Very recently, I listened to Dirty Work from start-to-finish, for the first time in an absolute age; in fact, possibly ever. You know, the world didn’t cave in; it’s not that bad at all. I wouldn’t describe the album as ‘good’, but, certainly, a solid ‘meh’, or bang-average.

I hate Let's Work (patronising message and hideous production) but I love Winning Ugly. Good tune, good lyric, great guitar work, what's not to like?

'Winning Ugly' and just about everything else on DW has the worst lead vocals by Mick ever. So guttural like he'd just swallowed a box of thumb tacks.

Dirty Work was the first album the Stones
tried to be the Stones instead of just being the Stones

Quote
yearsinthemaking
Dirty Work was the first album the Stones
tried to be the Stones instead of just being the Stones

I am sure this has some meaning, but I cannot discern it.

jb

Quote
bakersfield
Well Gas Light Street, I disagree with every sentiment in your last post, every sentence, every word and probably the punctuation too lol.
But I’m happy to agree to disagree. Personal taste is personal taste -after all - there are people who can listen ‘Blinded by Rainbows’ without cringing, incredibly. I’m glad I’m not the only who enjoys DW though. I have burned a CD replacing ‘Hold Back’ and ‘Too Rude’ with ‘Deep love’ and ‘Putty in your hands’ and now I love it from end to end. If only Charlie had been on top form it would have swung a little more……

I have no comment on accounting for your bad taste.

That aside, hopefully this deluxe reissue is stellar - more so than the previous four.

Quote
bakersfield
I hate Let's Work (patronising message and hideous production) but I love Winning Ugly. Good tune, good lyric, great guitar work, what's not to like?

The guitar work is a mystery regarding this horrendous song.

A mystery? He’s playing stunning lead and rhythm lines almost throughout! I guess this is musical marmite……

Imagine a Dirty Work deluxe reissue. Maybe 8 new tracks from the DW sessions. And a new cartoon. Wouldn't that be something? Or maybe not...

Quote
Big Al
Very recently, I listened to Dirty Work from start-to-finish, for the first time in an absolute age; in fact, possibly ever. You know, the world didn’t cave in; it’s not that bad at all. I wouldn’t describe the album as ‘good’, but, certainly, a solid ‘meh’, or bang-average.

I did listen to it too, recently after following a podcast on the subject of "Dirty Work". I agree with you that it is a record that has good moments on it and that I enjoyed listening from beginning to end. Bad reputations for records often become urban myths. People don't listen to them because they assume it is bad. Then to justify that it is bad they bring in theories and things that have nothing to do with music just to fit the conclusion that it is horrible. So listening and making up our own mind is what matters.
Rockandroll,
Mops

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
deardoctor

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
deardoctor
I love DW.
It´s about the bad production, tons of reverb and awful synthesizers. Ged rid of that, add some outtakes and yoou get a masterpiece.
I don´t care about ABB and "Blue and Lonesome". I alway would choose DW!

If you take out the bad performances and poor songwriting as well, you'd have a near perfect album.

Perhaps you should revisit. I know there are different tastes - I thought about 10 years GHS as a weak album.

Dirty work a a album:
One hit (Killer) - Killer? OK, I'm going to be nice and give you that.
fight (not bad but I prefer an early version) - Not good I prefer no version.
Harlem shuffle (nice) - OK, you said it. It's 'nice'.
Hold back (rather a filler) - you said it perfectly.
Too rude (ok) - ...hmmm. Not Ok. But this is the best you can do for your 'killer' album?
Winning ugly (Killer - but the London remix!) - OK, the London remix isn't on the album, get over yourself, and it is certainly NOT killer. I gave you a freebie already with One Hit. Don't push it!

This song is Ugly, but not in a Winning way.

Back to zero (nice parts but somehow ruined) - yeah, somehow it ruined even with the nice parts. I guess that's what happens when you write the worst song in the entire Stones catalogue, with Chuck. He must be so proud.

Dirty work (killer) - Again with the 'killer'. OK, you just have to stop with the hyperbole. It's getting embarrassing.

Had it with you (very good) - what, not killer?

Sleep tonight (well - ok) - sorry, did you say something, I slipped into a coma.

Overall far better than anything post 1997 -

OK, first of all your not setting the bar very high, because you only have A Bigger Bang post 1997, other than Blue and Lonesome, and surely you can't be referring to that.

As far as ABB vs. DW. I would absolutely take ABB, and challenge you to an off-album "killer song deathmatch", "One Hit London Remix" vs. "Under The Radar"...ANY DAY OF THE WEEK.

Take that!

DearDoctor...I've commented on your 'review' in red. Sorry I got a little nasty, but I couldn't control myself and you sort of had it coming, if you don't mind my saying.

Dear treaclefingers,
nice battle.
ABB, BAL or the ugly four from Fourty Licks, really?
Of course I know that I´m right, because my personal taste is way better than yours.
Cheers, Mate!

wait wait, though I can't think of anything more appalling in the band's catalogue than B20 or WU, if we start to 'remake' the album with outtakes that's another story.
DW was my second studio album, purchased the day of release at my local record store and I remember enjoying it, the whole A side at least, if you skip the dull HB. there is good stuff in it (I like Fight, DW and ST) so if you get rid of the fillers and put some of what was incredibly left out...

Quote
maumau
there is good stuff in it (I like Fight, DW and ST) so if you get rid of the fillers...

If you get rid of the fillers...there's nothing left beside
Harlem Shuffle and 30 seconds tribute to Stu...

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
maumau
there is good stuff in it (I like Fight, DW and ST) so if you get rid of the fillers...

If you get rid of the fillers...there's nothing left beside
Harlem Shuffle and 30 seconds tribute to Stu...

ahahah
OMG I forgot Stu! stellar outro
in 5 minutes I'm beginning to think the whole thing is a masterpiece ahhahah

Quote
deardoctor

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
deardoctor

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
deardoctor
I love DW.
It´s about the bad production, tons of reverb and awful synthesizers. Ged rid of that, add some outtakes and yoou get a masterpiece.
I don´t care about ABB and "Blue and Lonesome". I alway would choose DW!

If you take out the bad performances and poor songwriting as well, you'd have a near perfect album.

Perhaps you should revisit. I know there are different tastes - I thought about 10 years GHS as a weak album.

Dirty work a a album:
One hit (Killer) - Killer? OK, I'm going to be nice and give you that.
fight (not bad but I prefer an early version) - Not good I prefer no version.
Harlem shuffle (nice) - OK, you said it. It's 'nice'.
Hold back (rather a filler) - you said it perfectly.
Too rude (ok) - ...hmmm. Not Ok. But this is the best you can do for your 'killer' album?
Winning ugly (Killer - but the London remix!) - OK, the London remix isn't on the album, get over yourself, and it is certainly NOT killer. I gave you a freebie already with One Hit. Don't push it!

This song is Ugly, but not in a Winning way.

Back to zero (nice parts but somehow ruined) - yeah, somehow it ruined even with the nice parts. I guess that's what happens when you write the worst song in the entire Stones catalogue, with Chuck. He must be so proud.

Dirty work (killer) - Again with the 'killer'. OK, you just have to stop with the hyperbole. It's getting embarrassing.

Had it with you (very good) - what, not killer?

Sleep tonight (well - ok) - sorry, did you say something, I slipped into a coma.

Overall far better than anything post 1997 -

OK, first of all your not setting the bar very high, because you only have A Bigger Bang post 1997, other than Blue and Lonesome, and surely you can't be referring to that.

As far as ABB vs. DW. I would absolutely take ABB, and challenge you to an off-album "killer song deathmatch", "One Hit London Remix" vs. "Under The Radar"...ANY DAY OF THE WEEK.

Take that!

DearDoctor...I've commented on your 'review' in red. Sorry I got a little nasty, but I couldn't control myself and you sort of had it coming, if you don't mind my saying.

Dear treaclefingers,
nice battle.
ABB, BAL or the ugly four from Fourty Licks, really?
Of course I know that I´m right, because my personal taste is way better than yours.
Cheers, Mate!

Ha! Just reread...I think I may have been off my meds.

Quote
rollmops

Quote
Big Al
Very recently, I listened to Dirty Work from start-to-finish, for the first time in an absolute age; in fact, possibly ever. You know, the world didn’t cave in; it’s not that bad at all. I wouldn’t describe the album as ‘good’, but, certainly, a solid ‘meh’, or bang-average.

I did listen to it too, recently after following a podcast on the subject of "Dirty Work". I agree with you that it is a record that has good moments on it and that I enjoyed listening from beginning to end. Bad reputations for records often become urban myths. People don't listen to them because they assume it is bad. Then to justify that it is bad they bring in theories and things that have nothing to do with music just to fit the conclusion that it is horrible. So listening and making up our own mind is what matters.
Rockandroll,
Mops

Mops you've hit the nail ion the head - a weird kind of orthodoxy has arisen on this board that slates DW on principle. Is 'Back to Zero' really worse than 'Grown up wrong'? worse than 'Sing this all together see what happens'? That's not rational...

Isn't this thread about Tattoo You? Yes, Undercover is a terrible album, Dirty Work, only slightly better. But this is about a GOOD album, Tattoo You. A collage from songs held back for years, but good ones for sure. Wonder if there's an alternate version of Heaven?

Quote
bakersfield
I hate Let's Work (patronising message and hideous production) but I love Winning Ugly. Good tune, good lyric, great guitar work, what's not to like?

Let's Work? Isn't that on a Jagger solo album?

If Stones would use songs from, let´s say, 2015, 2016 on their new 2022-album - would the new album also be called "a collection of old songs"? Like Tattoo you? Time is a strange thing...

Quote
Bjorn
If Stones would use songs from, let´s say, 2015, 2016 on their new 2022-album - would the new album also be called "a collection of old songs"? Like Tattoo you? Time is a strange thing...

An album is, by definition, a collection of songs.

When the song were recorded, and finished, has zero meaning. Hence LET IT BLEED-UNDERCOVER. All involved some older songs, written and or recorded for previous.

TATTOO YOU will always be, to this day at least, the only Stones album completely made up of leftovers.

And it's absolutely brilliant.

Quote
deardoctor

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
deardoctor
I love DW.
It´s about the bad production, tons of reverb and awful synthesizers. Ged rid of that, add some outtakes and yoou get a masterpiece.
I don´t care about ABB and "Blue and Lonesome". I alway would choose DW!

If you take out the bad performances and poor songwriting as well, you'd have a near perfect album.

Perhaps you should revisit. I know there are different tastes - I thought about 10 years GHS as a weak album.

Dirty work a a album
One hit (Killer)
fight (not bad but I prefer an early version)
Harlem shuffle (nice)
Hold back (rather a filler)
Too rude (ok)
Winning ugly (Killer - but the London remix!)
Back to zero (nice parts but somehow ruined)
Dirty work (killer)
Had it with you (very good)
Sleep tonight (well - ok)

Overall far better than anything post 1997

A correction:

(WTF? "a a album"? WTFIT? "As An" I'm guessing):

One Hit (To The Body) - Asleep at the wheel Stones-by-numbers - aside from Ronnie comparing it to Street Fighting Man, which is @#$%^& weak, he said this:

(Jimmy Page) rang me at the studio one night and said, How's it going? Do you mind if I come and hear how the album's going? I said, no, I didn't mind. He's a very shy guy. After he'd done that overdub on One Hit, he left the studio saying, I'm sorry, man, I'm sorry. I said, Don't apologize... you did all right!

- Ron Wood, 1986

Weak. Rented blondes in the front weak.


Fight (energetic - but weak: WEAK)

That riff, yeah, and those tone drops on Fight which are typical of Jumpin' Jack or Street Fighting Man or Brown Sugar, those changes. That one came out of the blue. To tell the truth, I was pissed off at Mick one night, because we'd got nothing going in the studio and he'd left early. I just got so made with him I felt like, I want to get into a fight (laughs), and I just started it off like that. It was one of those things that came out of an immediate rage. Then Mick came back and sang it and did an INCREDIBLE job on it; it was when he started singing that I started to see the connection between it and Jumpin' Jack Flash and Street Fighting Man.

- Keith Richards, 1985

Such utter bullshit. Selling. First new record for a new record label. Spouting off bullshit. Keith took complete umbrage with this record because of Mick.

Garbage.

Although I do like the song. But I like other shit songs on other albums so whatever. Overall, regarding their cannon, complete garbage.


Harlem shuffle (Excellent)

Things like Harlem Shuffle... we did in two takes.

- Ron Wood, 1988

They should've stuck to that kind of thing for DIRTY WORK.



Hold Back (Dogshit in the doorway)

Ivan Neville, Aaron's son, is playing bass. That one was a track we'd put down almost at the end of the sessions but never really considered, you know: Oh well, put that one on hold for another album. But Charlie's drums were SO strong and the arrangement was developed so well that all we needed really was to re-do the bass, because the sound wasn't up to par on it - we'd only done it as a kind of dub in Paris. So when Ivan walked in one night, it was, Hey, Ivan, get out there.

- Keith Richards, 1985

More hype for another filler shit song from Keith.


Too Rude (Cool)

On Too Rude, I got to play the drums. That was when Charlie was going through a terrible time with Shirley. They were having lots of heavy arguments and so Charlie was often late, or Shirley would come into the studio and forcibly drag him out. On one of those nights Keith said, All right, you're on drums, Ronnie... The drum sound was very dynamic: I ended up sounding like Solomon Burke's drummer. I was very proud of it, actually.

- Ron Wood, 2003

Considering all that was recorded for this album, as we know, THIS was decided to be put on? I do like it but it's janked as shit overall. It's a weird good.


Winning ugly (Dogshit in the doorway 2)

Notice Keith doesn't actually say anything ABOUT the song:

The original track had two guitars, Woody and me, and then I think we put another couple on there that we used in and out. Then there's that lick: everybody keeps asking me to show them how to play it. I feel like I could make a living off teaching guitar players how to play that lick (laughs). But it's dead simple, just a slightly elongated version of Tumbling Dice - to me, at least. It's the same shapes, the same fingerings, just sort of drawn out a bit... That riff reminds me of an early Motown thing, a Marvin Gaye thing like Stubborn Kind of Fellow or You're a Wonderful One or Can I Get a Witness. It's a basic Motown riff, really; we've just jazzed it up with some technology.

- Keith Richards, 1985



Back To Zero (Interesting... but FAIL)

Nothing to provide here from [timeisonourside.com] because, well, duh.


Dirty work (Solid)

Nothing worth quoting.


Had It With You (nice)

Stones imitating Stones-by-numbers Stones. As Keith pointed out:

Yeah, the basic track was cut with Charlie on drums, me on guitar and Mick on vocal and harp. We tried it with the full band and we realized we were just sounding like the Rolling Stones doing the Rolling Stones' favorite sort of Ye Olde Famous Rolling Stones Sound. But then, when we took the bass and the piano and the extra guitars off, it just sat right on the button. It came off sounding like a live radio broadcast that way. And at a slightly later date Ronnie and I did one overdub at the same time. But, I mean, there's nothing in the RULE BOOK that says you've GOT to have a bass on there. And then there's that middle breakdown part that almost trips over itself (laughs). Cutting a good blues track is not easy: it's all been done a million times, and to add something new to it is not so much a matter of THOUGHT as FEEL.
- Keith Richards, 1985


Sleep Tonight (Lovely)

Amazingly, Keith did not, and has not ever, figured out that he ripped himself off: the song is the bridge from Coming Down Again.


I wrote that one at the piano when there was nobody else there except Woody and me - Woody plays drums on that one. So he was sitting at the kit, I was stitting at the piano, and I got this sequence together. I mean, it's one of those songs that I write occasionally where I say, Hey, I didn't write this, this is memory playing tricks with me, this is somebody else's song (laughs). It's happened to me before, with All About You, which I kept in the can for four or five years while I kept playing it for everybody I knew with a grounding in songwriting, because I kept thinking, This sequence does NOT come from me, this is NOT my shit... Sleep is like that for me because of all the weird modulations. The chorus is virtually a doo-wop chorus in C, but then the verses modulate quite naturally into another key. I had to wait for other people to convince me to go ahead with it; for a while I was saying, This is all good fun but we're wasting time, because I'm SURE this is somebody else's song (laughs).

- Keith Richards, 1985

It was HIS song.


Overall no better, by far as the furthest planet, than anything from 1994 onward.

[timeisonourside.com]

Well, that was fun. Back to the topic. What will the nine Tattoo You bonus tracks be? I'm assuming that everything from 69-83 is fair game as previous deluxe versions have been full of anachronisms:

I'd like to have (all with finished lyrics and vocals please):

1. Eliza
2. Misty Roads
3. Fiji Gin
4. Hillside Blues
5. Dreams to Remember
6. Built that way
7. Fast Talking
8. The song known as 'Dogshit' (which I guess is more likely 'Bad Luck'?)
9. Come on Sugar

Quote
bakersfield
Well, that was fun. Back to the topic. What will the nine Tattoo You bonus tracks be? I'm assuming that everything from 69-83 is fair game as previous deluxe versions have been full of anachronisms:

I'd like to have (all with finished lyrics and vocals please):

1. Eliza
2. Misty Roads
3. Fiji Gin
4. Hillside Blues
5. Dreams to Remember
6. Built that way
7. Fast Talking
8. The song known as 'Dogshit' (which I guess is more likely 'Bad Luck'?)
9. Come on Sugar

I Need You
She Never Listen To Me
Not The Way To Go
Cookin Up

Never Stop (Start Me Up Reggae Version)?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-07-30 09:55 by spunky.

Guess i should know
[youtu.be]

I want the Mocambo version of 'Worried about You' - love that one!

dayo

-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-07-30 13:13 by Stoneage.

Quote
Dayokay
I want the Mocambo version of 'Worried about You' - love that one!

dayo

Let that one for LYL Deluxe Box, my friend ...

Quote
mariano

Quote
Dayokay
I want the Mocambo version of 'Worried about You' - love that one!

dayo

Let that one for LYL Deluxe Box, my friend ...

I don't think LYL is iconic enough for a deluxe release. Let's have a straightup Mocambo release.

I think they are working on a deluxe edition and Mick will release it at the right time.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
mariano

Quote
Dayokay
I want the Mocambo version of 'Worried about You' - love that one!

dayo

Let that one for LYL Deluxe Box, my friend ...

I don't think LYL is iconic enough for a deluxe release. Let's have a straightup Mocambo release.