For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Witness
I consider TALK IS CHEAP as the best Rolling Stones solo album. Does that necessarily make me a Keith Richards diehard?
Quote
Doxa
Are you joking? Compare one of the most perfect and legendary album sides of world's greatest rock band at their prime to some secondary side product of one Rolling Stone? Or is there some kind of 'Keith Richards is The Rolling Stones' presuppostion in the question?
There is a difference between a show highlight and a piss break, and that's the difference in quality between TATTOO YOU and TALK IS CHEAP B-sides (or whatever sides). In TATTOU YOU any bloody note, word, sound, nuance is nothing but a perfection, The Stones in their very top form, but the b-side of TALK IS CHEAP is basically a bunch of simple children songs both in lyrically and melodically put through sloppy jamming with the hopeful idea if the output might turn up be something like unique. Sure there is a keithrichardsian 'feel' the True Beliveres with their acquired taste might recognice, but for the the rest of the people - with some sort of reasonable taste and judgment - it all will be 'what a fvck this boring shit is?'... None of Jaggerian focus, or wit or swagger or sex, nor wattsian minimalism, precise and swing, or any of keithrichardsian actual genious in melodies or riffs is present ... just listen all that tasteless noisy drumming, weak guitar sounds, non-finished song sketches, half-baked riffs, lousy vocals, over-all laziness, terrible production... huh!
But like I said there must be some sort of metaphyhysical rule that 'Keith Richards is The Rolling Stones' to get the comparison in some sort of acceptable level (the rule I never have grasped).
Is the next comparing the c-side of EXILE to b-side of MONKEY GRIP or GODDESS IN DOORWAY or something?
- Doxa
Quote
Doxa
Are you joking? Compare one of the most perfect and legendary album sides of world's greatest rock band at their prime ...
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Obviously, the Stones didn't think so, as they released a single the year after that was suspiciously similar (Mixed Emotions).
Quote
Witness
Well, well, but in my view it is the other album in the comparison here that I find , if I may use your words, critically overrated and TALK IS CHEAP not. And my attitude to that former album really has never changed from the days when I wondered after its release if it was sadly all over. At least, I later obtained UNDERCOVER as an album of greatness in my estimation.
Quote
dcba
Doxa now please give us your opinion on MO!
(and I'd really like to read it).
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
Doxa
Are you joking? Compare one of the most perfect and legendary album sides of world's greatest rock band at their prime to some secondary side product of one Rolling Stone? Or is there some kind of 'Keith Richards is The Rolling Stones' presuppostion in the question?
There is a difference between a show highlight and a piss break, and that's the difference in quality between TATTOO YOU and TALK IS CHEAP B-sides (or whatever sides). In TATTOU YOU any bloody note, word, sound, nuance is nothing but a perfection, The Stones in their very top form, but the b-side of TALK IS CHEAP is basically a bunch of simple children songs both in lyrically and melodically put through sloppy jamming with the hopeful idea if the output might turn up be something like unique. Sure there is a keithrichardsian 'feel' the True Beliveres with their acquired taste might recognice, but for the the rest of the people - with some sort of reasonable taste and judgment - it all will be 'what a fvck this boring shit is?'... None of Jaggerian focus, or wit or swagger or sex, nor wattsian minimalism, precise and swing, or any of keithrichardsian actual genious in melodies or riffs is present ... just listen all that tasteless noisy drumming, weak guitar sounds, non-finished song sketches, half-baked riffs, lousy vocals, over-all laziness, terrible production... huh!
But like I said there must be some sort of metaphyhysical rule that 'Keith Richards is The Rolling Stones' to get the comparison in some sort of acceptable level (the rule I never have grasped).
Is the next comparing the c-side of EXILE to b-side of MONKEY GRIP or GODDESS IN DOORWAY or something?
- Doxa
A bit tweaked, eh? Would it be better if it was DIRTY WORK vs Side 3 of EOMS or are you just a Keith Richards hater? Kinds looks that way. Obviously there's some lack of light winds aloft while everyone else can have a bit of fun with it.
Quote
DoxaQuote
Witness
Well, well, but in my view it is the other album in the comparison here that I find , if I may use your words, critically overrated and TALK IS CHEAP not. And my attitude to that former album really has never changed from the days when I wondered after its release if it was sadly all over. At least, I later obtained UNDERCOVER as an album of greatness in my estimation.
Yeah, I was actually about to write that what I say of TALK IS CHEAP is most likely something you would say of TATTOO YOU, Witness. That's what you have been saying for years, and I do appreciate your well-argued point there.
For me judging TATTOO YOU has been always a tough one, since it has had such a huge impact on me. It was the album I, as a young kid, get to know the band as and I still would say it is my favourite Stones album of all-time, even though I wouldn't say it is their best, or even close to that. Too much subjective value to really compare it fairly to any other Stones album. Anyway, all I can say is that it never lost its charm on me. Quite the opposite: I think as the years go by, and albums come and go, it just feels like an ageless masterpiece. This is totally different with any other Stones or Stones-related (Mick or Keith) album since then. No matter how much I once without any hesitation loved UNDERCOVER, SHE'S THE BOSS, DIRTY WORK, PRIMITIVE COOL, TALK IS CHEAP, STEEL WHEELS, all of those have lost their appeal along the years, some very quickly, some many years after (for the latter, TALK IS CHEAP, almost shockingly for me, is among them). I think there is a huge gap in quality between TATTOO YOU and anything the big boys have released since then - and like I said, it feels like the gap just getting bigger as teh years go by - TATTOO YOU just feels stronger and all the rest since then more and more mediocre.
- Doxa
Quote
24FPSQuote
DandelionPowderman
Obviously, the Stones didn't think so, as they released a single the year after that was suspiciously similar (Mixed Emotions).
Yes, but ten times better, by a much better group and vocalist.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
24FPSQuote
DandelionPowderman
Obviously, the Stones didn't think so, as they released a single the year after that was suspiciously similar (Mixed Emotions).
Yes, but ten times better, by a much better group and vocalist.
I prefer Take It So Hard, but I like both tunes.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
24FPSQuote
DandelionPowderman
Obviously, the Stones didn't think so, as they released a single the year after that was suspiciously similar (Mixed Emotions).
Yes, but ten times better, by a much better group and vocalist.
I prefer Take It So Hard, but I like both tunes.
I also think Take It So Hard is better...my problem with Mixed Emotions, is that I think it leads to Don't Stop, which is completely generic stones by numbers. I think we see evidence of that beginning with Mixed Emotions.
Quote
DoxaQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
Doxa
Are you joking? Compare one of the most perfect and legendary album sides of world's greatest rock band at their prime to some secondary side product of one Rolling Stone? Or is there some kind of 'Keith Richards is The Rolling Stones' presuppostion in the question?
There is a difference between a show highlight and a piss break, and that's the difference in quality between TATTOO YOU and TALK IS CHEAP B-sides (or whatever sides). In TATTOU YOU any bloody note, word, sound, nuance is nothing but a perfection, The Stones in their very top form, but the b-side of TALK IS CHEAP is basically a bunch of simple children songs both in lyrically and melodically put through sloppy jamming with the hopeful idea if the output might turn up be something like unique. Sure there is a keithrichardsian 'feel' the True Beliveres with their acquired taste might recognice, but for the the rest of the people - with some sort of reasonable taste and judgment - it all will be 'what a fvck this boring shit is?'... None of Jaggerian focus, or wit or swagger or sex, nor wattsian minimalism, precise and swing, or any of keithrichardsian actual genious in melodies or riffs is present ... just listen all that tasteless noisy drumming, weak guitar sounds, non-finished song sketches, half-baked riffs, lousy vocals, over-all laziness, terrible production... huh!
But like I said there must be some sort of metaphyhysical rule that 'Keith Richards is The Rolling Stones' to get the comparison in some sort of acceptable level (the rule I never have grasped).
Is the next comparing the c-side of EXILE to b-side of MONKEY GRIP or GODDESS IN DOORWAY or something?
- Doxa
A bit tweaked, eh? Would it be better if it was DIRTY WORK vs Side 3 of EOMS or are you just a Keith Richards hater? Kinds looks that way. Obviously there's some lack of light winds aloft while everyone else can have a bit of fun with it.
C'mon, Skippy, I probably forgot to put enough of smiling/winkling/laughing faces or something there. Of course, I am a Keith Richards hater in today's vocabulary. You either 'love' or 'hate' these days, no grey areas or room for another concepts.
- Doxa
Quote
SomeGuy
Funny how we fans can differ. I prefer Mixed Emotions over Take It So Hard because the melody is better, the drumming is better, Keith's singing doesn't come close to Mick's, the sound is better: mainly the drums are awful on Take It and the guitars on Mixed have a nice, subtle ring to them, plus there's no silly keyboard part (talk about dated!). Having said that, Take It is one of the better tracks on the album.
Quote
HairballQuote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
24FPSQuote
DandelionPowderman
Obviously, the Stones didn't think so, as they released a single the year after that was suspiciously similar (Mixed Emotions).
Yes, but ten times better, by a much better group and vocalist.
I prefer Take It So Hard, but I like both tunes.
I also think Take It So Hard is better...my problem with Mixed Emotions, is that I think it leads to Don't Stop, which is completely generic stones by numbers. I think we see evidence of that beginning with Mixed Emotions.
I agree that Take it So Hard is better, and how Mixed Emotions eventually lead to mediocre/generic soft pop rock Don't Stop.
Additionally, I think the production of Talk is Cheap is part of what helps it defy the aging process - no weirdness that makes it sound dated.
One may or may not like some of the songs on Talk is Cheap (I love them all), but no denying the production was pure and simple - same with Main Offender and Crosseyed Heart.
Quote
GasLightStreet
Take It So Hard is the best new Stones song of the 1980s.
Quote
slew
Tattoo You has Waiting on A Friend which makes it the winner right there,
Quote
Doxa
. I would pick up "Yap Yap", which has all the 'faults' I hear in latter day's Keith's way of writing, but it somehow works on me. Another thing, which prevents me of liking the outcome that much, is just I probably have never liked that much X-Winos as a band. I am sure they were a helluva concert act if witnessed live (unfortunately I haven't), but on a record I find them rather boring and one-dimensional.
- Doxa
Quote
lem motlow
Another classic IORR thread -discussing whether a bunch of Keith demos done with hack studio musicians is as good as a side of one of the best albums ever released by the greatest rock and roll band ever.
How many of you actually saw the fckng New Barbarians? I’m guessing not many.
I went to high school with a guy who played drums in bars on the weekend that was a better drummer than Steve Jordan.
Yeah,this is classic stuff- when I think of the greats it’s always Beck, Page , Clapton,Hendrix, Van Halen ,,, Wachtel.
Absolutely needs to be mentioned in the same breath as one of rocks greatest albums.