For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Eleanor RigbyQuote
DandelionPowderman
<I am guessing that fans would have initially thought this album was average...with one or 2 decent songs.>
Not for me, I liked the whole album at the time. And I thought Undercover Of The Night, She Was Hot and Pretty Beat Up were fantastic. I still do.
sorry..I should have expected a reply like this.
i should i have some fans...
Quote
Witness
Only a subjective remark, probably without consequence if one does not love UNDERCOVER: In some way "Undercover" (despite the title of the album) and "She Was Hot" mainly involve their own songs separately, whereas it is "Tie You Up (The Pain of Love" ) that defines the album (dare I say its theme and feeling) and unites and integrates those two first grand songs to this album, making them assets for it. So important and vital is that third song of the album. More or less, a key track to this album.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Witness
Only a subjective remark, probably without consequence if one does not love UNDERCOVER: In some way "Undercover" (despite the title of the album) and "She Was Hot" mainly involve their own songs separately, whereas it is "Tie You Up (The Pain of Love" ) that defines the album (dare I say its theme and feeling) and unites and integrates those two first grand songs to this album, making them assets for it. So important and vital is that third song of the album. More or less, a key track to this album.
That is a good observation, Witness. I agree, totally!
Some of Keith's finest playing ever in there as well
Quote
Witness
Only a subjective remark, probably without consequence if one does not love UNDERCOVER: In some way "Undercover" (despite the title of the album) and "She Was Hot" mainly involve their own songs separately, whereas it is "Tie You Up (The Pain of Love" ) that defines the album (dare I say its theme and feeling) and unites and integrates those two first grand songs to this album, making them assets for it. So important and vital is that third song of the album. More or less, a key track to this album.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
<But the majority of fans believe, that Mick started to write more songs only in the nineties and that Keith always was the main songwriter.>
Who believe this??
Most fans know that it was around 1967 that Mick started to write whole songs
Quote
elunsiQuote
DandelionPowderman
<But the majority of fans believe, that Mick started to write more songs only in the nineties and that Keith always was the main songwriter.>
Who believe this??
Most fans know that it was around 1967 that Mick started to write whole songs
Back to this, now old, discussion.
You asked who believes that Keith was the main songwriter of the band. I forgot Keith! Did he not say in his book that "in general" he comes up with a song and Mick "finished" it? Maybe he thought about the early 60ies and pretended that it was like that for the following 40 years, because it is clearly the opposite of what Taylor and Wood say.
Quote
24FPS
I don't know anything about the mixing of this album. EXILE was basically set aside, allowed to cool on the sill, and then was mixed some time later in Los Angeles. Who knows how good or bad some of those songs sounded before bits and pieces were added here and there. I certainly don't get that feeling with the Undercover album. I never thought of as the third leg in the Pathe Marconi stool, but I can see Some Girls being tops, Emotional Rescue a lesser, summer album, and then they ran out of gas for Undercover.
I was really hoping for a lot after the lackluster Emotional Rescue album. (Lackluster in comparison to Some Girls). I was knocked out by the UCOTN single and of course I bought the album immediately, as I bought all Stones albums back then. Well, this was the one that cure me of that habit. I took my time buying Dirty Work(on cassette), another dud, and I did take my time before snatching up Steel Wheels. (Although I was greatly satisfied by that album).
I think those who think Undercover is a great album, among the very Stones' best, are in the distinct minority. It seems there are more who sing the praises of Undercover than those who think the same of Dirty Work. Undercover is a more coherent work than Dirty Work, but there's only about 5 songs between the 2 of them that I would ever listen to again.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
elunsiQuote
DandelionPowderman
<But the majority of fans believe, that Mick started to write more songs only in the nineties and that Keith always was the main songwriter.>
Who believe this??
Most fans know that it was around 1967 that Mick started to write whole songs
Back to this, now old, discussion.
You asked who believes that Keith was the main songwriter of the band. I forgot Keith! Did he not say in his book that "in general" he comes up with a song and Mick "finished" it? Maybe he thought about the early 60ies and pretended that it was like that for the following 40 years, because it is clearly the opposite of what Taylor and Wood say.
Look, there's these antennae that Keith has...the songs are just floating around there out in the ether, Keith just happens to nab them from space, to which they channel through to his gnarled hands to his guitar.
At that point he just hands it over to Mick to finish up, like a chef to his protégé in the kitchen might do.
What's so difficult to understand about that? All Mick has to do is finish the damn things. It's a valuable role Mick plays in scraping the dough bowl clean but Keith's already done the hard part!
Quote
elunsiQuote
treaclefingersQuote
elunsiQuote
DandelionPowderman
<But the majority of fans believe, that Mick started to write more songs only in the nineties and that Keith always was the main songwriter.>
Who believe this??
Most fans know that it was around 1967 that Mick started to write whole songs
Back to this, now old, discussion.
You asked who believes that Keith was the main songwriter of the band. I forgot Keith! Did he not say in his book that "in general" he comes up with a song and Mick "finished" it? Maybe he thought about the early 60ies and pretended that it was like that for the following 40 years, because it is clearly the opposite of what Taylor and Wood say.
Look, there's these antennae that Keith has...the songs are just floating around there out in the ether, Keith just happens to nab them from space, to which they channel through to his gnarled hands to his guitar.
At that point he just hands it over to Mick to finish up, like a chef to his protégé in the kitchen might do.
What's so difficult to understand about that? All Mick has to do is finish the damn things. It's a valuable role Mick plays in scraping the dough bowl clean but Keith's already done the hard part!
Both, M.Taylor and R.Wood said, that most songs were written by M.Jagger. most of the times Jagger brought a song to the studio and the band helped to finish it. In the 70ies, the 80ies, the 90ies and the 2000s it was Mick who had done the hard part. Mick is not like a protege in the kitchen, he is an underrated songwriter.
Quote
24FPS
I don't know anything about the mixing of this album. EXILE was basically set aside, allowed to cool on the sill, and then was mixed some time later in Los Angeles. Who knows how good or bad some of those songs sounded before bits and pieces were added here and there. I certainly don't get that feeling with the Undercover album. I never thought of as the third leg in the Pathe Marconi stool, but I can see Some Girls being tops, Emotional Rescue a lesser, summer album, and then they ran out of gas for Undercover.
I was really hoping for a lot after the lackluster Emotional Rescue album. (Lackluster in comparison to Some Girls). I was knocked out by the UCOTN single and of course I bought the album immediately, as I bought all Stones albums back then. Well, this was the one that cure me of that habit. I took my time buying Dirty Work(on cassette), another dud, and I did take my time before snatching up Steel Wheels. (Although I was greatly satisfied by that album).
I think those who think Undercover is a great album, among the very Stones' best, are in the distinct minority. It seems there are more who sing the praises of Undercover than those who think the same of Dirty Work. Undercover is a more coherent work than Dirty Work, but there's only about 5 songs between the 2 of them that I would ever listen to again.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
elunsiQuote
treaclefingersQuote
elunsiQuote
DandelionPowderman
<But the majority of fans believe, that Mick started to write more songs only in the nineties and that Keith always was the main songwriter.>
Who believe this??
Most fans know that it was around 1967 that Mick started to write whole songs
Back to this, now old, discussion.
You asked who believes that Keith was the main songwriter of the band. I forgot Keith! Did he not say in his book that "in general" he comes up with a song and Mick "finished" it? Maybe he thought about the early 60ies and pretended that it was like that for the following 40 years, because it is clearly the opposite of what Taylor and Wood say.
Look, there's these antennae that Keith has...the songs are just floating around there out in the ether, Keith just happens to nab them from space, to which they channel through to his gnarled hands to his guitar.
At that point he just hands it over to Mick to finish up, like a chef to his protégé in the kitchen might do.
What's so difficult to understand about that? All Mick has to do is finish the damn things. It's a valuable role Mick plays in scraping the dough bowl clean but Keith's already done the hard part!
Both, M.Taylor and R.Wood said, that most songs were written by M.Jagger. most of the times Jagger brought a song to the studio and the band helped to finish it. In the 70ies, the 80ies, the 90ies and the 2000s it was Mick who had done the hard part. Mick is not like a protege in the kitchen, he is an underrated songwriter.
you may not have noticed the extreme sarcasm
Quote
elunsiQuote
DandelionPowderman
<But the majority of fans believe, that Mick started to write more songs only in the nineties and that Keith always was the main songwriter.>
Who believe this??
Most fans know that it was around 1967 that Mick started to write whole songs
Back to this, now old, discussion.
You asked who believes that Keith was the main songwriter of the band. I forgot Keith! Did he not say in his book that "in general" he comes up with a song and Mick "finished" it? Maybe he thought about the early 60ies and pretended that it was like that for the following 40 years, because it is clearly the opposite of what Taylor and Wood say.
Quote
DoxaQuote
Witness
Only a subjective remark, probably without consequence if one does not love UNDERCOVER: In some way "Undercover" (despite the title of the album) and "She Was Hot" mainly involve their own songs separately, whereas it is "Tie You Up (The Pain of Love" ) that defines the album (dare I say its theme and feeling) and unites and integrates those two first grand songs to this album, making them assets for it. So important and vital is that third song of the album. More or less, a key track to this album.
I agree with you there. Both "Undercover of the Night" and "She Was Hot" gives a wrong signal of the nature of the album (as "Too Much Blood" later as well). UNDERCOVER, if anything, is defined of those what I call typical Pathe Marconi numbers. Not too much idea in song writing or focus but the band having a nice groove going on, when some sort of idea or sketch is given. I think "Tie You Up" sets the mood for the rest come. Great band and great musicianship, but damn lazy song-writing.
- Doxa
Quote
Doxa
What else? "Undercover of The Night" and "She Was Hot" truely are very good songs, shining diamonds in that context. I admire what they try to do in "Too Much Blood", but unfortunately the result does not work for me.
- Doxa
Quote
DandelionPowderman
<That was, is and have always been part of the style of some of their music, and has interspersed the more explicit great song ideas?>
That is so true!
Songs like Rip This Joint, Shake Your Hips, Casino Boogie, Turd On The Run, Soul Survivor, Silver Train or Hide Your Love are hailed as great songs by many fans.
The song writing or the playing/production on songs like Pretty Beat Up, Love Is Strong, Tie You Up, Too Tough or All The Way Down is not inferior to the aforementioned songs, imo.
The cred and the rep of Exile and the so-called "big four" albums makes it easier to diss songs that are just as good as single tracks taken from the "golden era".
I would listen to Tie You Up instead of Turd On The Run any day, though, if I had to choose. I like them both, but things need to be put into perspective.
Saying that songs are merely grooves, and that they don't show any developement in song writing, is a paradox when we are discussing the Stones. GS is three chords played over and over again, abrupted by a few one-chord stops.
It IS the groove that makes the Stones what they are, the sleazier and more swinging, the better, imo.
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
<That was, is and have always been part of the style of some of their music, and has interspersed the more explicit great song ideas?>
That is so true!
Songs like Rip This Joint, Shake Your Hips, Casino Boogie, Turd On The Run, Soul Survivor, Silver Train or Hide Your Love are hailed as great songs by many fans.
The song writing or the playing/production on songs like Pretty Beat Up, Love Is Strong, Tie You Up, Too Tough or All The Way Down is not inferior to the aforementioned songs, imo.
The cred and the rep of Exile and the so-called "big four" albums makes it easier to diss songs that are just as good as single tracks taken from the "golden era".
I would listen to Tie You Up instead of Turd On The Run any day, though, if I had to choose. I like them both, but things need to be put into perspective.
Saying that songs are merely grooves, and that they don't show any developement in song writing, is a paradox when we are discussing the Stones. GS is three chords played over and over again, abrupted by a few one-chord stops.
It IS the groove that makes the Stones what they are, the sleazier and more swinging, the better, imo.
I have always thought that there is more than the "groove" that makes Stones tunes great songs. But if for you "Pretty Beat Up" is equal to "Gimme Shelter", let it be so, but for me there is more in song-writing. The genious of the Stones have been for me making diamonds of some theoretically simple ideas, but I don't hear much that in UNDERCOVER.
The reason why I call those UNDERCOVER tunes "lazy-writing" is that I hear some laziness and non-inspiration in the air. The ideas simply are not very inspiring to construct more worked-out songs, or if they are, the guys are too lazy to finish them properly. The question is not that of work ethics but more that of inspiration. I think especially Jagger is here one to blame. Maybe they are just tired creatively, I don't know. Some focus is missing. (But still UNDERCOVER has a certain charm of 'not going anywhere', and the guys being arrogant enough to just trust on their basic doings and routines, which still sounds rather vital).
But I don't hear that, for example, in EXILE gems like "Rip This Joint" or "Soul Survivor" of the songs you listed above. They simply are inspired songs based on fresh ideas per se. Listening to them one can hear how focused they were, in the very height of their powers. Comparin the finished version to Keith's sketch of "Soul Survivor (relaesed in SOME GIRLS bonus album), alone shows how damn inspired and focused Jagger was. Keith was so inspired that recicled the main riff to a couple of tunes ever since... Like argued above, EXILE was that sort of album that they were able to do once in a life time. The 'looseness' of it, and using ideas they wouldn't have dared earlier, was build on the strong and strict - even disciplined - body of work preceding it. They just let them relax there, and just follow their instincts (with marvellous results). But that is a dangerous road to follow, if your ideas are not so inspiring and fresh any longer, and your insticts so spot on either.
There is a lot of that 'looseness' in Pathe Marconi Era as well - and SOME GIRLS is a masterpiece - but starting by EMOTIONAL RESCUE and definitively by UNDERCOVER I start to hear the symptoms of running out of fresh, inspiring ideas, and more just relying on old routines. As albums EMOTIONAL RESCUE and UNDERCOVER are to SOME GIRLS like GOATS HEAD SOUP and IT'S ONLY ROCK'N'ROLL are to EXILE. (But that said, altogether GOATS HEAD SOUP and IT'S ONLY ROCK'N'ROLL contain way stronger song-writing as UNDERCOVER)
- Doxa
Quote
Eleanor Rigby
I can't believe there is any relation to SG or "the big four" with Undercover.
Crikey..people draw long bows on this thread.
The album Undercover was a flop and is not one of the band's good albums.
Yes I like 3 songs from the album but that's it.