Just got my deluxe delivered, cant wait to unbox it and spin it

Played the bonus tracks straight away. They're pretty good. Just wished either Keith or Mick T. did more jamming, especially in the longer tunes. Some nice Johnny Johnson playing though.

Quote
Bashlets
I know we all have different opinions but If CROSSEYED HEART is a snooze fest then that’s a sleep I really love. LOL

I know, that is the sweetest snooze ever, don't get swayed by jealous posters, Crosseyed Heart is without doubt Keith's master piece of the later era Stones, it was a return to form and undoubtedly the best solo album by a Stone, it's better each time we go back to it, and that was the real test, it's a keeper, i put it up there with Tattoo You, would have made a fine Stones album with Mick on vocals too, Keith obviously forced to save his best stuff for himself.

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Bashlets
I know we all have different opinions but If CROSSEYED HEART is a snooze fest then that’s a sleep I really love. LOL

I know, that is the sweetest snooze ever, don't get swayed by jealous posters, Crosseyed Heart is without doubt Keith's master piece of the later era Stones, it was a return to form and undoubtedly the best solo album by a Stone, it's better each time we go back to it, and that was the real test, it's a keeper, i put it up there with Tattoo You, would have made a fine Stones album with Mick on vocals too, Keith obviously forced to save his best stuff for himself.

Agree with almost all, though am glad it is turned out a Keith solo album vs. a Stones album...having Mick invlolved might have tarnished the quality.
Not a knock on Mick, but some things are meant to be the way they're meant to be, and in this case it's 100% Keith.

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

"jealous posters".....good grief, you might need some education or something Trying to people in their "places" because of their opinions.....are we back in Germany 1930s?
I think CrosseyedHeart is a vaste of time, btw.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-03-29 20:44 by Erik_Snow.

I've just finish to listen to it and I love it. I'd already like it before the remastering, and now for once the remastering sound pretty good to my ears and the bonus bluesy tracks are pure treat.
Guess we just have to wait 3 more years for the Main Offender deluxe Hélas !

HMN

Quote
Hairball

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Bashlets
I know we all have different opinions but If CROSSEYED HEART is a snooze fest then that’s a sleep I really love. LOL

I know, that is the sweetest snooze ever, don't get swayed by jealous posters, Crosseyed Heart is without doubt Keith's master piece of the later era Stones, it was a return to form and undoubtedly the best solo album by a Stone, it's better each time we go back to it, and that was the real test, it's a keeper, i put it up there with Tattoo You, would have made a fine Stones album with Mick on vocals too, Keith obviously forced to save his best stuff for himself.

Agree with almost all, though am glad it is turned out a Keith solo album vs. a Stones album...having Mick invlolved might have tarnished the quality.
Not a knock on Mick, but some things are meant to be the way they're meant to be, and in this case it's 100% Keith.

I agree Hairball, i wouldn't change Keith on the vocals for the world, but had Mick sang on it, it would have been a great album similar to Tattoo You.

Quote
Erik_Snow
"jealous posters".....good grief, you might need some education or something Trying to people in their "places" because of their opinions.....are we back in Germany 1930s?
I think CrosseyedHeart is a vaste of time, btw.

Easy on grandma's old cough medicine Eric.

Quote
Erik_Snow
"jealous posters".....good grief, you might need some education or something Trying to people in their "places" because of their opinions.....are we back in Germany 1930s?
I think CrosseyedHeart is a vaste of time, btw.

Maybe you are too, yeah??
Jeroen

Whatever
Jeroen

Quote
Hairball

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Bashlets
I know we all have different opinions but If CROSSEYED HEART is a snooze fest then that’s a sleep I really love. LOL

I know, that is the sweetest snooze ever, don't get swayed by jealous posters, Crosseyed Heart is without doubt Keith's master piece of the later era Stones, it was a return to form and undoubtedly the best solo album by a Stone, it's better each time we go back to it, and that was the real test, it's a keeper, i put it up there with Tattoo You, would have made a fine Stones album with Mick on vocals too, Keith obviously forced to save his best stuff for himself.

Agree with almost all, though am glad it is turned out a Keith solo album vs. a Stones album...having Mick invlolved might have tarnished the quality.
Not a knock on Mick, but some things are meant to be the way they're meant to be, and in this case it's 100% Keith.

"---having Mick involved might have tarnished the quality. Not a knock on Mick,..."

Good one!

Yeah, Mick's the weak link obviously. With a better singer, the Stones would not have played the second fiddle to the Beatles, they could have been the No. 1 band of all time...

-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-03-30 10:45 by Erik_Snow.

Got my deLuxe Box today. Wonderful Box. I like it.

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Hairball

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Bashlets
I know we all have different opinions but If CROSSEYED HEART is a snooze fest then that’s a sleep I really love. LOL

I know, that is the sweetest snooze ever, don't get swayed by jealous posters, Crosseyed Heart is without doubt Keith's master piece of the later era Stones, it was a return to form and undoubtedly the best solo album by a Stone, it's better each time we go back to it, and that was the real test, it's a keeper, i put it up there with Tattoo You, would have made a fine Stones album with Mick on vocals too, Keith obviously forced to save his best stuff for himself.

Agree with almost all, though am glad it is turned out a Keith solo album vs. a Stones album...having Mick invlolved might have tarnished the quality.
Not a knock on Mick, but some things are meant to be the way they're meant to be, and in this case it's 100% Keith.

"---having Mick involved might have tarnished the quality. Not a knock on Mick,..."

Good one!

Yeah, Mick's the weak link obviously. With a better singer, the Stones would not have played the second fiddle to the Beatles, they could have been the No. 1 band of all time...

Dawg of course Mick is the man, he sings in the best band in the world, period, performers don't come better than Mick, that's not up for debate, but Keith's dulcet tones have a charm of their own, it's nice for Keith to finally get the recognition he deserves, he's so much more than his image, he's got soul baby.

slim and mark on me the highlights for me. good job with the sessions lp. you get the feel that was is written on the intro of the book about the "core band" and how they recorded, is true.
anyway you cant go wrong with bootsy collins johnnie johnson and bernie worrell

Is it just me? I'm listening to the album now and it's sounds quite different compared to the original release – or maybe rather my memories of the original relase. I can't compare the two versions right now (since the old version is in my other flat). Can anyone comment on differences?

Quote
slewan
Is it just me? I'm listening to the album now and it's sounds quite different compared to the original release – or maybe rather my memories of the original relase. I can't compare the two versions right now (since the old version is in my other flat). Can anyone comment on differences?

Yes it sounds quite different -

here's the bonus disk:

[open.spotify.com]

Best outtakes since Foxes in the Boxes



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-03-29 23:56 by glimmertwin1.

"Today, Keith Richards, co-founder and guitarist of the Rolling Stones, has released a reissue of his debut solo album, “Talk Is Cheap,” in celebration of its 30th anniversary. Working on it with mostly new bandmates reminded him of getting the Stones off the ground a quarter-century earlier. "I did find at the beginning I had a déjà vu feeling of what it was like starting the Stones again.” And he may even drop a song or two from it during the Stones' No Filter U.S. tour, "I'm tempted, man. I've gotta test the temperature [within the band]. But why not? I'm not averse to it." Photo: Carolyn Cole for LA Times



[www.instagram.com]

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Hairball

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Bashlets
I know we all have different opinions but If CROSSEYED HEART is a snooze fest then that’s a sleep I really love. LOL

I know, that is the sweetest snooze ever, don't get swayed by jealous posters, Crosseyed Heart is without doubt Keith's master piece of the later era Stones, it was a return to form and undoubtedly the best solo album by a Stone, it's better each time we go back to it, and that was the real test, it's a keeper, i put it up there with Tattoo You, would have made a fine Stones album with Mick on vocals too, Keith obviously forced to save his best stuff for himself.

Agree with almost all, though am glad it is turned out a Keith solo album vs. a Stones album...having Mick invlolved might have tarnished the quality.
Not a knock on Mick, but some things are meant to be the way they're meant to be, and in this case it's 100% Keith.

"---having Mick involved might have tarnished the quality. Not a knock on Mick,..."

Good one!

Yeah, Mick's the weak link obviously. With a better singer, the Stones would not have played the second fiddle to the Beatles, they could have been the No. 1 band of all time...

Clearly you're misinterpreting my words and are reading in to it to fit some agenda you have against those who like Keith solo albums.
The fact is, this was a Keith solo album 100% through and through, and any input from Mick would have negated that. Crosseyed Heart has nothing to do with Mick or the Stones and thankfully so imo - it's really that simple.

Just as with Mick's solo albums...they are what they are because there's no Keith on them. Had Keith been involved would they have been better? Maybe. Or worse? Maybe not.
Really not sure, but if Keith had been involved they would have ended up as Stones albums - not solo albums which is what we're talking about here.

Again, not a knock on Mick - he's a great singer and probably the best front man ever when with the Rolling Stones.
But to have him all over Crosseyed Heart would have been a mistake imo - it was meant to be a Keith solo album.

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

Dropping a TIC song during the solo set....what?? Keith really is the master manipulator ....maybe he could sell ice to the eskimos....lol

Drop a song OR TWO...lol....definitely something that would break up some of the monotony of the shows.
But is he brave enough to do it?!!! Doubtful, but hope it happens!

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

Quote
Hairball
Drop a song OR TWO...lol....definitely something that would break up some of the monotony of the shows.
But is he brave enough to do it?!!! Doubtful, but hope it happens!

we'd have to be prepared for a 10 minute version of Let's Work as quid pro quo.

Careful what you wish for!

[www.instagram.com]

Imagine Keith during his solo set walking out with the Deluxe version in hand as seen above, giving a bit of a sales pitch, and then playing one or two songs from it!

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

Slim sounds so goooooooooooood!!!

Got it in the mail today!

Haven't listened yet but it looks fantastic. I dig it already.

Quote
shadooby
Slim sounds so goooooooooooood!!!

I tried looking up the lyrics, they are not online, do they come in a booklet?

I haven’t received my CD yet sometimes my mail takes a day off and I want to wait for the CD, not Spotify.

Here is a paragraph on the latest microscope of Keith Richards regime:
"In fact, I don't know if I got fed up with booze or if booze got fed up with me. I was just doing it because that's what I do but then I realized, 'I don't need this for breakfast.' "
(Keith on giving up vodka, recent interview)
Funny, when I realized I couldn’t have hard liquor for breakfast anymore I had to go to rehab! Only 1x tho *knock knock at 23 years old. I’ll have 30 years off booze next year, wow.
No more a.m. bloody mary’s Keith! Or Sunkist vodka. Long live Keef. We love ya.
Play songs from ‘Crosseyed Heart’ please if you decide to cross the Commander.

mine is here

Quote
Hairball

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Hairball

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Bashlets
I know we all have different opinions but If CROSSEYED HEART is a snooze fest then that’s a sleep I really love. LOL

I know, that is the sweetest snooze ever, don't get swayed by jealous posters, Crosseyed Heart is without doubt Keith's master piece of the later era Stones, it was a return to form and undoubtedly the best solo album by a Stone, it's better each time we go back to it, and that was the real test, it's a keeper, i put it up there with Tattoo You, would have made a fine Stones album with Mick on vocals too, Keith obviously forced to save his best stuff for himself.

Agree with almost all, though am glad it is turned out a Keith solo album vs. a Stones album...having Mick invlolved might have tarnished the quality.
Not a knock on Mick, but some things are meant to be the way they're meant to be, and in this case it's 100% Keith.

"---having Mick involved might have tarnished the quality. Not a knock on Mick,..."

Good one!

Yeah, Mick's the weak link obviously. With a better singer, the Stones would not have played the second fiddle to the Beatles, they could have been the No. 1 band of all time...

Clearly you're misinterpreting my words and are reading in to it to fit some agenda you have against those who like Keith solo albums.
The fact is, this was a Keith solo album 100% through and through, and any input from Mick would have negated that. Crosseyed Heart has nothing to do with Mick or the Stones and thankfully so imo - it's really that simple.

Just as with Mick's solo albums...they are what they are because there's no Keith on them. Had Keith been involved would they have been better? Maybe. Or worse? Maybe not.
Really not sure, but if Keith had been involved they would have ended up as Stones albums - not solo albums which is what we're talking about here.

Again, not a knock on Mick - he's a great singer and probably the best front man ever when with the Rolling Stones.
But to have him all over Crosseyed Heart would have been a mistake imo - it was meant to be a Keith solo album.

Some agenda? No, I just found it funny to read that "any input from Mick" would tarnish something. It would have sounded different, sure, but tarnished?

And just for the record: CH is not my favourite Keith solo album just like Goddess is not my favourite Jagger solo album. Imo both suffer from too few truly memorable songs, and while both albums offer some interesting & promising sounds, these sounds rarely transform into memorable songs, no wonder when the song material to start with is too weak to warrant or justify a full album.

With that in mind - no, I don't think Keith's involvement could have rescued Mick's Goddess and vice versa CH.

At the same time, I tremendously enjoy the Talk Is Cheap 30th Anniversary bonus tracks. Maybe that'll give you some satisfaction after all!

yeh talk is real cheap, keith.
35 grand for 15 seconds, maybe, Clause pretty cute here.
what, like maybe 14 seconds? Did someone give Chuckie a stopwatch for Arbor freakin' Day!?
it could not even be keith!!
if it's Tim and you want your money back, what you gonna do?
seriously, what?
Cry?
Write a letter to one of their managers? That's cool cause they read every letter.
yeah talk is cheap.
Gold. Rings. On. Ya. that will be thirty five grand.
another syllable may be negotiable, bring drugs. kidding.
bring your credit card i mean.
or cash.
cash works.