For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Just read that Don Was..
Posted by:
StonedAsia
()
Date: May 18, 2016 15:35
Quote
Spodlumt
Don Was is the worst producer they can work with. He strips all the grime out of a record. He is as bad as Jeff Lynne. They should get Chris Kimsey as a producer and Bob Clearmountain as a mixer. At least these guys know what they are doing. The Stones have turned the last 30 odd years into a colossal episode in laziness. Shitty records, Over-priced tickets and paint by the numbers "events."
I used to love them by they have made a mockery of their legacy....money, money, money.....not a decent record in 35 years...."the greatest rock n' roll band in the world....MY ASS....talk about staying too long at the party......
Agreed. Don Was may be a good producer, but he's not good for the Stones, at least that is my honest opinion; too sterile. I want some gritty, loose rock and roll recorded with 3 mikes in a room. Period.
Re: Just read that Don Was..
Posted by:
KRiffhard
()
Date: May 18, 2016 15:43
Quote
StonedAsiaQuote
Spodlumt
Don Was is the worst producer they can work with. He strips all the grime out of a record. He is as bad as Jeff Lynne. They should get Chris Kimsey as a producer and Bob Clearmountain as a mixer. At least these guys know what they are doing. The Stones have turned the last 30 odd years into a colossal episode in laziness. Shitty records, Over-priced tickets and paint by the numbers "events."
I used to love them by they have made a mockery of their legacy....money, money, money.....not a decent record in 35 years...."the greatest rock n' roll band in the world....MY ASS....talk about staying too long at the party......
Agreed. Don Was may be a good producer, but he's not good for the Stones, at least that is my honest opinion; too sterile. I want some gritty, loose rock and roll recorded with 3 mikes in a room. Period.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
Mel Belli
()
Date: May 18, 2016 16:36
People need to distinguished between "slick" and "produced." There is nothing slick about A Bigger Bang. Much of it sounds like it was cut live, with minimal overdubs. But it is arguably underproduced or undercooked. Exile On Main Street is raw but *produced*, in the sense that there's a lot going on with instrumentation, background vocals, horns, arrangements, etc.
Steel Wheels is both slick and produced.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-05-18 16:36 by Mel Belli.
Steel Wheels is both slick and produced.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-05-18 16:36 by Mel Belli.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 18, 2016 16:39
Quote
Mel Belli
People need to distinguished between "slick" and "produced." There is nothing slick about A Bigger Bang. Much of it sounds like it was cut live, with minimal overdubs. But it is arguably underproduced or undercooked. Exile On Main Street is raw but *produced*, in the sense that there's a lot going on with instrumentation, background vocals, horns, arrangements, etc.
Steel Wheels is both slick and produced.
Correct, and B2B is a little of both (Flip The Switch is clearly under-produced, with its mistakes included and all, while Anybody Seen My Baby is very polished).
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-05-18 16:39 by DandelionPowderman.
Re: Just read that Don Was..
Posted by:
tumbled
()
Date: May 18, 2016 16:42
Quote
24FPSQuote
wonderboy
He's been working for them for years. If you believe the legends that the Stones use people up, shouldn't he be carving swastikas on the console board by now?
They're too old to ruin somebody's life now. The bodies just aren't piling up like they used to.
You make Lisa giggle!!!!!
Re: Just read that Don Was..
Posted by:
runrudolph
()
Date: May 18, 2016 17:01
Quote
StonedAsiaQuote
Spodlumt
Don Was is the worst producer they can work with. He strips all the grime out of a record. He is as bad as Jeff Lynne. They should get Chris Kimsey as a producer and Bob Clearmountain as a mixer. At least these guys know what they are doing. The Stones have turned the last 30 odd years into a colossal episode in laziness. Shitty records, Over-priced tickets and paint by the numbers "events."
I used to love them by they have made a mockery of their legacy....money, money, money.....not a decent record in 35 years...."the greatest rock n' roll band in the world....MY ASS....talk about staying too long at the party......
Agreed. Don Was may be a good producer, but he's not good for the Stones, at least that is my honest opinion; too sterile. I want some gritty, loose rock and roll recorded with 3 mikes in a room. Period.
jeroen
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
maumau
()
Date: May 18, 2016 18:21
how does a producer impact on the sound of a record is a very strange matter. chris kimsey produced very different stones records. i agree sw is both produced and slick. is this kimsey contribution? i doubt
on the other hand steve lillywhite brought to dirty work some of the "sound" at the time I recognized being his "signature".
is there a don was signature sound as a producer? is this the "sterile" sound? I wonder because many songs of stones-was albums I could define "sterile" too. Is this Was?
There's is a warmth and "wet" in CH that would make me say yes or at least narrow the choice between Was and Mick.
Was it Was that make them drop the best and more edgy material from the VL sessions? Or was it Micks angst and need to easily please the "stones" casual listener.
This was a bit different with BTB. Thanks to Was or to Mick?
Is it Was or Mick that cuts the edges, if there's any, in stones late music. or is it Keith laisser faire?
I am more inclined to think that the weaknesses of those records lie in the material and in the band in the studio or wherever they record these days. That is: there's little edge left in their new music.
A different approach to the work in the studio could make more difference than any change of producer guy for the quality of their music, being it new material or standards.
Wonder if the unplanned popping out of a "blues album" in the studio bode well in this perspective. If that is a sign o playfulness and good vibe that might have good effect on the outcome.
I surely hope so
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-05-18 18:26 by maumau.
on the other hand steve lillywhite brought to dirty work some of the "sound" at the time I recognized being his "signature".
is there a don was signature sound as a producer? is this the "sterile" sound? I wonder because many songs of stones-was albums I could define "sterile" too. Is this Was?
There's is a warmth and "wet" in CH that would make me say yes or at least narrow the choice between Was and Mick.
Was it Was that make them drop the best and more edgy material from the VL sessions? Or was it Micks angst and need to easily please the "stones" casual listener.
This was a bit different with BTB. Thanks to Was or to Mick?
Is it Was or Mick that cuts the edges, if there's any, in stones late music. or is it Keith laisser faire?
I am more inclined to think that the weaknesses of those records lie in the material and in the band in the studio or wherever they record these days. That is: there's little edge left in their new music.
A different approach to the work in the studio could make more difference than any change of producer guy for the quality of their music, being it new material or standards.
Wonder if the unplanned popping out of a "blues album" in the studio bode well in this perspective. If that is a sign o playfulness and good vibe that might have good effect on the outcome.
I surely hope so
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-05-18 18:26 by maumau.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
peoplewitheyes
()
Date: May 18, 2016 18:30
I tend to agree with HMS about pitting Stones covers against Stones originals. It seems risky to me (therefore unlikely) that Mick would want reviews comparing the two discs. I can just imagine the gushing reviews for the blues album, and a lukewarm comparison to the new material disc.
To me it just doesn't make business sense (and, lets be frank, money is is the main motivator with the Stones). I could imagine a more carefree artist - say Neil Young - doing such a thing, but not the Stones...
To me it just doesn't make business sense (and, lets be frank, money is is the main motivator with the Stones). I could imagine a more carefree artist - say Neil Young - doing such a thing, but not the Stones...
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
Tate
()
Date: May 18, 2016 19:01
Very little the Stones do regarding recording and promoting albums makes business sense to me. The tours are geared 100% toward money making, but I think the albums have been different. I love the double album concept, but I'd prefer all the "blues" standards and new material just be mixed up together. Either way, I think it's a great idea. Why not just put out a big chunk of music? I really think The Rolling Stones are limited in their capacity and perseverance these days to put forth really creative efforts.. Or else we might have seen an album in the last 11 years. They've been touring a lot, setlists getting simpler and shorter, and we got a solo album from Keith, but I didn't find it all that surprising when I heard they went into the studio and cut a bunch of blues jams. Jeez, don't put too much effort into it now, gentlemen. So if we're lucky, we get the double album concept. If not, we get a bunch of 12 bar blues or whatever, but even that's better than nothing. I don't know that it will be a business decision, though. I suspect it all depends on how much effort they want to put into a studio project.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
MonkeyMan2000
()
Date: May 18, 2016 20:33
If they indeed release a Blues CD, I think there will be some variety in the songs. I don't think Mick would want to release an album with just 12 bar chord songs. So I'm really looking forward to it. There will be some Blues standards, maybe a Chuck Berry song, maybe even an R'n'B song.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
IanBillen
()
Date: May 18, 2016 21:00
Mel Belli is spot on on the true definition of something being 'slick' versus something being 'produced ..or over produced' (or both).
How is Don Was's style too sterile? Are we talking about the same producer here? His style is normally <anything but> sterile. Did you think Voodoo Lounge was too sterile?
If so .. I'll have to ask .. are we even talking about the same album here?
One could argue ABB was sterile in meaning stripped down but to me .. stripped down and bare bones does NOT = sterile (two different things / sounds). Sweet Neocon was sterile .. that I agree.. and it was 'meant' to be. "That is it's production style. Very sterile on that particular sound.
Don Was only makes the album the artist wants to make more over. How do I know this? I watched several interviews.. with both him and the artist ....and as well I have spoke to people who have worked with him. Don Was only organizes what they have and tries to make it comfortable and gives them what they want to express and sound like but in the best possible fashion.
If you don't enjoy what the Stones have done while with him I guess I can understand .. (but I certainly disagree) .. however he is only one side of the coin. The bigger ...most important side of that coin is what The Stones got going and what they come up with inside ... and what their state of affairs is.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-05-18 21:06 by IanBillen.
How is Don Was's style too sterile? Are we talking about the same producer here? His style is normally <anything but> sterile. Did you think Voodoo Lounge was too sterile?
If so .. I'll have to ask .. are we even talking about the same album here?
One could argue ABB was sterile in meaning stripped down but to me .. stripped down and bare bones does NOT = sterile (two different things / sounds). Sweet Neocon was sterile .. that I agree.. and it was 'meant' to be. "That is it's production style. Very sterile on that particular sound.
Don Was only makes the album the artist wants to make more over. How do I know this? I watched several interviews.. with both him and the artist ....and as well I have spoke to people who have worked with him. Don Was only organizes what they have and tries to make it comfortable and gives them what they want to express and sound like but in the best possible fashion.
If you don't enjoy what the Stones have done while with him I guess I can understand .. (but I certainly disagree) .. however he is only one side of the coin. The bigger ...most important side of that coin is what The Stones got going and what they come up with inside ... and what their state of affairs is.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-05-18 21:06 by IanBillen.
Re: Just read that Don Was..
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: May 18, 2016 21:50
Quote
tumbledQuote
24FPSQuote
wonderboy
He's been working for them for years. If you believe the legends that the Stones use people up, shouldn't he be carving swastikas on the console board by now?
They're too old to ruin somebody's life now. The bodies just aren't piling up like they used to.
You make Lisa giggle!!!!!
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: May 19, 2016 00:54
Quote
IanBillen
Mel Belli is spot on on the true definition of something being 'slick' versus something being 'produced ..or over produced' (or both).
How is Don Was's style too sterile? Are we talking about the same producer here? His style is normally <anything but> sterile. Did you think Voodoo Lounge was too sterile?
If so .. I'll have to ask .. are we even talking about the same album here?
One could argue ABB was sterile in meaning stripped down but to me .. stripped down and bare bones does NOT = sterile (two different things / sounds). Sweet Neocon was sterile .. that I agree.. and it was 'meant' to be. "That is it's production style. Very sterile on that particular sound.
Don Was only makes the album the artist wants to make more over. How do I know this? I watched several interviews.. with both him and the artist ....and as well I have spoke to people who have worked with him. Don Was only organizes what they have and tries to make it comfortable and gives them what they want to express and sound like but in the best possible fashion.
If you don't enjoy what the Stones have done while with him I guess I can understand .. (but I certainly disagree) .. however he is only one side of the coin. The bigger ...most important side of that coin is what The Stones got going and what they come up with inside ... and what their state of affairs is.
Agree with Ian on this one. I see nothing wrong with the production of "You Got Me Rocking" or "Sparks Will Fly," for example. Any weaknesses the songs have are down to the writing. If I ignore the sharks and the fire chiefs, they are great-sounding songs.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
lem motlow
()
Date: May 19, 2016 02:25
i stopped blaming chuck,don was or anyone else for the stones problems a long time ago.
it's their band,if they can't listen to the finished record and notice that it's just ok or even subpar and are willing to just put it out anyway that's their problem and not the fault of the people they employ.
it's their band,if they can't listen to the finished record and notice that it's just ok or even subpar and are willing to just put it out anyway that's their problem and not the fault of the people they employ.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
mpj200
()
Date: May 19, 2016 03:38
Quote
lem motlow
i stopped blaming chuck,don was or anyone else for the stones problems a long time ago.
it's their band,if they can't listen to the finished record and notice that it's just ok or even subpar and are willing to just put it out anyway that's their problem and not the fault of the people they employ.
Not to mention, the band is the real producer.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
matxil
()
Date: May 19, 2016 12:04
Quote
lem motlow
i stopped blaming chuck,don was or anyone else for the stones problems a long time ago.
it's their band,if they can't listen to the finished record and notice that it's just ok or even subpar and are willing to just put it out anyway that's their problem and not the fault of the people they employ.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 19, 2016 12:16
«Mystery guitars», bicycles, trash can drums, pedal steel guitars with bottleneck, accordions, harpsichord, violins and other stuff lightened up VL, imo.
Not sure if the Stones came up with all those ideas themselves..
Not sure if the Stones came up with all those ideas themselves..
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
maumau
()
Date: May 19, 2016 13:07
Quote
DandelionPowderman
«Mystery guitars», bicycles, trash can drums, pedal steel guitars with bottleneck, accordions, harpsichord, violins and other stuff lightened up VL, imo.
Not sure if the Stones came up with all those ideas themselves..
right but when I listen to bsides of singles and the bootlegs from the sessions I cant help thinking they really had material for an album that could stand up there in their discography, beside the greatest. imo in the end they came up with an very good album with great ideas some great tunes, some average and a safe vintage stones sound.
monsoon ragoon, samba, middle of the sea, bump and ride, you got it made, zip mouth angel, honest man
what a waste if i compare those sketches to blinded by rainbows, baby break it down or sweethearts together..
and the storm jump i'm gonna drive ended up as b-sides...
good album, incredible waste
imo
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 19, 2016 14:17
Quote
maumauQuote
DandelionPowderman
«Mystery guitars», bicycles, trash can drums, pedal steel guitars with bottleneck, accordions, harpsichord, violins and other stuff lightened up VL, imo.
Not sure if the Stones came up with all those ideas themselves..
right but when I listen to bsides of singles and the bootlegs from the sessions I cant help thinking they really had material for an album that could stand up there in their discography, beside the greatest. imo in the end they came up with an very good album with great ideas some great tunes, some average and a safe vintage stones sound.
monsoon ragoon, samba, middle of the sea, bump and ride, you got it made, zip mouth angel, honest man
what a waste if i compare those sketches to blinded by rainbows, baby break it down or sweethearts together..
and the storm jump i'm gonna drive ended up as b-sides...
good album, incredible waste
imo
I agree totally. VL's problem was how the collection of songs didn't really fit together. No flow.
Mick blamed Was for not wanting to including many of the songs you mention. We'll never know if that was true or not, though.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
matxil
()
Date: May 19, 2016 14:24
I much prefer the Stones to try to do something new and experimental than doing some nostalgic blues album which would be pointless.
However, that doesn't mean that "experimental" album would be any good. TSMR or DW show that experimental Stones can end up pretty bad (at least 50% terrible). On the other hand, when their blues-based roots go hand in hand with going along with the times, trying new things, jamming, allowing grooves to grow, then they have proved that they come up with truely great stuff.
The fact that "the new album" is apparantly the fruit of a few separate sessions, however, does not promise anything good.
However, that doesn't mean that "experimental" album would be any good. TSMR or DW show that experimental Stones can end up pretty bad (at least 50% terrible). On the other hand, when their blues-based roots go hand in hand with going along with the times, trying new things, jamming, allowing grooves to grow, then they have proved that they come up with truely great stuff.
The fact that "the new album" is apparantly the fruit of a few separate sessions, however, does not promise anything good.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 19, 2016 14:31
Quote
matxil
I much prefer the Stones to try to do something new and experimental than doing some nostalgic blues album which would be pointless.
However, that doesn't mean that "experimental" album would be any good. TSMR or DW show that experimental Stones can end up pretty bad (at least 50% terrible). On the other hand, when their blues-based roots go hand in hand with going along with the times, trying new things, jamming, allowing grooves to grow, then they have proved that they come up with truely great stuff.
The fact that "the new album" is apparantly the fruit of a few separate sessions, however, does not promise anything good.
It's been so long since they did the blues properly, so we can regard a blues album as a major experiment
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
Bluesstone
()
Date: May 19, 2016 14:52
Ben Waters posted this on his facebook page yesterday: "On the train to London for an extremely exciting recording session!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Asked if he could provide any more details he later posted "i dont think i am allowed to say. i will ask the boss later".
It's not June yet, but any chance that this might involve the Stones record? Or do you think they will leave all the piano pieces to Chuck? Charlie obviously could put in a word for him and Mick and Keith know how well the "Boogie for Stu"-sound was. Just wondering
Asked if he could provide any more details he later posted "i dont think i am allowed to say. i will ask the boss later".
It's not June yet, but any chance that this might involve the Stones record? Or do you think they will leave all the piano pieces to Chuck? Charlie obviously could put in a word for him and Mick and Keith know how well the "Boogie for Stu"-sound was. Just wondering
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
1962
()
Date: May 19, 2016 15:17
I hope so, he is great.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
matxil
()
Date: May 19, 2016 15:28
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxil
I much prefer the Stones to try to do something new and experimental than doing some nostalgic blues album which would be pointless.
However, that doesn't mean that "experimental" album would be any good. TSMR or DW show that experimental Stones can end up pretty bad (at least 50% terrible). On the other hand, when their blues-based roots go hand in hand with going along with the times, trying new things, jamming, allowing grooves to grow, then they have proved that they come up with truely great stuff.
The fact that "the new album" is apparantly the fruit of a few separate sessions, however, does not promise anything good.
It's been so long since they did the blues properly, so we can regard a blues album as a major experiment
The only way for them to do it properly, is when they do something new to it, i.e., as they did, for example, on EOMS (which doesn't mean they should repeat EOMS which would be equally pointless), if not, you'd be better of listening to Howling Wolf, John Lee Hooker, Muddy Waters etc...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-05-19 15:29 by matxil.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
cowboytoast
()
Date: May 19, 2016 15:47
my hopes just aren't up - i feel the same way i did after Steel Wheels - then i was pleasantly surprised with Voodoo Lounge - it may not be the best album and it may not have the trendy stuff MJ wanted on it - but it beats the hell out of the 2 before it -
after hearing Keith's new half baked glorified jam session called Crosseyed Heart and SuperHeavy or whatever that crap was called - it's really hard to get excited about something thrown together in a period of months - those 2 albums alone show that they have no quality control whatsoever and really need a producer who's going to push them around - i bet when you get them in a room and they start playing old blues they can't be rivaled - but they don't have anything to write about anymore - let's hope to God they don't do a song about Trump ...
with all of this being said I love the Rolling Stones - i just suffer from being a realist...
after hearing Keith's new half baked glorified jam session called Crosseyed Heart and SuperHeavy or whatever that crap was called - it's really hard to get excited about something thrown together in a period of months - those 2 albums alone show that they have no quality control whatsoever and really need a producer who's going to push them around - i bet when you get them in a room and they start playing old blues they can't be rivaled - but they don't have anything to write about anymore - let's hope to God they don't do a song about Trump ...
with all of this being said I love the Rolling Stones - i just suffer from being a realist...
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 19, 2016 16:02
Quote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxil
I much prefer the Stones to try to do something new and experimental than doing some nostalgic blues album which would be pointless.
However, that doesn't mean that "experimental" album would be any good. TSMR or DW show that experimental Stones can end up pretty bad (at least 50% terrible). On the other hand, when their blues-based roots go hand in hand with going along with the times, trying new things, jamming, allowing grooves to grow, then they have proved that they come up with truely great stuff.
The fact that "the new album" is apparantly the fruit of a few separate sessions, however, does not promise anything good.
It's been so long since they did the blues properly, so we can regard a blues album as a major experiment
The only way for them to do it properly, is when they do something new to it, i.e., as they did, for example, on EOMS (which doesn't mean they should repeat EOMS which would be equally pointless), if not, you'd be better of listening to Howling Wolf, John Lee Hooker, Muddy Waters etc...
What was the new thing they did with the blues tunes on EOMS?
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
matxil
()
Date: May 19, 2016 16:46
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxil
I much prefer the Stones to try to do something new and experimental than doing some nostalgic blues album which would be pointless.
However, that doesn't mean that "experimental" album would be any good. TSMR or DW show that experimental Stones can end up pretty bad (at least 50% terrible). On the other hand, when their blues-based roots go hand in hand with going along with the times, trying new things, jamming, allowing grooves to grow, then they have proved that they come up with truely great stuff.
The fact that "the new album" is apparantly the fruit of a few separate sessions, however, does not promise anything good.
It's been so long since they did the blues properly, so we can regard a blues album as a major experiment
The only way for them to do it properly, is when they do something new to it, i.e., as they did, for example, on EOMS (which doesn't mean they should repeat EOMS which would be equally pointless), if not, you'd be better of listening to Howling Wolf, John Lee Hooker, Muddy Waters etc...
What was the new thing they did with the blues tunes on EOMS?
Well, it was blues/rock/soul/gospel/country based (I'm sure I forgot something there). I know you don't agree but I think Ventilator Blues is more blues than anything else. In any case, I think you would agree that there is at least a strong blues influence/base/root in it.
HipShake, on the other hand, is a fairly straight played classic blues (Slim Harpo, I think), but Mick's voice and the tight, crisp guitars make it special.
Another example is Stop Breaking Down.
I'm not saying any of these songs are revolutionary experimental (compared to e.g. Captain Beefheart or something) but they do have a twist, they sound new and fresh and exciting. Even now.
I can't remember any of their recent blues attempts had that quality.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 19, 2016 17:02
Quote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxil
I much prefer the Stones to try to do something new and experimental than doing some nostalgic blues album which would be pointless.
However, that doesn't mean that "experimental" album would be any good. TSMR or DW show that experimental Stones can end up pretty bad (at least 50% terrible). On the other hand, when their blues-based roots go hand in hand with going along with the times, trying new things, jamming, allowing grooves to grow, then they have proved that they come up with truely great stuff.
The fact that "the new album" is apparantly the fruit of a few separate sessions, however, does not promise anything good.
It's been so long since they did the blues properly, so we can regard a blues album as a major experiment
The only way for them to do it properly, is when they do something new to it, i.e., as they did, for example, on EOMS (which doesn't mean they should repeat EOMS which would be equally pointless), if not, you'd be better of listening to Howling Wolf, John Lee Hooker, Muddy Waters etc...
What was the new thing they did with the blues tunes on EOMS?
Well, it was blues/rock/soul/gospel/country based (I'm sure I forgot something there). I know you don't agree but I think Ventilator Blues is more blues than anything else. In any case, I think you would agree that there is at least a strong blues influence/base/root in it.
HipShake, on the other hand, is a fairly straight played classic blues (Slim Harpo, I think), but Mick's voice and the tight, crisp guitars make it special.
Another example is Stop Breaking Down.
I'm not saying any of these songs are revolutionary experimental (compared to e.g. Captain Beefheart or something) but they do have a twist, they sound new and fresh and exciting. Even now.
I can't remember any of their recent blues attempts had that quality.
I don't disagree at all on the Stones integrating the blues into numbers like Ventilator Blues, Casino Boogie and others.
What I do disagree with is that this was new to them. They did that on Aftermath (Doncha Bother Me), TSMR (The Lantern) and BB (Parachute Woman) already.
All of those are off the «formula»-songs, heavily rooted into the blues.
The mix of songs and styles, and the flow, is what makes Exile unique for me. And they grasped even broader, with gospel (SAL, IJWSHF, LIL), caribbean (SBA) and those wonderful country-ish tunes (SV and T&F).
When push comes to shove, I'm not sure if we disagree so much
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
Muddyw
()
Date: May 19, 2016 17:16
The Stones don't spend that much time together to create the songs nowadays. With Exile they lived together and took their time to jam the songs they wanted to make.
Re: New Rolling Stones studio album due out in 2016
Posted by:
mtaylor
()
Date: May 19, 2016 18:09
A bit over-stated. Mick J and Bill were not too much present in Nellcote. At that time they were already separating, Keith on Heroin and Mick with his things. Keith recording some of his songs in NellCote, while Mick recorded his songs / finished up things in LA.Quote
Muddyw
The Stones don't spend that much time together to create the songs nowadays. With Exile they lived together and took their time to jam the songs they wanted to make.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
1571
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10