wow this is a good thread after all the Mick solo bullshit trying to capture Mozart from a turd basically.

The thing that strikes me the most and never gets picked up on on iorr is that Mick is seen as this musician who wants to branch out from the Stones and do other things. Keith is seen as the musician who keeps repeating himself doing the same old music.
It's evident from their solo work that it is Glimmer Twin Keith who branches out more into Soul, Reggae, Country, Blues, and dare i say it tries more contemporary avenues with tracks like "Substantial Damage" and "Amnesia".

LOL, Exactly. If the Stones had ever drafted a mission statement, it would be something like your last sentence; what Keith has carried on.
So when reviews say that Keith's solo albums stayed closer to the Stones path - they are correct. It's up to you then to interpret what a Stones' path is. The short and narrow minded version sees it as uptempo, sus-chord rockers about partying. But at essence the Stones are about root music; and bringing it up through the years.

Yes i see what you mean. The Stones have certainly covered a myriad of avenues in their musical genre. They have been inspired and influenced by so many varying musical styles throughout their career. To some they are just a Rock band, but they have never really been just that. How many Rock bands come out with songs like Lady Jane, Factory Girl and As Tears Go By. I like to think Keith especially has always tried to pay homage to his roots. Be it Country, folk, Blues or Reggae, and its still noticeable on albums like Steel Wheels and Voodoo Lounge.
I would love to see one more solo album from a confident Keith this time round. As much as i love CH it does show ring rust in the guitar department as expected from the long lay off.
Its clear from all the solo spot's Keith has done in tributes to various artists that Keith still loves and respects the people who have inspired him musically throughout his life, and that always comes out in his music.

Goto Page: PreviousFirst...245246247248249250251252253254255...LastNext
Current Page: 250 of 257


This Thread has been closed

Online Users

Guests: 1540
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