For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
drewmasterQuote
peoplewitheyes
I'm not trying to spread bad vibes! I really like All Of Your Love, and as i said, the sound/feel is great. But i guess i like more than three chords (or at least three different chords, or in a different order) in my music... Not digging the blues doesn't preclude me from loving the Rolling Stones. I love how they took so many of those blues sounds/ideas/feels and took them into new dimensions. Which i dont hear on all these covers.
But that's enough from me. Everyone else, roll a fat one and enjoy it!!
+1
I might add that, of all the tracks, All Of Your Love is IMO the one that breathes the most, the one that builds tension up slowly and then provides sweet, sweet release ...
Drew
Add Little Rain to that list.
Quote
Cristiano Radtke
There's some nice - although short - footage from the Stones in studio here: [www.amazon.co.uk]
Quote
Hansman
I'd rather see The Rolling Stones to appear in a Rolling Stones video than Kristen Stewart.
Indeed..Quote
corriecasQuote
Cristiano Radtke
There's some nice - although short - footage from the Stones in studio here: [www.amazon.co.uk]
grea, thanks Cristiano. just great.
Thanks
jeroen
Quote
frenki09
Fun to watch.
And Charlie seems really easy to talk to. But let's be honest: the guy asked some very dumb questions from Charlie, predictable questions (last album..., you enjoy blues more..., why are people attracted to blues), but a few nice moments...
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
Hairball
[...]
But...no cover can possibly come close to topping these versions - at least in my world:
[...]
Otis Rush - I Can't Quit You Baby (studio)
Cheers for posting this one!
Love the Rush-version dearly
However, I think Hairball is up for a rather nice surprise here
Quote
Redhotcarpet
Geez what a boring album! Loudness war, Mick tries to sing like a yelling 20 something guy, Keith is absent, no nuances at all in anything. Hate to see you go is good though. Had they released that - fine but no this is not a good album. 2/5. 2 is for the Mick Jagger harmonica showcase.
Quote
Hansman
Just heard the whole album two times in a row. My honest opinion is: Mick shines on it. I really like his vocals and especially his harmonica playing. BUT...let's face it, 54 years ago when this band started they were poor and hungry and real blues enthusiasts. What we hear now are a bunch of multi-millionaires and jet-setters whose blues roots are long, long gone. The Rolling Stones are not even a real band anymore, it is some sort of a project and a multi-million global player in the music and entertainment industry. More of like a brand than a band. It's a nice attempt to give the impression that they are old blues-cats and such, but it is as fake as Keith's teeth. To me this album is some sort of a gimmick and it doesn't sound like real and authentic blues to me.
**/*****
Quote
roller99
I just don't think it's that great. Two good songs on it, the rest....no. The whole album sounds so flat, it has nowhere near the sound quality of the first album. I hear the term "brickwalled" a lot. I've gone into rehearsal spaces here in LA (some of them the same ones the Stones rehearse at) and with nothing more than an overhead mic recording into a single track, it sounds fuller, more vibrant. The harp has the right amount of echo courtesy of the amp, no effects. I can go to a local blues jam and hear better sounding music. I'm not going to join the choruses of people praising the band for finally doing this because it's not a big deal, especially not for true professionals.
Maybe it's because I'm a Blues purist, but I've heard way better.
Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Can anyone on this forum please upload the Album on Youtube ? I haven't heard it yet.
Quote
Rolling HansieQuote
Hansman
I'd rather see The Rolling Stones to appear in a Rolling Stones video than Kristen Stewart.
Oh, Come On Hansman. What's wrong with your eyes? She looks a lot better than the Stones
Quote
HairballQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
matxilQuote
Hairball
[...]
But...no cover can possibly come close to topping these versions - at least in my world:
[...]
Otis Rush - I Can't Quit You Baby (studio)
Cheers for posting this one!
Love the Rush-version dearly
However, I think Hairball is up for a rather nice surprise here
I cheated last night by listening online - I couldn't resist!
Have to say it sounds just as I anticipated - to put it mildly I'm not surprised by any of it.Quote
Redhotcarpet
Geez what a boring album! Loudness war, Mick tries to sing like a yelling 20 something guy, Keith is absent, no nuances at all in anything. Hate to see you go is good though. Had they released that - fine but no this is not a good album. 2/5. 2 is for the Mick Jagger harmonica showcase.
I wouldn't go so far to say it's boring, but for the most part would agree with you Redhotcarpet. I can't imagine this will be on my playlist for very long as there's nothing much to discover here that's new really - they're only blues covers for goodness sake, and the original versions are all superior. (Down in the Hole from Emotional Rescue - an original - is better than any of this).Quote
Hansman
Just heard the whole album two times in a row. My honest opinion is: Mick shines on it. I really like his vocals and especially his harmonica playing. BUT...let's face it, 54 years ago when this band started they were poor and hungry and real blues enthusiasts. What we hear now are a bunch of multi-millionaires and jet-setters whose blues roots are long, long gone. The Rolling Stones are not even a real band anymore, it is some sort of a project and a multi-million global player in the music and entertainment industry. More of like a brand than a band. It's a nice attempt to give the impression that they are old blues-cats and such, but it is as fake as Keith's teeth. To me this album is some sort of a gimmick and it doesn't sound like real and authentic blues to me.
**/*****
The authenticity is lacking here big time. The context in which the originals were recorded is hard to ignore (racial tensions, etc.), and when listening to these multimillionaire English rock stars covering them it comes across as false. The backstories of those blues musicians are very real...the pain, the anguish, the struggles...all of it equates to real blues...nothing phony about it. In the past, the Stones have taken this American art form and made something intersting/new/different with it - here they seem to just be regurgitating. Makes me wonder why Mick scrapped his blues album with the Red Devils - perhaps he felt the same way. Keith's latest album on the other hand was full of surprises, spice, and curveballs, and while it wasn't to everyone's liking, at least it wasn't simply a rehash of things that came before.Quote
roller99
I just don't think it's that great. Two good songs on it, the rest....no. The whole album sounds so flat, it has nowhere near the sound quality of the first album. I hear the term "brickwalled" a lot. I've gone into rehearsal spaces here in LA (some of them the same ones the Stones rehearse at) and with nothing more than an overhead mic recording into a single track, it sounds fuller, more vibrant. The harp has the right amount of echo courtesy of the amp, no effects. I can go to a local blues jam and hear better sounding music. I'm not going to join the choruses of people praising the band for finally doing this because it's not a big deal, especially not for true professionals.
Maybe it's because I'm a Blues purist, but I've heard way better.
Based on first impressions I would fully agree, and anticpate my feelings won't change much beyond that.
Will listen a few more times when cd arrives today, and should have a full grasp of everything that needs to be heard by tomorrow. Granted it might be the best album since Tattoo You (yay), and one I'll probably listen to more than anything else of theirs from the past 35 years, but that's not saying much. Dare I say I look forward to a new album of originals - maybe this detour through the blues will inspire something that will stand the test of time and add something to their legacy. For now, they're just treading water. Hopefully those that are unfamiliar with the originals or blues in general will dig a bit deeper and discover the real deal in the process.
"I mean what's the point in listening to us doing "I'm A King Bee" when you can listen to Slim Harpo doing it"? - Mick
Agreed.
Quote
maumau
you're quick and smart Hairball, good for you
not being rude here but consider that not anyone who is liking or dancing the butt out of this are green to the originals or unfamiliar of "the real deal"
at least I am not