Quote
RipThisBone

Quote
Maindefender

Quote
Kurt
That review from Mojo is the perfect example of a rock "journalist" that loves themselves more than they love their profession.

How many big words can I use in my "review" while I float above the world in my own shit-zeppelin? Give me a @#$%& break, man.

I'm now more excited for this release than ever, especially since Paul Trynka used the word 'prosaic' and 'hagiographic'.

edit: I had to look up 'hagiographic' because spell-check wouldn't even recognize it as a real word.

Funny......

Funny indeed.

"review"...this "journalist" don't know what he/she is talking about.

Edit: hagiographic my ass.

Quote
Hairball
Thanks for posting Cristiano.
Mostly positive except for paragraph three...hope that part doesn't hurt anyone's feelings around here.

Quote
Maindefender
Pretty lukewarm review, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. Paragraph 5 is not kind to Keith, but if the reviewer understood Aaron Neville's My True Story he may understand Keith's role on this album a little better. Looking forward to hearing Little Rain...

Quote
Rokyfan
I don't know, I read it and got excited to hear the album. If there are three songs on it that are magic, as he says, then that is great and all anyone can expect. Three magic, three relative duds and the rest pretty good. I know there are people who have to say every song is great, even before hearing it, but to me that is a pretty good and probably realistic review.

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Paul Trynka is probably too kind and of course he is right about The Stones disgusting attitude towards Brian. The realistic review is probably 2/5. Keiths album deserved 1/5.

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Paul Trynka is probably too kind and of course he is right about The Stones disgusting attitude towards Brian. The realistic review is probably 2/5. Keiths album deserved 1/5.

Quote
TeddyB1018
The Mojo review grants the new one 8 of 10. It also cites Little Rain as the highlight Keith's album was a small miracle at this late date. More than three magic ones, maybe five or six.

Quote
TeddyB1018
The Mojo review grants the new one 8 of 10. It also cites Little Rain as the highlight Keith's album was a small miracle at this late date. More than three magic ones, maybe five or six.

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Paul Trynka is probably too kind and of course he is right about The Stones disgusting attitude towards Brian. The realistic review is probably 2/5. Keiths album deserved 1/5.

Keiths album deserved 1/5...?
You're hard to please or did I get something wrong ?

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Paul Trynka is probably too kind and of course he is right about The Stones disgusting attitude towards Brian. The realistic review is probably 2/5. Keiths album deserved 1/5.

Keiths album deserved 1/5...?
You're hard to please or did I get something wrong ?

It is not a good album. You wouldnt give it a chance had it been released by someone other than KR.

Quote
Bashlets
8 out of 10 is very good Can someone scan the mojo review or place a link to it?

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Paul Trynka is probably too kind and of course he is right about The Stones disgusting attitude towards Brian. The realistic review is probably 2/5. Keiths album deserved 1/5.

Keiths album deserved 1/5...?
You're hard to please or did I get something wrong ?

It is not a good album. You wouldnt give it a chance had it been released by someone other than KR.

Quote
KRiffhard

Quote
TeddyB1018
The Mojo review grants the new one 8 of 10. It also cites Little Rain as the highlight Keith's album was a small miracle at this late date. More than three magic ones, maybe five or six.

Quote
Deltics
Review in the Guardian:
[www.theguardian.com]

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Paul Trynka is probably too kind and of course he is right about The Stones disgusting attitude towards Brian. The realistic review is probably 2/5. Keiths album deserved 1/5.

Keiths album deserved 1/5...?
You're hard to please or did I get something wrong ?

It is not a good album. You wouldnt give it a chance had it been released by someone other than KR.

If I heard Suspicious, Trouble, Lover's Plea, Nothing On Me, Heartstopper or Blues In The Morning by another artist I would certainly have paid attention and wanted to hear more.

Quote
powerage78

Quote
Deltics
Review in the Guardian:
[www.theguardian.com]

Last week, a US journalist interviewing the Rolling Stones offered up a 21st-century spin on the old ‘Can white men sing the blues?’ argument. Wasn’t the Stones’ early repertoire, heavy on the songs of Willie Dixon, Jimmy Reed, Slim Harpo, Muddy Waters et al, just an example of cultural appropriation, he asked? You might charitably describe Keith Richards’ response as a little confused. At one juncture, he appeared to suggest that the blues was actually “quite Jewish”, but the bulk of the answer consisted of Richards insisting that he was, in fact, black: “Ask any of the brothers.”


Tireless on your behalf, I’ve researched this thoroughly and can exclusively reveal that he isn’t. But equally, the charge of cultural appropriation feels deeply unfair. The biggest band of the British blues boom were always among the loudest cheerleaders for the real deal. They never pulled the grim Led Zeppelin trick of claiming they’d written songs they’d clearly swiped from old blues artists, never missed an opportunity to take BB King on tour or to try to educate their audience about the artists they were paying homage to. “I think it’s about time you shut up and we had Howlin’ Wolf on stage,” suggested Brian Jones to the presenter of US TV show Shindig! in 1965, after the Stones had agreed to appear only if the show also booked Wolf and Son House, a ballsy move in a country where the Voting Rights Act hadn’t yet been passed.

The issue is being raised again because, for the first time in their career, the Rolling Stones have elected to release an album consisting entirely of blues covers. A sceptical voice might suggest it finally confirms what their last album, 2005’s lacklustre A Bigger Bang strongly hinted at: that, as songwriters at least, the Jagger/Richards partnership is out of juice. A less cynical observer’s first thought might be to wonder why they didn’t do something like this sooner: the opening cover of Buddy Johnson’s I’m Just Your Fool comes barreling out of the speakers, sounding more raw and vibrant than the Stones have done in years.


Their second thought might be that Blue and Lonesome sounds surprisingly like Mick Jagger’s show, which rather goes against the commonly held belief that Keith Richards is the band’s R&B heart and Jagger is a fashion-conscious dilettante who’d have the Stones recording tropical house with Kungs and Seeb if he thought it would make them seem relevant. You can see how that notion came about, but while there are fantastic contributions from Richards and Ronnie Wood – the grumbling twin guitars of Little Rain; the taut interplay that powers Hate to See You Go; and, especially, the woozy, chaotic backdrop they conjure on a version of Lightning Slim’s Hoo Doo Blues – it’s Jagger’s voice and harmonica that really drive Blue and Lonesome. At his least inspired, Jagger can sound like a man who isn’t singing so much as rearranging a well-worn series of mannerisms and tics, but here his vocals are extremely powerful and genuinely affecting, as if he’s digging deep within himself to find the emotions to fit the material. You expect him to be able to summon up the kind of swaggering lubriciousness requisite for Everybody Knows About My Good Thing, originally recorded by Little Johnny Taylor, which he does; more surprising is how authentically wracked he sounds on All Your Love, Hate to See You Go and the Memphis Slim-penned title track. There’s a really striking moment on the last one where he sings the line “Baby please come on home to me”, drawing out the word “please” into a chilling, agonised, vulnerable howl.

Moreover, you wonder if Jagger’s fashion-conscious dilettantism might account for the album’s sound: Blue and Lonesome feels very much a record piloted by someone who’s heard the White Stripes or the Black Keys, or the raw blues releases on which Mississippi label Fat Possum’s reputation was founded. The sound is appealingly visceral and live: the guitars are spiky and slashing, the drums punch hard, everything – including Jagger’s voice – is coated with a thin, crisp layer of distortion, as if the band are playing at such volume and with such force that the microphones can’t quite take it.


The obvious point of comparison would be the recordings the Stones made in the brief period between their rise to fame and the full flowering of Jagger and Richards’ songwriting. But if at least one track, a version of Willie Dixon’s Just Like I Treat You, might have slotted neatly onto 5 x 5 or The Rolling Stones No 2, for the most part Blue and Lonesome doesn’t really feel or sound much like the stuff the Stones made half a century ago. They wouldn’t have thanked you for saying it, but back then, their skill lay in a perhaps unwitting ability to transform gnarled rhythm and blues into thrilling teen-friendly pop: listen to Muddy Waters’ original version of I Just Wanna Make Love to You next to their 1964 version and you hear a very grownup, slow-burning record, made by a man already in middle age, converted into something urgent and wired, the soundtrack to an overexcited fumble in the back of a Ford Anglia.

Now in their 70s, men who by anyone’s standards have lived a bit, they frequently seem to tap into something deeper about the music: they really inhabit its sense of hard-won experience. The last thing you hear on the album, after a version of Willie Dixon’s I Can’t Quit You Baby crashes to a halt, is Mick Jagger asking uncertainly “was that OK?” He sounds like a man who’s still slightly awed by this music in its original form; who knows he’s still paying homage to artists he can never entirely grasp, whatever Keith Richards thinks. But the answer to his question is an unqualified yes: it’s more than OK, which is not something you can say about many Stones albums over the last 30 years.[[/b]/quote]

...so they should do only blues covers?!
Nah

Quote
bitusa2012
Rokyfan, Redhotcarpet and anyone else handing out star ratings... You have heard the album, not just read the track list, right? Get a grip...

Quote
Spud

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Paul Trynka is probably too kind and of course he is right about The Stones disgusting attitude towards Brian. The realistic review is probably 2/5. Keiths album deserved 1/5.

Keiths album deserved 1/5...?
You're hard to please or did I get something wrong ?

It is not a good album. You wouldnt give it a chance had it been released by someone other than KR.

If I heard Suspicious, Trouble, Lover's Plea, Nothing On Me, Heartstopper or Blues In The Morning by another artist I would certainly have paid attention and wanted to hear more.

Me too .

I'd think we had a very good and interesting new artist to listen to !

In fact, When folks criticise the band's later work in light of their past glories I often think that had it been the work of a new unkown, we'd think it was great and the best thing since....errm the Rolling Stones

Quote
georgelicks
Ride Em On Down is available to download from the Internet if you know how to find it, ITunes quality, 256kbps.

I love it, great version.

Quote
georgelicks
Ride Em On Down is available to download from the Internet if you know how to find it, ITunes quality, 256kbps.

I love it, great version.