We shouldn't carry out a damnatio memoriae on Bigger Bang, as the only song that can be comparable to the new album is Back of My Hand.

Why they have not recorded "Rolling Stone Blues" de Muddy Waters?

The production from what I've heard so far on the two or three pre-released tunes seemed fine, but then again I've only listened on my laptop, and having only listened to them once or twice (anxiously waiting for vinyl and/or cd), my opinion is somewhat limited on this. What I did notice though was the overall playing and vibe seemed a bit mechanical...almost too correct...no bum notes...not a mistake to be heard. Unlike the originals which have an authentic/organic/live/raw feeling w/mistakes and all, these new versions seem a bit processed. I understand they were all cut in three days (or whatever it was) and supposedly 'live', but maybe Don Was (and Mick?) were busy for awhile cleaning them up afterwards with their digital trickery leaving them a bit sterile. Hopefully it all doesn't come across as Blues without a feeling...but reading some of the comments of the vinyl single is a bit worrying.

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

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Rolling Stone gave Voodoo Lounge 4/5 in 1994. Just sayin.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/voodoo-lounge-19940811

So you don't believe it. That's fine. You should believe it. It's right there. It is absurd, though. They do give them too much credit for anything they release.

Quote
HMS
The three songs I´ve heard so far are recorded/mixed/whatever so loud that they are sometimes heavily distorted. That´s most unenjoyable.

I´m afraid all of the songs will turn out to sound that way. Musically the songs are very good and Mick´s singing is amazing. After all that overacted singing-posing on the last couple of albums I didn´t knew that he actually still can sing in a "normal way".

But: Their best album since Some Girls? Never. This is all covers, no originals. It seems to be well done but just like Crosseyed Heart it isn´t Manna from heaven. Maybe it will be boring to listen to it, 12 more or less similar songs in a row. Always the harmonica, always the singing & breathing-at-the-same-time vocal gimmick, always the distorted guitars, I really don´t know.... I like the three songs we´ve heard so far, but basically it´s all just the same... not much variety.

Best album since Some Girls, btw, of course is DW.

Your usual garbage. Why would you purposely drag SOME GIRLS down with a stupid and ignorant statement like that? Everyone knows TATTOO YOU is their best since SOME GIRLS.

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
HMS
The three songs I´ve heard so far are recorded/mixed/whatever so loud that they are sometimes heavily distorted. That´s most unenjoyable.

I´m afraid all of the songs will turn out to sound that way. Musically the songs are very good and Mick´s singing is amazing. After all that overacted singing-posing on the last couple of albums I didn´t knew that he actually still can sing in a "normal way".

But: Their best album since Some Girls? Never. This is all covers, no originals. It seems to be well done but just like Crosseyed Heart it isn´t Manna from heaven. Maybe it will be boring to listen to it, 12 more or less similar songs in a row. Always the harmonica, always the singing & breathing-at-the-same-time vocal gimmick, always the distorted guitars, I really don´t know.... I like the three songs we´ve heard so far, but basically it´s all just the same... not much variety.

Best album since Some Girls, btw, of course is DW.

Spot on. Not about DW but the rest.

Spot on garbage. Don't you know HMS is not capable of hearing anything? He doesn't know what he's talking about. Besides his constant drivel about the worst Stones album in history, HMS' quackery is that it's not a Stones album at all.

Quote
GasLightStreet
Why would you purposely drag SOME GIRLS down with a stupid and ignorant statement like that?

Possible answer #1: HMS really means it.
Possible answer #2: HMS really loves it when somebody keeps responding.

Anyway, time for my beer Cheers

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

Quote
Hairball
The production from what I've heard so far on the two or three pre-released tunes seemed fine, but then again I've only listened on my laptop, and having only listened to them once or twice (anxiously waiting for vinyl and/or cd), my opinion is somewhat limited on this. What I did notice though was the overall playing and vibe seemed a bit mechanical...almost too correct...no bum notes...not a mistake to be heard. Unlike the originals which have an authentic/organic/live/raw feeling w/mistakes and all, these new versions seem a bit processed. I understand they were all cut in three days (or whatever it was) and supposedly 'live', but maybe Don Was (and Mick?) were busy for awhile cleaning them up afterwards with their digital trickery leaving them a bit sterile. Hopefully it all doesn't come across as Blues without a feeling...but reading some of the comments of the vinyl single is a bit worrying.

you're right, answer about the "feel" of the album can be given only after a hifi material has been released. I played the 3 songs thru my amp and speakers and they sounded warm but I know how much different is the lossless sound, so. I dont agree on the "too correct" remark. though I know mick stated that after the "three days" the process was "painstaking" it doesn seem to me that the result is clean e and sterile as you mean. I am not crazy about JYF and REOD but I do love HTSYG very much, both faithful to the original and stoned

I can't believe no audio samples are available yet besides the 3 we have already heard. No samples on iTunes, cd japan, Amazon etc. I'm dying for a few snippets

Quote
Bashlets
I can't believe no audio samples are available yet besides the 3 we have already heard. No samples on iTunes, cd japan, Amazon etc. I'm dying for a few snippets

After 11 years waiting for a full album, you can wait 4-5 days more for the whole thing.

stones can never please some of the fans they like a broken record always complaning,why don't just fade away and find another band,or make better music then them,get your rocks off and leave the stones alone.

Quote
maumau

Quote
Hairball
The production from what I've heard so far on the two or three pre-released tunes seemed fine, but then again I've only listened on my laptop, and having only listened to them once or twice (anxiously waiting for vinyl and/or cd), my opinion is somewhat limited on this. What I did notice though was the overall playing and vibe seemed a bit mechanical...almost too correct...no bum notes...not a mistake to be heard. Unlike the originals which have an authentic/organic/live/raw feeling w/mistakes and all, these new versions seem a bit processed. I understand they were all cut in three days (or whatever it was) and supposedly 'live', but maybe Don Was (and Mick?) were busy for awhile cleaning them up afterwards with their digital trickery leaving them a bit sterile. Hopefully it all doesn't come across as Blues without a feeling...but reading some of the comments of the vinyl single is a bit worrying.

you're right, answer about the "feel" of the album can be given only after a hifi material has been released. I played the 3 songs thru my amp and speakers and they sounded warm but I know how much different is the lossless sound, so. I dont agree on the "too correct" remark. though I know mick stated that after the "three days" the process was "painstaking" it doesn seem to me that the result is clean e and sterile as you mean. I am not crazy about JYF and REOD but I do love HTSYG very much, both faithful to the original and stoned

That's good to hear maumau - I take your word for it and look forward to hearing on a proper sound system! To clarify, what I meant about being 'too correct' and 'mechanical' was the actual performance of the instruments and vocals themselves on the studio recordings - it's as if they sound too precise and rehearsed to think it was recorded LIVE in one or two takes. Again, I've only listened once or twice on my laptop, but thats the way they came across. I imagine there must have been some overdubs and/or auto-correct type work from Don Was (and Mick?) after the fact - just something my ears tell me after seeing them perform the tunes LIVE at Desert Trip and Vegas when there were a few minor glitches in the performance...good glitches I might add...like a breathing wobbling organism rather than a perfect machine. With that said, the new blues tunes weren't met with great fanfare from a majority of those in attendance at any of the shows - it seemed only the diehards were hip to hearing something new, while most of the casual fans wanted the warhorses and not much more more.

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

I actually like the production. But I think Keith is a bit too low on REOD.

On Little Walter's Blue and Lonesome and many others old blues recordings you can't hear much but distortion. So that's what they went for with the production, I think.

The Rolling Stones’s ‘Blue & Lonesome’: A Romp Among Friends

Fifty-two years after their first album, the Rolling Stones return to their blues roots
By JIM FUSILLI
Nov. 27, 2016 8:25 p.m. ET



Ronnie Wood, Keith Richards, Mick Jagger and Charlie Watts attend The Rolling Stones Exhibitionism opening night at Industria Superstudio on Nov. 15 in New York City. PHOTO: ZUMA PRESS

In May 1964, a quintet from London released its U.S. debut album, “The Rolling Stones (England’s Newest Hit Makers).” It contained covers of compositions by American bluesmen Willie Dixon, Slim Harpo and Jimmy Reed. Fifty-two years later, the Rolling Stones, fortified on two songs by Eric Clapton, return to the blues for “Blue & Lonesome” (Interscope), a collection of 12 tracks written by or associated with Dixon, Reed, Howlin’ Wolf, Little Walter, Memphis Slim and others. On “Blue & Lonesome,” out Dec. 2 , the Stones, now England’s Oldest Hit Makers, revel in their ability to still play vintage blues.

Though it informs the Stones’ music, traditional blues haven’t been a part of the band’s in-studio repertoire for a long while. Here, they slide back in and discharge the music with edgy, raspy efficiency. Cut live during the course of three days, the album has the feeling of a romp among friends who know the Chicago-style electric blues of the ’50s and ’60s by heart. Rather than strive for technical perfection, the Stones emphasize feel and loyalty to the originators in their playing. There are clever allusions by the band to bygone recording techniques. Mick Jagger’s harmonica, a predominant instrument on “Blue & Lonesome,” rattles the speakers as if he’s playing it through one of those old crystal microphones Little Walter preferred with a tube amp cranked to 10. Charlie Watts’s kick drum and toms boom and shake—where did the engineers place his microphones, inside the drums?—and his traditional grip on the sticks gives the rhythm its snap and swing. Guitars by Keith Richards and Ron Wood sting in homage to the work of Hubert Sumlin, who backed Howlin’ Wolf. They play the big riffs with fuzzy gusto.

Acknowledged as the greatest blues harmonica player, Little Walter, born Marion Walter Jacobs, is one of the stars of “Blue & Lonesome.” Four of its songs, including the title track composed by Memphis Slim, are part of Little Walter’s catalog, and the Stones do justice to each. In the jump-blues “Hate to See You Go,” the band locks in beneath Mr. Jagger’s harmonica and vocal; and as he’s done for decades, Mr. Watts pushes his colleagues by playing behind the beat, his brushes swiping the snare drum and high-hat cymbal. Released by Little Walter in 1960—the year Messrs. Jagger and Richards began, as schoolboys, to share their passion for the blues and R&B—“Just Your Fool,” an eight-bar blues, rides on the chugging guitars. Slurred guitar chords color the galloping “I Gotta Go,” another performance dominated by Messrs. Jagger and Watts.

If the tempo pulls back a bit on Howlin’ Wolf’s “Commit a Crime,” Lightning Slim’s “Hoodoo Blues” and chilling readings of Magic Sam’s “All of Your Love” and Reed’s “Little Rain,” the energy never flags. In “All of Your Love,” Darryl Jones patiently walks the bass under the guitars and vocals; and Chuck Leavell tosses in a ticklish piano solo to shake up the mood. Two guitars tighten the tension under Mr. Jagger’s voice in “Little Rain,” and Messrs. Jones and Watts enter subtly to give the performance a boozy bottom.

By coincidence, Mr. Clapton was at the same recording complex as the Stones when they were cutting what became “Blue & Lonesome,” and he joins in on a stalking reading of “I Can’t Quit You Baby,” the Dixon composition recorded by Otis Rush, and Little Johnny Taylor’s “Everybody Knows About My Good Thing.” The always tasteful Mr. Clapton pays tribute to Mr. Rush with his solo in the former. In the latter, he plays slide guitar to provide counterpoint to Mr. Jagger’s wry vocal and then puts away the slide bar for a tidy solo as Messrs. Richards and Wood weave away on guitars, and Mr. Leavell on piano and Matt Clifford on the Hammond B-3 organ fill out the midrange.

The Stones have been conducting a sort of extended farewell for years. The band commemorated its 50th anniversary with a November 2012 performance in London, and since then have undertaken brief but geographically ambitious tours: In March, some 500,000 people attended a free concert in Havana, an event captured in “Havana Moon,” a documentary released earlier this month. “The Rolling Stones in Mono,” a 15-CD set that includes all of the band’s 1960s albums, was issued in September. With “Blue & Lonesome,” the Stones revisit where it all began. Joy and heart and vigor radiate from an album that is a celebration of the blues and the Rolling Stones.

[www.wsj.com]

Quote
MonkeyMan2000
I actually like the production. But I think Keith is a bit too low on REOD.

On Little Walter's Blue and Lonesome and many others old blues recordings you can't hear much but distortion. So that's what they went for with the production, I think.

yes i think that distortion was their "sound reference" aim it seems.

and Hairball, I see what you mean, to my ears is Micks vocals in Reod that sound mechanical

Quote
Cristiano Radtke
The Rolling Stones’s ‘Blue & Lonesome’: A Romp Among Friends

Fifty-two years after their first album, the Rolling Stones return to their blues roots
By JIM FUSILLI
Nov. 27, 2016 8:25 p.m. ET



[www.wsj.com]

Thanks Cristiano.

"In “All of Your Love,” Darryl Jones patiently walks the bass under the guitars and vocals; and Chuck Leavell tosses in a ticklish piano solo to shake up the mood".

I thought Chuck was absent from all recording sessions?
Or maybe he did an ovedub?
Or the writer is mistaken?

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

It's recorded and produced raw by design. And there are very few overdubs. The reason you don't hear mistakes is because the band did have some proper pre-production before the songs were recorded.

Quote
mpj200
It's recorded and produced raw by design. And there are very few overdubs. The reason you don't hear mistakes is because the band did have some proper pre-production before the songs were recorded.

_____________________________________


I'm not making some kind of attempt to educate you here.. I am only agreeing and adding my lib is all

The recording technique / production's aim was to give an over-driven, unprofessional, spontaneous sound. It is rough edged, harsh, and crude. Very
unpolished.. as unpolished as can be for the most part.

The band used a Decca tree and vintage gear (possibly even an old TG board which is present at British Grove) in order to recreate a blues style recording of old... the way the true classics were recorded .. but this time it is The Rolling Stones some 50-60 years later (<that was the concept).

The way it is recorded / produced is quite purposeful. It has a thin layer of distortion to certain instruments / tracks to give that 'amped to the max / over driven' feel.

The result is something significantly raw... significantly unpolished .. junky.. 'Stones junky' ...but like the blues recordings of old. That was the very point.

Mick claimed the mixing was painstaking. My thought is that is because he (he and the mixing engineer Kirsh Sharma / and Producer, Don Was) was going over the different tracks trying to give them their own 'spin' BUT in keeping with that unpolished, raw, thrown together sound. That would be a very tedious... tight rope to walk on (if you have ever done any mixing in the studio .. this stab at both worlds while still trying to make everything sound like it's from the same cloth would be difficult and would need some trial and error .. even with seasoned professionals.. because every recording / mixing situation is unique in it's own way ..) Meeting the objective of giving each song a different spin while making them all sound like they are from the same, unpolished cloth is much harder than simply making something all one way.

Personally, I can't wait to hear the slower tracks (Little Rain .. Blue and Lonesome... All Your Love etc.). I have a feeling those will be really .. really good.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2016-11-28 05:44 by IanBillen.

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
mpj200
It's recorded and produced raw by design. And there are very few overdubs. The reason you don't hear mistakes is because the band did have some proper pre-production before the songs were recorded.

_____________________________________


I'm not making some kind of attempt to educate you here.. I am only agreeing and adding my lib is all

The recording technique / production's aim was to give an over-driven, unprofessional, spontaneous sound. It is rough edged, harsh, and crude. Very
unpolished.. as unpolished as can be for the most part.

The band used a Decca tree and vintage gear (possibly even an old TG board which is present at British Grove) in order to recreate a blues style recording of old... the way the true classics were recorded .. but this time it is The Rolling Stones some 50-60 years later (<that was the concept).

The way it is recorded / produced is quite purposeful. It has a thin layer of distortion to certain instruments / tracks to give that 'amped to the max / over driven' feel.

The result is something significantly raw... significantly unpolished .. junky.. 'Stones junky' ...but like the blues recordings of old. That was the very point.

Mick claimed the mixing was painstaking. My thought is that is because he (he and the mixing engineer Kirsh Sharma / and Producer, Don Was) was going over the different tracks trying to give them their own 'spin' BUT in keeping with that unpolished, raw, thrown together sound. That would be a very tedious... tight rope to walk on (if you have ever done any mixing in the studio .. this stab at both worlds while still trying to make everything sound like it's from the same cloth would be difficult and would need some trial and error .. even with seasoned professionals.. because every recording / mixing situation is unique in it's own way ..) Meeting the objective of giving each song a different spin while making them all sound like they are from the same, unpolished cloth is much harder than simply making something all one way.

Personally, I can't wait to hear the slower tracks (Little Rain .. Blue and Lonesome... All Your Love etc.). I have a feeling those will be really .. really good.

Exactly. Or again, as the band puts it "raw". And yes, spending time on mixing doesn't equate to polished.

Quote
duke richardson
Ghost of Brian Jones visits Keith...

[www.contactmusic.net]

Interesting, thanks for the link duke.

While former member Mick Taylor - who made a number of appearances on the group's 50th anniversary tour -
is a respected blues guitarist and many fans hoped he'd appear on the covers record, the group insist he would have ''dithered'' too much and hampered the recording process.

Ronnie said: ''He would have analysed it too much I think.
''He would have dithered around too much. What he does best is play. Talk about it? No.''


Sounds like a bunch of crap.
Mick Taylor would have raised the bar.
Bummer.

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

Quote
Hairball

Quote
duke richardson
Ghost of Brian Jones visits Keith...

[www.contactmusic.net]

Interesting, thanks for the link duke.

While former member Mick Taylor - who made a number of appearances on the group's 50th anniversary tour -
is a respected blues guitarist and many fans hoped he'd appear on the covers record, the group insist he would have ''dithered'' too much and hampered the recording process.

Ronnie said: ''He would have analysed it too much I think.
''He would have dithered around too much. What he does best is play. Talk about it? No.''


Sounds like a bunch of crap.
Mick Taylor would have raised the bar.
Bummer.

He left the band decades ago. Where you been, mate?

Quote
mpj200

Quote
Hairball

Quote
duke richardson
Ghost of Brian Jones visits Keith...

[www.contactmusic.net]

Interesting, thanks for the link duke.

While former member Mick Taylor - who made a number of appearances on the group's 50th anniversary tour -
is a respected blues guitarist and many fans hoped he'd appear on the covers record, the group insist he would have ''dithered'' too much and hampered the recording process.

Ronnie said: ''He would have analysed it too much I think.
''He would have dithered around too much. What he does best is play. Talk about it? No.''


Sounds like a bunch of crap.
Mick Taylor would have raised the bar.
Bummer.

He left the band decades ago. Where you been, mate?

He was welcomed back and touring with them just a few years ago (the highlight of the tour)...a shame he wasn't included on the new album.

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

Quote
Hairball
The production from what I've heard so far on the two or three pre-released tunes seemed fine, but then again I've only listened on my laptop, and having only listened to them once or twice (anxiously waiting for vinyl and/or cd), my opinion is somewhat limited on this. What I did notice though was the overall playing and vibe seemed a bit mechanical...almost too correct...no bum notes...not a mistake to be heard. Unlike the originals which have an authentic/organic/live/raw feeling w/mistakes and all, these new versions seem a bit processed. I understand they were all cut in three days (or whatever it was) and supposedly 'live', but maybe Don Was (and Mick?) were busy for awhile cleaning them up afterwards with their digital trickery leaving them a bit sterile. Hopefully it all doesn't come across as Blues without a feeling...but reading some of the comments of the vinyl single is a bit worrying.

There are bum notes, perhaps even deliberate bum notes

The rhythm guitar(s) on Just Your Fool is a bit mechanical.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-11-28 09:49 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
mpj200

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
mpj200
It's recorded and produced raw by design. And there are very few overdubs. The reason you don't hear mistakes is because the band did have some proper pre-production before the songs were recorded.

_____________________________________


I'm not making some kind of attempt to educate you here.. I am only agreeing and adding my lib is all

The recording technique / production's aim was to give an over-driven, unprofessional, spontaneous sound. It is rough edged, harsh, and crude. Very
unpolished.. as unpolished as can be for the most part.

The band used a Decca tree and vintage gear (possibly even an old TG board which is present at British Grove) in order to recreate a blues style recording of old... the way the true classics were recorded .. but this time it is The Rolling Stones some 50-60 years later (<that was the concept).

The way it is recorded / produced is quite purposeful. It has a thin layer of distortion to certain instruments / tracks to give that 'amped to the max / over driven' feel.

The result is something significantly raw... significantly unpolished .. junky.. 'Stones junky' ...but like the blues recordings of old. That was the very point.

Mick claimed the mixing was painstaking. My thought is that is because he (he and the mixing engineer Kirsh Sharma / and Producer, Don Was) was going over the different tracks trying to give them their own 'spin' BUT in keeping with that unpolished, raw, thrown together sound. That would be a very tedious... tight rope to walk on (if you have ever done any mixing in the studio .. this stab at both worlds while still trying to make everything sound like it's from the same cloth would be difficult and would need some trial and error .. even with seasoned professionals.. because every recording / mixing situation is unique in it's own way ..) Meeting the objective of giving each song a different spin while making them all sound like they are from the same, unpolished cloth is much harder than simply making something all one way.

Personally, I can't wait to hear the slower tracks (Little Rain .. Blue and Lonesome... All Your Love etc.). I have a feeling those will be really .. really good.

Exactly. Or again, as the band puts it "raw". And yes, spending time on mixing doesn't equate to polished.

_________________________________________________


Yupp ... I Agree on all accounts.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Cristiano Radtke
The Rolling Stones’s ‘Blue & Lonesome’: A Romp Among Friends

Fifty-two years after their first album, the Rolling Stones return to their blues roots
By JIM FUSILLI
Nov. 27, 2016 8:25 p.m. ET



[www.wsj.com]

Thanks Cristiano.

"In “All of Your Love,” Darryl Jones patiently walks the bass under the guitars and vocals; and Chuck Leavell tosses in a ticklish piano solo to shake up the mood".

I thought Chuck was absent from all recording sessions?
Or maybe he did an ovedub?
Or the writer is mistaken?

___________________________________________


Chuck was originally not present (In December). In April / May they chose to have him do some overdubs on the album (and he was hopeful they would being as he didn't think the keys they had down with Matt Clifford sounded spontaneous and natural enough .. Clifford was there in Decemberer .. Chuck was not).


Ian

I'm very much looking forward to this album! I enjoyed the RS Cover Story and can't wait to start listening on friday.

By the way: Do you know if the whole album will be published on Spotify on friday as well? I am currently in the process of putting together a new record player and music system, and that might not be ready for the new vinyl by friday..

Quote
mpj200

Quote
Hairball

Quote
duke richardson
Ghost of Brian Jones visits Keith...

[www.contactmusic.net]

Interesting, thanks for the link duke.

While former member Mick Taylor - who made a number of appearances on the group's 50th anniversary tour -
is a respected blues guitarist and many fans hoped he'd appear on the covers record, the group insist he would have ''dithered'' too much and hampered the recording process.

Ronnie said: ''He would have analysed it too much I think.
''He would have dithered around too much. What he does best is play. Talk about it? No.''


Sounds like a bunch of crap.
Mick Taylor would have raised the bar.
Bummer.

He left the band decades ago. Where you been, mate?

And somehow still missed. They should have asked him to play on this album. Any album really.

I hate to say it but the Mick Taylor today sounds like shit!

eeeeeh here we go again..
sour comments pro and versus taylor
che palle!

Quote
Testify
I hate to say it but the Mick Taylor today sounds like shit!

I doubt your statement.
It's just dumb.