Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
lem motlow
the artwork on the new disc is VERY IMPORTANT....

No, it's not ... at all.

Look at the love on this board for Crosseyed Heart. Not one person (unless I missed it) disliked that album due to it having the worst cover in history of the Stones (or Stones related) releases.

That's because it didn't have the worst cover in the history of Stones or Stones related.

That belongs solely to DIRTY WORK (and PRIMITIVE COOL and hell, STEEL WHEELS).

And we can have another 2000 posts on which covers are good and which are bad. Point is the cover doesn't matter. And yes, x-eyed Heart is a horrible cover, I much prefer Primitive Cool and Steel Wheels to it (dirty work is close though).

Quote
Hairball
And what's not to like about the cover of Crosseyed Heart?
A simple black and white picture of a grinning Keith w/his arms crossed and his gnarled fingers on full display.
Every picture tells a story, and this one says alot about Keith and his solo album.

Yes, I don't recall any kind of consensus about Crosseyed Heart being a terrible cover upon release. It not only does an accurate job of reflecting the music being sold- warm, organic, and vintage- but is essentially a mirror to Talk Is Cheap's cover showing the artist some thirty years later.

I would also argue that the majority of the Stones' album covers DO accurately reflect either their content or a snapshot of the band's general state of mind: The chaos of Exile. The general weirdness of Goats Head Soup. The decadence of It's Only Rock N Roll. The lethargy of Black And Blue. It's even evident in albums like Dirty Work, Their Satanic Majesties Request, or Emotional Rescue: All of which are portraits of a band struggling to retain its identity amid changing times.

Album covers may no longer be as important to the casual consumer, but they're still very much a part of the overall artistic work.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-10-07 20:32 by howlingmad.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
lem motlow
the artwork on the new disc is VERY IMPORTANT....

No, it's not ... at all.

Look at the love on this board for Crosseyed Heart. Not one person (unless I missed it) disliked that album due to it having the worst cover in history of the Stones (or Stones related) releases.

That's because it didn't have the worst cover in the history of Stones or Stones related.

That belongs solely to DIRTY WORK (and PRIMITIVE COOL and hell, STEEL WHEELS).

it's important on a level that alot of people don't understand,creating imagery rather than just putting out a product with a label on it.
you either get it or you don't.
it's funny,the stones now have lonesome and blue up on their website on the page with all the other covers of their albums and the entire first two rows are the generic digital age crap like steel wheels,voodoo, bigger bang,bridges and also our old favorite dirty work

...then you scroll down and the classics start to appear-the great guy peellaert painting that is the cover of iorr,andy warhols sticky fingers,the robert frank photos that make up exile on main streets cover,there is a vast difference.

the cover of crosseyed heart seemed fine to me. since they went back to their roots they should make up something like the first five records or maybe use one of those robert kruger paintings,that guy can capture the stones vibe to a tee. it's true it doesn't change the music but it's nice to see art wrapped in art rather than packaged like a soda can.

This forum cracks me up. Finally a song where the pling pling piano is deep in the mix, and now people start bitching about the cover.

Quote
Koen
This forum cracks me up. Finally a song where the pling pling piano is deep in the mix, and now people start bitching about the cover.

HA HA! Perhaps some people see plink-plink in the cover?

At least with CROSSEYED HEART you knew what it was. And it doesn't matter - it's about the music. With the Stones it seems it's about that album's era.

Quote
Koen
This forum cracks me up. Finally a song where the pling pling piano is deep in the mix, and now people start bitching about the cover.

lol……. A little cheese with your whine sir...

I think we just have to chalk it up to the dangers of visiting a discussion forum.

It doesn't happen often, but every once in a while there's a chance an actual discussion could break out.

Quote
howlingmad

Quote
Hairball
And what's not to like about the cover of Crosseyed Heart?
A simple black and white picture of a grinning Keith w/his arms crossed and his gnarled fingers on full display.
Every picture tells a story, and this one says alot about Keith and his solo album.

Yes, I don't recall any kind of consensus about Crosseyed Heart being a terrible cover upon release. It not only does an accurate job of reflecting the music being sold- warm, organic, and vintage- but is essentially a mirror to Talk Is Cheap's cover showing the artist some thirty years later.

I would also argue that the majority of the Stones' album covers DO accurately reflect either their content or a snapshot of the band's general state of mind: The chaos of Exile. The general weirdness of Goats Head Soup. The decadence of It's Only Rock N Roll. The lethargy of Black And Blue. It's even evident in albums like Dirty Work, Their Satanic Majesties Request, or Emotional Rescue: All of which are portraits of a band struggling to retain its identity amid changing times.

Album covers may no longer be as important to the casual consumer, but they're still very much a part of the overall artistic work.

That's a damn fine post howlingmad!

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

Quote
howlingmad
I think we just have to chalk it up to the dangers of visiting a discussion forum.

It doesn't happen often, but every once in a while there's a chance an actual discussion could break out.

so true,is it that difficult to discuss more than one thing at a time? how long can you carry on about one damn blues song,something the stones already have a million of.the song is good but not anywhere near the league of "love in vain " or "stop breaking down",the blues are great but it can turn into a snoozfest if it's done the same over and over on each song,so i'll wait to hear the entire album-and that cover screams "laundry detergent"" not the blues.

Keef - Blue and Lonsome interview.
Not sure when this is from.

[www.youtube.com]

Quote
Koen
This forum cracks me up. Finally a song where the pling pling piano is deep in the mix, and now people start bitching about the cover.

Bravo, that's been my point from the beginning. I can't stand the cover of X-eyed Heart, but don't think i ever mentioned it before, because (1) i don't really care about the cover, the great songs are what I care about ... and (2) it matters not in the least, despite what some seem to think.

It's the great album that make the legendary covers that you know of today, The Beatles 'White Album' as being the perfect example of that. There's loads of shitty albums with great covers that no one ever thinks about.

You've made it clear it doesn't matter to you, but you seem to be missing the point that it indeed matters to others.
Is that really hard to accept? Or because someone sees something different than you, they're wrong?

To sum it up: some of us think the cover is inferior, and you think it's great but really don't care one way or the other.

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

Quote
Hairball
You've made it clear it doesn't matter to you, but you seem to be missing the point that it indeed matters to others.
Is that really hard to accept? Or because someone sees something different than you, they're wrong?

To sum it up: some of us think the cover is inferior, and you think it's great but really don't care one way or the other.

Similarly, you've made it clear it matters to you, but are missing the point that others don't care.
Is that really hard to accept? Or because someone sees something different than you, they're wrong?

To sum it up: some of us think the cover is great, and you think it's inferior but really care a lot, for some reason.

** editing to add ... the reason it does matter much to me is that many will disagree on the cover, but for some reason are making a big deal out of it "they should have hired someone" "i can't believe this is the cover" "i could photoshop this" -- as Koen points out, we finally have new Stones music coming! This is after I was convinced they'd never have another release again -- It's a reason to celebrate, not really a time to bitch about something as petty as the cover.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-10-07 22:10 by LeonidP.

In olden days when vinyl ruled cover-art was very important, unfortunately that has changed obviously. On the other hand the Stones were never famous for having great cover-art, most of their albums have horrible cover.

But I don´t really care as long as there are still new Stones-albums to come. They can sell it in a plastic bag if they want, I don´t mind.

Quote
HMS
In olden days when vinyl ruled cover-art was very important, unfortunately that has changed obviously. On the other hand the Stones were never famous for having great cover-art, most of their albums have horrible cover.

But I don´t really care as long as there are still new Stones-albums to come. They can sell it in a plastic bag if they want, I don´t mind.

Whaaat?? EOMS, Beggars, Sticky Fingers, to name a few...all stunningly original album covers that are instantly recognizable to this day.

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
Hairball
You've made it clear it doesn't matter to you, but you seem to be missing the point that it indeed matters to others.
Is that really hard to accept? Or because someone sees something different than you, they're wrong?

To sum it up: some of us think the cover is inferior, and you think it's great but really don't care one way or the other.

Similarly, you've made it clear it matters to you, but are missing the point that others don't care.
Is that really hard to accept? Or because someone sees something different than you, they're wrong?

To sum it up: some of us think the cover is great, and you think it's inferior but really care a lot, for some reason.

** editing to add ... the reason it does matter much to me is that many will disagree on the cover, but for some reason are making a big deal out of it "they should have hired someone" "i can't believe this is the cover" "i could photoshop this" -- as Koen points out, we finally have new Stones music coming! This is after I was convinced they'd never have another release again -- It's a reason to celebrate, not really a time to bitch about something as petty as the cover.

You keep trying to convince me of something you believe in that I happen to disagree with. For you it's great but doesn't matter - that's fine and dandy, but others think they could have put more thought into it and yet you seem to get offended- whats the big deal? You can disagree with that all you want, nobody's trying to shame you into thinking otherwise.

It's like having an ugly car with the best and most expensive engine in the world, yet the body looks like a piece of shit all chromed out and painted flourescent neon blue and pink.
Sure it runs smooth, but I probably wouldn't want to be seen in it (just my opinion), while others could care less and would be happy with it or could care less.

Looking forward to hearing the new covers album!

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

I heard new song cover on Spotify. I love The Stones but I was not "overwhelmed". I'm not sure why but it didn't move me in the least.

full song

[www.youtube.com]

I heard it today at a store on the local oldies station. Quite surprised to hear it there.
So maybe it will get some airplay.
I heard it yesterday on Spotify, but it's more fun to hear it on the radio. Old fashioned that way -- I remember the summer Emotional Rescue came out driving around and hoping they would play something on the radio.

Quote
spikenyc
full song

[www.youtube.com]

Thanks much spike, couldn't view it at work on vimeo.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
peoplewitheyes
I dig the new tune, I'm not a huge blues fan - I like some unexpected chord changes in my music - but this is cool, and the overall sound is good and crunchy.

I wish they would chuck on a harmony vocal though.... That bridge part ('Must be tryin to drive me crazy..') is just dying for a Keith (or Mick) harmony vocal.

I guess with a no-overdub policy, that aint gonna happen. A shame, because one of my favourite elements of the Stones best music is the backup vox, Keith wailing away with Mick.

You got the unexpected chord changes here anyway

Yes the Stones copied the awkward chord change after the bridge just like the original. It's awkward that the E is not held long enough during the bridge, it's a quick A, then of course a quick D follows, but then they go back to the standard progression for the last verse.

If the Stones play this live, and I hope they do, it could be a train wreck if they stick to this awkward original out of progression chord changes.

However, Cyndi Lauper plays this live and her band does the awkward progression after the bridge like the original also.

If my band plays this, I would think we will hold the E longer after the bridge and go in to normal progression for the next verse.
But I like the song regardless. but too short and no guitar solos, maybe live....

Quote
Rocky Dijon
The press release states Mick, Keith, Charlie, and Ronnie are joined by Darryl, Chuck, Matt, and Clapton. No saxophone, apparently.

Thanks for confirm, Rocky.
I looked closer at seeing Karl Denson when he plays here in a few weeks (and some Prince coverage, more intriguing for this MN gal)
but, he's playing another bloody festival stuck in a crowd for hours and camp in a tent. Doesn't work for me :-/. Even tho it's geographically close,
I can't hang and don't have that time. To spend in a tent. W/ drunk strangers all around, lol.
Hope Karl wails out on CYHMK tonight, or even Emotional Rescue in lieu of Miss You. Sorry no sax on
Lonesome Blues, I have the Tahoe Blues
gimme the whole release please,
and I'll mediate on the Lake December 2.

Quote
rbk
"Just Your Fool" is a nearly note-for-note remake of the Little Walter original right down to the awkward cold start. Walter played a better harp than Mick, however.

Here for yourselves:

[www.youtube.com]

A lot closer to LW's version than to the original song, hard to hear much in common actually ;-)

On the other hand I was immediately reminded of the 1982 "Cook Cook Blues" that they (Kimsey ?) dug up for the RAHP bside in 1989,is it just me?

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-10-08 04:00 by gotdablouse.

If I were given a choice between

( A ) Stones not releasing a new album
( B ) Stones release a new album but with mediocre album art

... I would choose ( B ).

That said, I think the cover is bland, boring...unimaginative

Okay Shill... come on man show us what you'd do with da cover



ROCKMAN

I love the blue it does remind me of Tahoe blue
so begs the question
Where can I buy the new clothes
so I can match
and represent?

Blue rinse .. Blue clothes
then stick your tongue out ...



ROCKMAN

Quote
Hairball

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
Hairball
You've made it clear it doesn't matter to you, but you seem to be missing the point that it indeed matters to others.
Is that really hard to accept? Or because someone sees something different than you, they're wrong?

To sum it up: some of us think the cover is inferior, and you think it's great but really don't care one way or the other.

Similarly, you've made it clear it matters to you, but are missing the point that others don't care.
Is that really hard to accept? Or because someone sees something different than you, they're wrong?

To sum it up: some of us think the cover is great, and you think it's inferior but really care a lot, for some reason.

** editing to add ... the reason it does matter much to me is that many will disagree on the cover, but for some reason are making a big deal out of it "they should have hired someone" "i can't believe this is the cover" "i could photoshop this" -- as Koen points out, we finally have new Stones music coming! This is after I was convinced they'd never have another release again -- It's a reason to celebrate, not really a time to bitch about something as petty as the cover.

You keep trying to convince me of something you believe in that I happen to disagree with. For you it's great but doesn't matter - that's fine and dandy, but others think they could have put more thought into it and yet you seem to get offended- ...

Not offended in the least. And I don't care if you like it or not. I realize others hate it. Point that you keep missing is ... it doesn't matter what the cover is. I hate the X-Eyed Heart cover, but love the album. I love this cover, can't wait to hear the songs. The point is the cover doesn't affect the songs in any way, nor will it affect anyone's opinion on whether the album is great or not.
So to not like it is one thing -- but to act like it's the end of the world is another ...

Quote
Rockman
what you'd do with da cover

Well... it's gonna take a bit more than the ten minutes they spent on album cover they used!

You know... come up with a concept...
Then design alternatives, sketches, meet with Mick and Charlie ... revisions...
research photography, Select & hire photographer...

Photoshop retouching & adjustments, composite with typography...
Get Mick & Charlie's final ok...
Prepare web-ready; press-ready art.

Frame the $150 check from Mick.

the first single is....pure energy...love it!