Quote
HMS

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet
Play ER and then U, the true follow up to ER. It makes sense.

yeah, i do love these two albums and they fit together nicely

I love these two albums too, but I cannot see how "they fit together nicely".
Undercover´s musical direction and production is completely different from Emotional Rescue, imo. ER is a lighthearted easy-to-listen-to album, Undercover has a much darker atmosphere, even when it comes to typical Stones-rockers a la She Was Hot or All The Way Down. Undercover is closer to Exile than to ER and not only because of It Must Be Hell.

Not that different at all, if you listen to most of the album that don't have synth or drum machines + the demos/outtakes. Same studio/equipment/sound, albeit somewhat more distortion on the guitars.

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
TheGreek
wonderboy , Bill German has written a really good book " Under their Thumb " A really good read on this period

Yes, I enjoyed that book. A very good look at Keith and Ronnie. ... I wish I had a better understanding of Mick's attitude at the time -- I wonder if he wanted to go solo, sabotage DW and leave the band. And how much did Keith's mis-adventures affect him personally.

The mystery to know Mick's side in all of this ,i wonder if he will ever pen a tell all book ? Well at the time it was considered the next step in his career with his acting credits .I do not believe for a second that he would ever want to sabotage HIS band .I for one don't think as you said "Keith's mis-adventures affect him personally" had any bearing on his ambitions at all .I just think that Mick considered it his next logical step in his career path .To test the waters to see if he could be BIGGER than his band and then see what fruits that bore off that tree.

I agree the decision to go solo was a calculated move. But personally speaking, and this is just speculation, he seems to have sort of divorced himself from Keith at that point. If I could get an honest answer, I'd ask him what happened between them.

I don't know about 'calculated', but sometimes people are just not interested in things anymore. And you throw opportunistic people like Walter Yetnikoff into the mix and there you go. 1962-1985 is a loooong time, Mick seems to like a change now and then...

I think Mick's biggest problem could be that he's just been more interested in pussy than writing a song that could change the world after 1983.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
HMS

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet
Play ER and then U, the true follow up to ER. It makes sense.

yeah, i do love these two albums and they fit together nicely

I love these two albums too, but I cannot see how "they fit together nicely".
Undercover´s musical direction and production is completely different from Emotional Rescue, imo. ER is a lighthearted easy-to-listen-to album, Undercover has a much darker atmosphere, even when it comes to typical Stones-rockers a la She Was Hot or All The Way Down. Undercover is closer to Exile than to ER and not only because of It Must Be Hell.

Not that different at all, if you listen to most of the album that don't have synth or drum machines + the demos/outtakes. Same studio/equipment/sound, albeit somewhat more distortion on the guitars.

Regardless of what you, HMS, think, the fact is that UNDERCOVER is the true follow up to EMOTIONAL RESCUE. What treaclefingers means is the continuation of the sound fits "together nicely". It "makes sense".

Quote
HMS

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet
Play ER and then U, the true follow up to ER. It makes sense.

yeah, i do love these two albums and they fit together nicely

I love these two albums too, but I cannot see how "they fit together nicely".
Undercover´s musical direction and production is completely different from Emotional Rescue, imo. ER is a lighthearted easy-to-listen-to album, Undercover has a much darker atmosphere, even when it comes to typical Stones-rockers a la She Was Hot or All The Way Down. Undercover is closer to Exile than to ER and not only because of It Must Be Hell.

2 sides of a coin

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
HMS

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet
Play ER and then U, the true follow up to ER. It makes sense.

yeah, i do love these two albums and they fit together nicely

I love these two albums too, but I cannot see how "they fit together nicely".
Undercover´s musical direction and production is completely different from Emotional Rescue, imo. ER is a lighthearted easy-to-listen-to album, Undercover has a much darker atmosphere, even when it comes to typical Stones-rockers a la She Was Hot or All The Way Down. Undercover is closer to Exile than to ER and not only because of It Must Be Hell.

2 sides of a coin

With the same face at that...

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
HMS

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet
Play ER and then U, the true follow up to ER. It makes sense.

yeah, i do love these two albums and they fit together nicely

I love these two albums too, but I cannot see how "they fit together nicely".
Undercover´s musical direction and production is completely different from Emotional Rescue, imo. ER is a lighthearted easy-to-listen-to album, Undercover has a much darker atmosphere, even when it comes to typical Stones-rockers a la She Was Hot or All The Way Down. Undercover is closer to Exile than to ER and not only because of It Must Be Hell.

2 sides of a coin

With the same face at that...

face to face

Imagine if they'd of finished and put Neighbours, Heaven, Little T&A, Hang Fire, Think I'm Going Mad and No Use In Crying on ER.

Quote
GasLightStreet
Imagine if they'd of finished and put Neighbours, Heaven, Little T&A, Hang Fire, Think I'm Going Mad and No Use In Crying on ER.

yes...i'm guessing then it would definitely have been a double album.

Quote
thijs1981

I think Mick's biggest problem could be that he's just been more interested in pussy than writing a song that could change the world after 1983.

I think that could be my biggest problem since 1983 as well but yeah...Are we even sure Mick has left his bedroom since 1983? The guy on stage in recent decades looks and writes lyrics a lot like Leo Sayer. Somebody tell Keith.

Quote
GasLightStreet
Imagine if they'd of finished and put Neighbours, Heaven, Little T&A, Hang Fire, Think I'm Going Mad and No Use In Crying on ER.

Little T + A and No Use In Crying would have improved ER. The others not so much, imo. Mainly because the rockers are very good on ER, imo.

OK, maybe Think I'm Going Mad or Heaven could have replaced Indian Girl

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
GasLightStreet
Imagine if they'd of finished and put Neighbours, Heaven, Little T&A, Hang Fire, Think I'm Going Mad and No Use In Crying on ER.

Little T + A and No Use In Crying would have improved ER. The others not so much, imo. Mainly because the rockers are very good on ER, imo.

OK, maybe Think I'm Going Mad or Heaven could have replaced Indian Girl

Nothing of the sort!

So often, posters want hypothetically to cut songs from albums, when they'd better leave the albums as they are. Here, given context, several comparatively inferior songs are advocated to be hypothetically added to a perfect album, according to its concept.

Quote
Witness

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
GasLightStreet
Imagine if they'd of finished and put Neighbours, Heaven, Little T&A, Hang Fire, Think I'm Going Mad and No Use In Crying on ER.

Little T + A and No Use In Crying would have improved ER. The others not so much, imo. Mainly because the rockers are very good on ER, imo.

OK, maybe Think I'm Going Mad or Heaven could have replaced Indian Girl

Nothing of the sort!

So often, posters want hypothetically to cut songs from albums, when they'd better leave the albums as they are. Here, given context, several comparatively inferior songs are advocated to be hypothetically added to a perfect album, according to its concept.

As they all were from the same album sessions, that isn't really so far out?

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Witness

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
GasLightStreet
Imagine if they'd of finished and put Neighbours, Heaven, Little T&A, Hang Fire, Think I'm Going Mad and No Use In Crying on ER.

Little T + A and No Use In Crying would have improved ER. The others not so much, imo. Mainly because the rockers are very good on ER, imo.

OK, maybe Think I'm Going Mad or Heaven could have replaced Indian Girl

Nothing of the sort!

So often, posters want hypothetically to cut songs from albums, when they'd better leave the albums as they are. Here, given context, several comparatively inferior songs are advocated to be hypothetically added to a perfect album, according to its concept.

As they all were from the same album sessions, that isn't really so far out?

By choice of songs, EMOTIONAL RESCUE in my outlook became, more or less, one certain concept of an album (by which words I don't imply a concept album). I for one don't want a change of that.

Quote
Witness

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Witness

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
GasLightStreet
Imagine if they'd of finished and put Neighbours, Heaven, Little T&A, Hang Fire, Think I'm Going Mad and No Use In Crying on ER.

Little T + A and No Use In Crying would have improved ER. The others not so much, imo. Mainly because the rockers are very good on ER, imo.

OK, maybe Think I'm Going Mad or Heaven could have replaced Indian Girl

Nothing of the sort!

So often, posters want hypothetically to cut songs from albums, when they'd better leave the albums as they are. Here, given context, several comparatively inferior songs are advocated to be hypothetically added to a perfect album, according to its concept.

As they all were from the same album sessions, that isn't really so far out?

By choice of songs, EMOTIONAL RESCUE in my outlook became, more or less, one certain concept of an album (by which words I don't imply a concept album). I for one don't want a change of that.

I don't disagree - far from it, actually. I guess GLS was just toying with the idea of how it would have sounded with those other songs

Uhhh.... yeah. Hence the "Imagine if" part.

The fact that anyone could've actually thought the Stones were "pulling one over" on fans about TATTOO YOU proves that they were totally ignorant about STICKY FINGERS and EXILE ON MAIN STREET, seeing that, out of those two, EOMS has a number of leftover SF tracks on it, part of the reason it's so good.

Aside from putting ER sessions tracks on TY, which is what, almost half the album (Little T&A, Hang Fire, Neighbours, Heaven, No Use In Crying), consider that they easily could've had a fourth album in that 1978-1981 era even with holding songs off of SG and ER for TY had they done it that way...

The Stones were cheating when they released TY, they acted as if it was a "new album", which it isn´t. It contains not one single song especially written and recorded for that "new album". Using leftover songs that are one or two years old for the next album is different from using songs in 1981 that were actually recorded in 1973 or 1975.


TY is a fake-album, it´s very good and it sounds like a genuine album but it´s a fake. I dont care when a song is written but I care when it has been recorded. To make TY a "real" Stones-album they would have had to record all instrumental parts older than two years once again, instead of just doing a few overdubs here and there and add new vocals. TY isnt a real Stones-album just like the Bonus-CD´s of Exile Deluxe & SG Deluxe arent real albums but compilations of partly reworked old material. If you list "Studio-albums" and "Compilation-albums" seperately, one ought to file TY under "compilation-album".

The run of their studio-albums 1975-85 goes like this:
Black And Blue
Some Girls
Emotional Rescue
Undercover

TY does NOT belong to their string of studio-albums.

Even though all of TY was recorded in recording studios - with new vocals and new instrumentation, even in 1981.

Huh.

Songs on EOMS were written and recorded in 1969, 1970 and 1971. So, according to your illogic, EOMS is a fake album.

Songs on SF were written and recorded in 1969 and 1970. So, according to your illogic, SF is a fake album.


You keep saying the same things over again, ignoring the facts of how they work and how previous albums include the same kind of leftover material that TY had - leftover material.


"Album: a collection of recordings issued as a single item on CD, record, or another medium."

That's TATTOO YOU.

"Compilation album is a general term used to refer to a music release made of up songs not intended to be seen as a single work."

That's not TATTOO YOU, that's MADE IN THE SHADE or REWIND.


Therefor, factually, their 1978-1983 run of LPs is SOME GIRLS, EMOTIONAL RESCUE, TATTOO YOU and UNDERCOVER.

EOMS & SF arent fake, because the majority of the songs were especially recorded/written for that albums.

TY contains no material especially written and/or recorded for it. That is the difference. And it has very old material on it, songs from 1973 and 1975. TY does not represent the "normal way" the Stones used to work.

Quote
GasLightStreet
Uhhh.... yeah. Hence the "Imagine if" part.

The fact that anyone could've actually thought the Stones were "pulling one over" on fans about TATTOO YOU proves that they were totally ignorant about STICKY FINGERS and EXILE ON MAIN STREET, seeing that, out of those two, EOMS has a number of leftover SF tracks on it, part of the reason it's so good.

Aside from putting ER sessions tracks on TY, which is what, almost half the album (Little T&A, Hang Fire, Neighbours, Heaven, No Use In Crying), consider that they easily could've had a fourth album in that 1978-1981 era even with holding songs off of SG and ER for TY had they done it that way...

I would very much have liked the Stones to have made one album morë of available material (I've got a couple of old vinyl boots.) But, more controversially, I acknowledge that, myself I would have preferred a rougher TATTOO YOU, only for instance with one of the early outtake versions of "Hang Fire". And, also in a minority, there are some songs, even the delights of many, that do not appeal very much to me.

Agree that TY is sort of a compilation/outtakes album. It lacks the feel and cohesiveness of the other studio albums from that period (B&B, SG, ER, U).
I also liked Undercover more, it feels more like a statement of what they were up to that year.

Quote
wonderboy
Agree that TY is sort of a compilation/outtakes album. It lacks the feel and cohesiveness of the other studio albums from that period (B&B, SG, ER, U).
I also liked Undercover more, it feels more like a statement of what they were up to that year.

TATTOO YOU is the studio album by the Stones, that I am most reserved to, even more than the weaker DIRTY WORK. However, I disagree in the view that it lacks cohesiveness. But it is a different kind of cohesiveness than the other albums mentionned, to which I would not include BLACK AND BLUE, that I consider more a transitional album. Somehow, its the very album feel and cohesiveness of TATTOO YOU, which are why I have got problems with liking it to much (and after my taste a couple of weaker or more irritating songs), but which I acknowledge as such. Indeed I consider it to be a genuine and cohesive album, not any compilation.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-08-29 21:46 by Witness.

Quote
HMS
The Stones were cheating when they released TY, they acted as if it was a "new album", which it isn´t. It contains not one single song especially written and recorded for that "new album". Using leftover songs that are one or two years old for the next album is different from using songs in 1981 that were actually recorded in 1973 or 1975.


TY is a fake-album, it´s very good and it sounds like a genuine album but it´s a fake. I dont care when a song is written but I care when it has been recorded. To make TY a "real" Stones-album they would have had to record all instrumental parts older than two years once again, instead of just doing a few overdubs here and there and add new vocals. TY isnt a real Stones-album just like the Bonus-CD´s of Exile Deluxe & SG Deluxe arent real albums but compilations of partly reworked old material. If you list "Studio-albums" and "Compilation-albums" seperately, one ought to file TY under "compilation-album".

The run of their studio-albums 1975-85 goes like this:
Black And Blue
Some Girls
Emotional Rescue
Undercover

TY does NOT belong to their string of studio-albums.

"Cheating", "fake" - strong words that don't do TY justice at all. First and foremost, artists can do whatever they want with their material. Why should they record instrumental parts again just because they're 3, 4 or even 7 years old when they are perfectly great and couldn't be bettered anyway - just because there are some fans like you who tend to over-complicate matters?

4 years in the 70's were not the same as 4 years in the 60's in the band's development and the the development of recording techniques in general - just compare Don't Lie To Me to Family on Metamorphosis. Nowadays, 4 years would mean nothing at all. Probably not even 8 years. Or 10. Or 12. Or...

Absolutely, Doggy! If anything, TY was the first album since SG that I could listen the whole way through again without thinking "Oh, this song's a stinker, let's skip it!" (not so easy with vinyl anyway!). Only ever happened again with Steel Wheels and that's it for all those decades.

And I was AMAZED, almost relieved to finally get my favourite tracks from the Reggae'n Roll bootleg in perfect quality - Worried About You and Slave. Thank you, Stones! What's not to like with a move like that? Little did I know back then that Tops and Waiting On A Friend were even older material. While I agree that Tops sounded a bit suspicious for end-70's Ronnie-era Stones, if I would not have learned better in the meantime I would still believe that Waiting On A Friend was written and recorded for TY to this very day.

Quote
HMS
The Stones were cheating when they released TY, they acted as if it was a "new album", which it isn´t. It contains not one single song especially written and recorded for that "new album". Using leftover songs that are one or two years old for the next album is different from using songs in 1981 that were actually recorded in 1973 or 1975.


TY is a fake-album, it´s very good and it sounds like a genuine album but it´s a fake. I dont care when a song is written but I care when it has been recorded. To make TY a "real" Stones-album they would have had to record all instrumental parts older than two years once again, instead of just doing a few overdubs here and there and add new vocals. TY isnt a real Stones-album just like the Bonus-CD´s of Exile Deluxe & SG Deluxe arent real albums but compilations of partly reworked old material. If you list "Studio-albums" and "Compilation-albums" seperately, one ought to file TY under "compilation-album".

The run of their studio-albums 1975-85 goes like this:
Black And Blue
Some Girls
Emotional Rescue
Undercover

TY does NOT belong to their string of studio-albums.

Rubbish.

Black and Blue released 1975 and Undercover 1985...?
Sure.

It was the first new Stones album I bought on the release day, actually 2 days before because the kid at the record store bent the rules. Also loved it and She's so Cold is still my favorite video

Quote
shortfatfanny
Black and Blue released 1975 and Undercover 1985...?
Sure.

I know that B&B was released in 1976 and Undercover in 1983 like everybody else does. I meant during a decade (1975-85).

And yes, they cheated and released a fake-album. We were never told that we got old reworked material in 1981. I always wondered about credits for MT on the inner sleeve but thought he did a guest appearance in 1981!

A 1981-release should show where the band stands musically in 1981 and there is no place for instrumental tracks from 1973 and 1975, no matter how perfect they are. Record these parts again or tell the people what´s the matter with these tracks. They simply didn´t tell the truth. They didnt lie in fact, they just didnt tell us where all these songs came from. They let us blieve it´s all new. I always thought it was a genuine new album, liked it very much and was very disappointed when I learned decades later that it was stitched together and that they didn´t even tell us about it. To me TY for all these reasons isn´t a Stones-album like SG, Undercover, Dirty Work, ABB, IORR etc. It´s a compilation of leftovers hanging around for years and years and in fact does not represent the Stones in 1981. Undercover represents the Stones in 1983, Steel Wheels in 1989, ABB in 2005, but TY is not the Stones in 1981.

Musically TY is a very good album, but it isn´t "new" it´s a compilation (1973-81) and no definition of the term "album" or "compilation" can excuse the fact that TY is faked indeed.

Several quotes here by Mick and Keith from 1981-82 regarding the age of some of the tracks: [www.timeisonourside.com]
No mention of MT on any of my copies.


"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-08-30 15:57 by Deltics.

Quote
HMS

Quote
shortfatfanny
Black and Blue released 1975 and Undercover 1985...?
Sure.

I know that B&B was released in 1976 and Undercover in 1983 like everybody else does. I meant during a decade (1975-85).

And yes, they cheated and released a fake-album. We were never told that we got old reworked material in 1981. I always wondered about credits for MT on the inner sleeve but thought he did a guest appearance in 1981!

A 1981-release should show where the band stands musically in 1981 and there is no place for instrumental tracks from 1973 and 1975, no matter how perfect they are. Record these parts again or tell the people what´s the matter with these tracks. They simply didn´t tell the truth. They didnt lie in fact, they just didnt tell us where all these songs came from. They let us blieve it´s all new. I always thought it was a genuine new album, liked it very much and was very disappointed when I learned decades later that it was stitched together and that they didn´t even tell us about it. To me TY for all these reasons isn´t a Stones-album like SG, Undercover, Dirty Work, ABB, IORR etc. It´s a compilation of leftovers hanging around for years and years and in fact does not represent the Stones in 1981. Undercover represents the Stones in 1983, Steel Wheels in 1989, ABB in 2005, but TY is not the Stones in 1981.

Musically TY is a very good album, but it isn´t "new" it´s a compilation (1973-81) and no definition of the term "album" or "compilation" can excuse the fact that TY is faked indeed.

Does it really matter when / where an album's tracks came from? What mattered is that Tattoo You was a great album and made most fans very happy when it came out.

"Gonna find my way to heaven ..."

Yes it matters a lot.

Imagine a band releasing an album of great stuff in, say, 2010 and everybody´s happy that they are (still) so good and productive. Then two years later you learn that most stuff on that great record was in fact recorded in 2001. And the band that sounded so good on their faked album is in fact now a bunch of addicts not able to get in their boots without someone who helps them. Wouldnt that be a little bit disappointing?

An album should be a clear statement of where the band stands, not where it once stood. Musically, emotionally and so on. Hope you understand my point of view. If you dont have enough new material and use very old recordings, then tell the people the truth.

If a new Stones-record is released I expect to hear the "Today´s Stones", not the "Yesterday´s Stones". After all it´s a matter of honesty.