Quote
TheflyingDutchman
The Rolling Stones have a designer-sloppines that makes them fill stadiums and sell albums. It doesn't necessarily mean that they are the holy grail when it comes to playing the Chicago blues stuff like they do on Blue and Lonesome. Anyway, thanks for bringing up The Red Devils (and Jagger), what a relief. Was Keith ever given a copy of this band's efforts? I bet he likes it a lot.

Quote
DandelionPowderman


Rubin is rarely there when records are made, but he pops by time and again, to touch base and check out how it's going. He's a very untraditional producer, and i can totally understand that he wasn't a good match with Mick, with this approach.

Quote
dcba

Quote
DandelionPowderman


Rubin is rarely there when records are made, but he pops by time and again, to touch base and check out how it's going. He's a very untraditional producer, and i can totally understand that he wasn't a good match with Mick, with this approach.

"rarely there when records are made" that's certainly his motto these days (cos he can "produce" many artists at the same time and pocket more money?) but back then I think it was the opposite.

He really drove Mick over the edge questioning everything, always demanding that Mick could do better.
And the Red Devils sessions was a way for Rubin to connect Mick with his blues roots (sth Mick probably wanted to avoid at all costs. Mick's motto is : look for new sounds).

In short : Rubin busted Mick's ass and in retrospect WS is Jagger's best solo album.

Quote
TravelinMan

Apparently, he was "there" producing Johnny Cash in the 90's.

Quote
Duked
In the description of the Jagger & Red Devils studio recording on the internet, there is this line:
"During a short tour of England in March and April 1993, Jagger joined the band for several performances"

Is this true? No other trace of this on the internet anywhere. Not even in the Stones day by day history pages (time is on our side).
Does anyone know is this true? If so, does a recording exist of any of the live shows?

Quote
Duked
Nobody.....? Is this (Jagger joined them love) true at all?

Quote
Duked
In the description of the Jagger & Red Devils studio recording on the internet, there is this line:
"During a short tour of England in March and April 1993, Jagger joined the band for several performances"

Is this true? No other trace of this on the internet anywhere. Not even in the Stones day by day history pages (time is on our side).
Does anyone know is this true? If so, does a recording exist of any of the live shows?

Quote
Duked
Nobody.....? Is this (Jagger joined them love) true at all?

Quote
dcba

Quote
swimtothemoon
Yes a good CD. Why was it not officially released? I guess I have always assumed it was Mick’s decision - maybe trying to do something not too close to Stones sound as he was striving to do something a little different in his solo career.

Rubin forced Jagger to spend a few hours of studio time with the Red Devils. That's part of Rubin's method. He talks musicians into getting back to their roots. For Jagger it was logically the blues.

Alas Jagger most certainly didn't like the experience as what he likes best is chasing new musical trends, not reviving things he did when he was 20-25.

Another failed "Rubin experience" was with AC/DC : I speculate here but when he talked the Young Brothers into going back to their roots they probably looked at each others and thought "you @#$%&! Our amps are old, our guitars are old, even the tubes in our Marshall are from the 60's. We DO go back to our roots every time we hit a chord! You won't teach us sh!t!"

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
dcba

Quote
swimtothemoon
Yes a good CD. Why was it not officially released? I guess I have always assumed it was Mick’s decision - maybe trying to do something not too close to Stones sound as he was striving to do something a little different in his solo career.

Rubin forced Jagger to spend a few hours of studio time with the Red Devils. That's part of Rubin's method. He talks musicians into getting back to their roots. For Jagger it was logically the blues.

Alas Jagger most certainly didn't like the experience as what he likes best is chasing new musical trends, not reviving things he did when he was 20-25.

Another failed "Rubin experience" was with AC/DC : I speculate here but when he talked the Young Brothers into going back to their roots they probably looked at each others and thought "you @#$%&! Our amps are old, our guitars are old, even the tubes in our Marshall are from the 60's. We DO go back to our roots every time we hit a chord! You won't teach us sh!t!"

I always call that album HARD AS A ROCK, which is probably a better album title but not for that album, which it is not hard as a rock. That aside, BALLBREAKER doesn't have the energy that STIFF UPPER LIP and BLACK ICE have. After I listened to it I looked at the liner notes just to make sure I did see that it was produced by Rick Rubin.

The obvious single and first track, Hard As A Rock, that's pretty good. It even sounds like AC/DC. As in... it has previous elements that have given them a certain sound, like Thunderstruck, FTATR... Hells Bells. It kind of has that essence.

But it's too reduced.

Boogie Man is - who the hell thought that was worth recording? It is not Big Balls.

Angus clearly regurgitated The Honey Roll on STIFF UPPER LIP with House Of Jazz, which is a lot better of a song.

Burnin' Alive sounds like AC/DC... at first.


Aside from the first track, nothing on the album grabs, which they're usually pretty good at doing. Obviously that's part of the songwriting not being very good. But the album sounds too clean. There's nothing about it that kicks. It sounds like they borrowed some amps and didn't use their amps.

And that's on Rubin. He finally got his dream gig and he blew it.