Tell Me :
Talk
The verses in Angry have autotune, 100% sure.
There's not one reason at all to believe they used autotune. A vocoder, sure, but they used Melodyne for parts of Living In A Ghost Town.
On Living in a Ghost Town you have both: In the bridge, there's a vocoder (as an an effect, doubt that they used an analog one) on the backing vocals but on the lead line there's autotune (the one note step in "be-ed"gives it a way). But in LIAGT both are used as an effect, meant to be noticed.
On Angry, there's autotune during the verses and also on the falsetto backing vocals in the chorus. But here it's used as pitch correction, not as an obvious effect. So it's not a Cher-style autotune. It's just used to move the notes right on to the frequencies. Mick just doesn't sing like that naturally, as he bends the notes a lot. Some of the lines in Angry are untouched, correction-wise. But the autotune is very noticable on the "Whyyyy"-melody line and the clean changes between major and minor thirds throughout. You can also hear it well on the jumps in the melody of the pre-chorus.
I'm not saying that autotune is a bad thing or anything. I don't want to Mick out on it. I've used autotune in the studio and I think it can serve great purposes. But it's there and it's noticable.
Just watched the video from the last page and the guy in the video shows well how autotune used as pitch correction can be detected.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-18 23:57 by MonkeyMan2000.
I was curious if they'd use a vocoder on the album via LIAGT and the chorus of Angry certainly reveals that.
I don't hear anything anywhere else, though, that screams or hints that Mick's vocal has been messed with.
I'm not against it! I thought what was done in LIAGT was brilliant. It was just enough. In regard to Angry, why do ABC harmony backing vox when it can be done perfectly with whatever?
Obviously the song will dictate that.
Couldn't really get away with that in Rocks Off or Tumbling Dice. Then again... who knows.
That's why I wrote that I don't find it a bad thing per se! I belong to the young generation of musicians myself and have used autotune in the studio with my band. If you have a recording, played live together in the studio and the singer delivers a great performance but is just a bit flat or sharp in some places, it is such an amazing piece of technology to preserve the moment of performance, instead of rerecording it.
I was just explaining to Gas Light how you can spot it.
And in Angry it's especially noticable, and IMO badly done, as we all know how Mick actually sounds. His voice is still so powerful and probably more "in tune" than ever, as can be heard on the less processed vocals on Get Close and alike.
I wonder why so many music fans - and not only Stones' fans - have this idea.
As I see it, to "please the casual listener" is exactly what pop music is all about! Or, from a different point of view, the job of an artist in the pop trade is to craft musical products that can please as many casual listeners as possible.
The end result - the song - is what is important, not how it is made. Who cares if a solo is a first take or is an edited mix ot ten takes? Who cares if Mick autotunes his voice, or adds reverb to it, or whatever?
Does it fit the song? Yes? No?
It does for me, not for you?
That is all that it matters!
C
I think it was supposed to be as it is. It is not a fix. The artistic decision is to have a contrast between the "modernized" Mick and the real one.
C
Yeah, I know, but i still don't think the autotune serves any purpose in Angry like it does in other songs. It doesn't fit the vibe. Here, it's too obvious why they did it: Because Angry was meant to chart. They didn't decide to use it out of genuinly artistic reasons, imo.
With "they" I mean the whole team around the record, not just Mick or the three principals.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 00:22 by MonkeyMan2000.
LOL probably.
I loved LIAGT and that effect. I'm not in any way against it - it's no different than using delay, echo, etc on/with whatever.
Certainly using it on purpose for whatever makes more sense than just making it sound different because or, as you pointed out, like Cher.
It's certainly more tuneful than Start Me Up.
It's more interesting than Start Me Up. And I'd rather listen to Angry than Start Me Up.
Start Me Up has never been performed live the way it is on record (yeah yeah, no song ever has). It's one of those songs they just can't play that way, like Shattered, Jumpin' Jack Flash, IORR, quite a few others, the way it was recorded.
Monkey Man they've reproduced fantastically. Midnight Rambler they improved.
It will be interesting to hear how they do with the new songs over the course of a tour, if they sound like the album or improve, or devolve (Anybody Seen My Baby should've never been played live).
I agree. The more I hear this, and I hear it PLENTY, the more I love it. A classic Stones song.
Rod
It's funny, while that last line sounds hyperbolic, it really isn't.
It's almost unimaginable they could have come up with something this good. The only issue is now that we know what they're still capable of, the follow-up will never be able to live up to this one, even if it's great.
Ha ha - I've noticed over the years after listening to whatever song on whatever hits comp, usually, that I expect to hear, for example, Wannnn two three fourrr FWAM FWAM FWAM FWAMMM of Sway... the sharp tight guitar/drums intro of She Was Hot or the snare salvo of Hang Fire.
Anyone that says the album (regardless of format) is dead needs to revisit their thoughts: sequencing will always be an artform for the Long Player!
No. That's wrong. Bad "fact". Fake fact. Not a fact at all. I understand your... I get it. But it's not true.
There is a lot that is appropriately produced.
You can't simplify such a thing: producing a record is expensive and a lot of artists pay their own way or pay a portion (or have a small budget from their record label) so there is no "virtually everything" in that regard. Some can get whatever sound without spending a ton of money - that's not being overproduced.
That's way off the mark in regard to reality. You can't take a single from the new Stones album and say OH IT'S OVERPRODUCED EVERYONE IS DOING THIS.
Overproduced?
That's called Phil Spector. And he ain't around anymore.
What do you mean by overproduced? That Mick used a vocoder for this that and the other for vocals opposed to spending days and nights doubling, tripling and quadrupling various vocal lines with vocal overdubs?
He doesn't do coke anymore. It's not 1977-1983.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-01-03 04:05 by GasLightStreet.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: December 18, 2023 04:44
There's a bit of "vocoder" in Living In A Ghost Town (it's got a specific name I can't recall at the moment, it's somewhere in that song's thread).
U2 did similar on their 2017 album.
Nothing in Angry sounds like he's been tweaked in the verses.
The bridge is obvious ala Ghost Town - two completely different aspects of the song.
He should be do something on Motley Crue's fake live sound.
His guitar bits, though... a bit more simple than vocals, ha ha. What's really cool is how he smiles and nods while listening - clearly he knows it's a killer track - and enjoys not exactly figuring out how Keith and Ronnie are just clamming about bending etc - no thought put into it other than the moment, just playing, no tweaking, and here's this person scientifically... figuring out if any guitars were tweaked ha ha.
U2 did similar on their 2017 album.
Nothing in Angry sounds like he's been tweaked in the verses.
The bridge is obvious ala Ghost Town - two completely different aspects of the song.
He should be do something on Motley Crue's fake live sound.
His guitar bits, though... a bit more simple than vocals, ha ha. What's really cool is how he smiles and nods while listening - clearly he knows it's a killer track - and enjoys not exactly figuring out how Keith and Ronnie are just clamming about bending etc - no thought put into it other than the moment, just playing, no tweaking, and here's this person scientifically... figuring out if any guitars were tweaked ha ha.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
HardRiffin
()
Date: December 18, 2023 08:48
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
Doxa
The more I listen to the tune, the better it just gets. It just sticks into one's brains. Everything is just in a right place there. You know, all the musical ideas, the way the song is build up, the melodic hooks, Mick's delivery, the use of instruments... Delicious. That's genius actually. A wonderful example of how one can make old cliches work so well. To sound so damn fresh. They haven't managed this in that this well for ages.
- Doxa
It took about 5 listens to go Ohhhh, got it.
KILLER track. Just enough of everything necessary - just the right attitude, Mick; the fwanging riffs, just the right riffage, just the right minor key "bridge", it swings and pumps, the awkward gap pre-guitar solo... the excellent outro: stellar single, stellar track.
Best single since Start Me Up.
And I do love Living In A Ghost Town - but that's completely different, that's more sneaky, Angry is right on top of the head.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
MonkeyMan2000
()
Date: December 18, 2023 10:44
Quote
GasLightStreet
There's a bit of "vocoder" in Living In A Ghost Town (it's got a specific name I can't recall at the moment, it's somewhere in that song's thread).
U2 did similar on their 2017 album.
Nothing in Angry sounds like he's been tweaked in the verses.
The bridge is obvious ala Ghost Town - two completely different aspects of the song.
He should be do something on Motley Crue's fake live sound.
His guitar bits, though... a bit more simple than vocals, ha ha. What's really cool is how he smiles and nods while listening - clearly he knows it's a killer track - and enjoys not exactly figuring out how Keith and Ronnie are just clamming about bending etc - no thought put into it other than the moment, just playing, no tweaking, and here's this person scientifically... figuring out if any guitars were tweaked ha ha.
The verses in Angry have autotune, 100% sure.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: December 18, 2023 21:57
Quote
MonkeyMan2000Quote
GasLightStreet
There's a bit of "vocoder" in Living In A Ghost Town (it's got a specific name I can't recall at the moment, it's somewhere in that song's thread).
U2 did similar on their 2017 album.
Nothing in Angry sounds like he's been tweaked in the verses.
The bridge is obvious ala Ghost Town - two completely different aspects of the song.
He should be do something on Motley Crue's fake live sound.
His guitar bits, though... a bit more simple than vocals, ha ha. What's really cool is how he smiles and nods while listening - clearly he knows it's a killer track - and enjoys not exactly figuring out how Keith and Ronnie are just clamming about bending etc - no thought put into it other than the moment, just playing, no tweaking, and here's this person scientifically... figuring out if any guitars were tweaked ha ha.
The verses in Angry have autotune, 100% sure.
There's not one reason at all to believe they used autotune. A vocoder, sure, but they used Melodyne for parts of Living In A Ghost Town.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
MonkeyMan2000
()
Date: December 18, 2023 23:45
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
MonkeyMan2000Quote
GasLightStreet
There's a bit of "vocoder" in Living In A Ghost Town (it's got a specific name I can't recall at the moment, it's somewhere in that song's thread).
U2 did similar on their 2017 album.
Nothing in Angry sounds like he's been tweaked in the verses.
The bridge is obvious ala Ghost Town - two completely different aspects of the song.
He should be do something on Motley Crue's fake live sound.
His guitar bits, though... a bit more simple than vocals, ha ha. What's really cool is how he smiles and nods while listening - clearly he knows it's a killer track - and enjoys not exactly figuring out how Keith and Ronnie are just clamming about bending etc - no thought put into it other than the moment, just playing, no tweaking, and here's this person scientifically... figuring out if any guitars were tweaked ha ha.
The verses in Angry have autotune, 100% sure.
There's not one reason at all to believe they used autotune. A vocoder, sure, but they used Melodyne for parts of Living In A Ghost Town.
On Living in a Ghost Town you have both: In the bridge, there's a vocoder (as an an effect, doubt that they used an analog one) on the backing vocals but on the lead line there's autotune (the one note step in "be-ed"gives it a way). But in LIAGT both are used as an effect, meant to be noticed.
On Angry, there's autotune during the verses and also on the falsetto backing vocals in the chorus. But here it's used as pitch correction, not as an obvious effect. So it's not a Cher-style autotune. It's just used to move the notes right on to the frequencies. Mick just doesn't sing like that naturally, as he bends the notes a lot. Some of the lines in Angry are untouched, correction-wise. But the autotune is very noticable on the "Whyyyy"-melody line and the clean changes between major and minor thirds throughout. You can also hear it well on the jumps in the melody of the pre-chorus.
I'm not saying that autotune is a bad thing or anything. I don't want to Mick out on it. I've used autotune in the studio and I think it can serve great purposes. But it's there and it's noticable.
Just watched the video from the last page and the guy in the video shows well how autotune used as pitch correction can be detected.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-18 23:57 by MonkeyMan2000.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: December 19, 2023 05:46
Quote
MonkeyMan2000Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
MonkeyMan2000Quote
GasLightStreet
There's a bit of "vocoder" in Living In A Ghost Town (it's got a specific name I can't recall at the moment, it's somewhere in that song's thread).
U2 did similar on their 2017 album.
Nothing in Angry sounds like he's been tweaked in the verses.
The bridge is obvious ala Ghost Town - two completely different aspects of the song.
He should be do something on Motley Crue's fake live sound.
His guitar bits, though... a bit more simple than vocals, ha ha. What's really cool is how he smiles and nods while listening - clearly he knows it's a killer track - and enjoys not exactly figuring out how Keith and Ronnie are just clamming about bending etc - no thought put into it other than the moment, just playing, no tweaking, and here's this person scientifically... figuring out if any guitars were tweaked ha ha.
The verses in Angry have autotune, 100% sure.
There's not one reason at all to believe they used autotune. A vocoder, sure, but they used Melodyne for parts of Living In A Ghost Town.
On Living in a Ghost Town you have both: In the bridge, there's a vocoder (as an an effect, doubt that they used an analog one) on the backing vocals but on the lead line there's autotune (the one note step in "be-ed"gives it a way). But in LIAGT both are used as an effect, meant to be noticed.
On Angry, there's autotune during the verses and also on the falsetto backing vocals in the chorus. But here it's used as pitch correction, not as an obvious effect. So it's not a Cher-style autotune. It's just used to move the notes right on to the frequencies. Mick just doesn't sing like that naturally, as he bends the notes a lot. Some of the lines in Angry are untouched, correction-wise. But the autotune is very noticable on the "Whyyyy"-melody line and the clean changes between major and minor thirds throughout. You can also hear it well on the jumps in the melody of the pre-chorus.
I was curious if they'd use a vocoder on the album via LIAGT and the chorus of Angry certainly reveals that.
I don't hear anything anywhere else, though, that screams or hints that Mick's vocal has been messed with.
I'm not against it! I thought what was done in LIAGT was brilliant. It was just enough. In regard to Angry, why do ABC harmony backing vox when it can be done perfectly with whatever?
Obviously the song will dictate that.
Couldn't really get away with that in Rocks Off or Tumbling Dice. Then again... who knows.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
MonkeyMan2000
()
Date: December 19, 2023 11:36
We're probably not talking about the same thing, Gas Light.
Yes, LIAGT uses a vocoder effect on the backing vocals in the bridge (and autotuned pitch correction on the lead line). On Angry, there's no vocoder! We have the heavy processed layers of backing vocals in the chorus, which may sound something like a vocoder because they have been edited, consonant-aligned and pitch corrected, but they are just heavily processed vocal recordings. Throughout the song autotune is used as pitch-correction, not because Mick can't sing, but because the ears of most people are accustommed to that vocal sound. This is what the market demands. You can hear it everytime a note is being helt for a sec or in the melody-runs. The distinction between the notes is so clean and Mick doesn't sing like that. Nobody does.
Watch the video on the last page: This gives a good explanation and you see which parts have been messed with and which parts of the vocals are untouched to still provide a somewhat authentic "Mick-experience".
Yes, LIAGT uses a vocoder effect on the backing vocals in the bridge (and autotuned pitch correction on the lead line). On Angry, there's no vocoder! We have the heavy processed layers of backing vocals in the chorus, which may sound something like a vocoder because they have been edited, consonant-aligned and pitch corrected, but they are just heavily processed vocal recordings. Throughout the song autotune is used as pitch-correction, not because Mick can't sing, but because the ears of most people are accustommed to that vocal sound. This is what the market demands. You can hear it everytime a note is being helt for a sec or in the melody-runs. The distinction between the notes is so clean and Mick doesn't sing like that. Nobody does.
Watch the video on the last page: This gives a good explanation and you see which parts have been messed with and which parts of the vocals are untouched to still provide a somewhat authentic "Mick-experience".
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: December 19, 2023 11:54
We around here are never going to like the idea of the Stones sound being sanitised to please the casual listener...
But I suppose needs must...and a successful album may arguably justify it ?
But I suppose needs must...and a successful album may arguably justify it ?
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
harlem shuffle
()
Date: December 19, 2023 13:40
Well MonkeyMan2000 the same happens with younger artist in the twentys and thirties.Lots of these top artist have used it for years,so if the Stones use some of it in their eighties it,s not so strange
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
MonkeyMan2000
()
Date: December 19, 2023 13:59
Quote
harlem shuffle
Well MonkeyMan2000 the same happens with younger artist in the twentys and thirties.Lots of these top artist have used it for years,so if the Stones use some of it in their eighties it,s not so strange
That's why I wrote that I don't find it a bad thing per se! I belong to the young generation of musicians myself and have used autotune in the studio with my band. If you have a recording, played live together in the studio and the singer delivers a great performance but is just a bit flat or sharp in some places, it is such an amazing piece of technology to preserve the moment of performance, instead of rerecording it.
I was just explaining to Gas Light how you can spot it.
And in Angry it's especially noticable, and IMO badly done, as we all know how Mick actually sounds. His voice is still so powerful and probably more "in tune" than ever, as can be heard on the less processed vocals on Get Close and alike.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
liddas
()
Date: December 19, 2023 16:57
Quote
Spud
We around here are never going to like the idea of the Stones sound being sanitised to please the casual listener...
But I suppose needs must...and a successful album may arguably justify it ?
I wonder why so many music fans - and not only Stones' fans - have this idea.
As I see it, to "please the casual listener" is exactly what pop music is all about! Or, from a different point of view, the job of an artist in the pop trade is to craft musical products that can please as many casual listeners as possible.
The end result - the song - is what is important, not how it is made. Who cares if a solo is a first take or is an edited mix ot ten takes? Who cares if Mick autotunes his voice, or adds reverb to it, or whatever?
Does it fit the song? Yes? No?
It does for me, not for you?
That is all that it matters!
C
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
liddas
()
Date: December 19, 2023 17:02
Quote
MonkeyMan2000
And in Angry it's especially noticable, and IMO badly done, as we all know how Mick actually sounds. His voice is still so powerful and probably more "in tune" than ever, as can be heard on the less processed vocals on Get Close and alike.
I think it was supposed to be as it is. It is not a fix. The artistic decision is to have a contrast between the "modernized" Mick and the real one.
C
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
MonkeyMan2000
()
Date: December 20, 2023 00:19
Quote
liddasQuote
MonkeyMan2000
And in Angry it's especially noticable, and IMO badly done, as we all know how Mick actually sounds. His voice is still so powerful and probably more "in tune" than ever, as can be heard on the less processed vocals on Get Close and alike.
I think it was supposed to be as it is. It is not a fix. The artistic decision is to have a contrast between the "modernized" Mick and the real one.
C
Yeah, I know, but i still don't think the autotune serves any purpose in Angry like it does in other songs. It doesn't fit the vibe. Here, it's too obvious why they did it: Because Angry was meant to chart. They didn't decide to use it out of genuinly artistic reasons, imo.
With "they" I mean the whole team around the record, not just Mick or the three principals.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 00:22 by MonkeyMan2000.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: December 20, 2023 02:15
Quote
MonkeyMan2000
We're probably not talking about the same thing, Gas Light.
Yes, LIAGT uses a vocoder effect on the backing vocals in the bridge (and autotuned pitch correction on the lead line). On Angry, there's no vocoder! We have the heavy processed layers of backing vocals in the chorus, which may sound something like a vocoder because they have been edited, consonant-aligned and pitch corrected, but they are just heavily processed vocal recordings. Throughout the song autotune is used as pitch-correction, not because Mick can't sing, but because the ears of most people are accustommed to that vocal sound. This is what the market demands. You can hear it everytime a note is being helt for a sec or in the melody-runs. The distinction between the notes is so clean and Mick doesn't sing like that. Nobody does.
Watch the video on the last page: This gives a good explanation and you see which parts have been messed with and which parts of the vocals are untouched to still provide a somewhat authentic "Mick-experience".
LOL probably.
I loved LIAGT and that effect. I'm not in any way against it - it's no different than using delay, echo, etc on/with whatever.
Certainly using it on purpose for whatever makes more sense than just making it sound different because or, as you pointed out, like Cher.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: December 21, 2023 11:06
It's just a fact that virtually everything is overproduced these days...
..and in this Digital age, that ain't going to change anytime soon.
Edited to add...
I just try to appreciate recordings for how good they still are... and try not to dwell on how much better they could have been.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-21 11:09 by Spud.
..and in this Digital age, that ain't going to change anytime soon.
Edited to add...
I just try to appreciate recordings for how good they still are... and try not to dwell on how much better they could have been.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-21 11:09 by Spud.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
ds1984
()
Date: December 28, 2023 11:13
My radio did broadcast the song and I surprised me doing foot tapping while listening to it.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
TrulyMicks1
()
Date: December 30, 2023 14:47
To be honest, when I first heard this I was thinking what the heck? lol I’m not sure what I was expecting, maybe something a little more “mature” based on snippets of their music I had heard online. But, by about 40 seconds in I was loving it and thinking that I was so glad they were back and their old in your face selves.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: December 30, 2023 21:01
I'll probably get lambasted, but to me, it's every bit as great as Start Me Up
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
HouseBoyKnows
()
Date: December 30, 2023 23:46
US TV broadcasts (ESPN/ABC) of the big college football bowl games are using segments from Angry as they go to and from commercial breaks. Sounds great, like maybe it's the new SMU.
I wonder if the Stones pay for this exposure or if it was selected by the network as a great theme/riff from 2023.
HBK
I wonder if the Stones pay for this exposure or if it was selected by the network as a great theme/riff from 2023.
HBK
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: December 31, 2023 17:01
Quote
LeonidP
I'll probably get lambasted, but to me, it's every bit as great as Start Me Up
It's certainly more tuneful than Start Me Up.
It's more interesting than Start Me Up. And I'd rather listen to Angry than Start Me Up.
Start Me Up has never been performed live the way it is on record (yeah yeah, no song ever has). It's one of those songs they just can't play that way, like Shattered, Jumpin' Jack Flash, IORR, quite a few others, the way it was recorded.
Monkey Man they've reproduced fantastically. Midnight Rambler they improved.
It will be interesting to hear how they do with the new songs over the course of a tour, if they sound like the album or improve, or devolve (Anybody Seen My Baby should've never been played live).
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
jahisnotdead
()
Date: January 1, 2024 12:08
It's an excellent song, even slightly underrated imho. It tends to get stuck in my head.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
bitusa2012
()
Date: January 2, 2024 11:54
Quote
jahisnotdead
It's an excellent song, even slightly underrated imho. It tends to get stuck in my head.
I agree. The more I hear this, and I hear it PLENTY, the more I love it. A classic Stones song.
Rod
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
MadMetaphoricalMax
()
Date: January 2, 2024 13:12
It's so good. And so well constructed, detailed, layered. It accumulates. And it still explodes at the end, after innumerable listens.
People often decry the new when there is a long trail of the old - in five years time this will be hailed a Stones classic among the best of them, as will the album, which is magnificent, after all this time, and as soon as I have played this song, I find I have to play the whole album. There are very few albums like that, now or ever.
People often decry the new when there is a long trail of the old - in five years time this will be hailed a Stones classic among the best of them, as will the album, which is magnificent, after all this time, and as soon as I have played this song, I find I have to play the whole album. There are very few albums like that, now or ever.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
dedospegajosos
()
Date: January 2, 2024 15:58
Excellent album opener, but it lacks something for me.. not sure what.. maybe its the robotic drums..
A lot of critics have called it the best single since start me up. No way jose. Maybe since Anybody Seen My Baby.
A lot of critics have called it the best single since start me up. No way jose. Maybe since Anybody Seen My Baby.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: January 2, 2024 16:06
Quote
MadMetaphoricalMax
It's so good. And so well constructed, detailed, layered. It accumulates. And it still explodes at the end, after innumerable listens.
People often decry the new when there is a long trail of the old - in five years time this will be hailed a Stones classic among the best of them, as will the album, which is magnificent, after all this time, and as soon as I have played this song, I find I have to play the whole album. There are very few albums like that, now or ever.
It's funny, while that last line sounds hyperbolic, it really isn't.
It's almost unimaginable they could have come up with something this good. The only issue is now that we know what they're still capable of, the follow-up will never be able to live up to this one, even if it's great.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: January 2, 2024 20:12
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
MadMetaphoricalMax
It's so good. And so well constructed, detailed, layered. It accumulates. And it still explodes at the end, after innumerable listens.
People often decry the new when there is a long trail of the old - in five years time this will be hailed a Stones classic among the best of them, as will the album, which is magnificent, after all this time, and as soon as I have played this song, I find I have to play the whole album. There are very few albums like that, now or ever.
It's funny, while that last line sounds hyperbolic, it really isn't.
It's almost unimaginable they could have come up with something this good. The only issue is now that we know what they're still capable of, the follow-up will never be able to live up to this one, even if it's great.
Ha ha - I've noticed over the years after listening to whatever song on whatever hits comp, usually, that I expect to hear, for example, Wannnn two three fourrr FWAM FWAM FWAM FWAMMM of Sway... the sharp tight guitar/drums intro of She Was Hot or the snare salvo of Hang Fire.
Anyone that says the album (regardless of format) is dead needs to revisit their thoughts: sequencing will always be an artform for the Long Player!
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
IrelandCalling4
()
Date: January 2, 2024 22:37
'Angry' tops the list of UltimateClassicRocks list of Top 30 Rock Tracks of the year
[ultimateclassicrock.com]
[ultimateclassicrock.com]
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: January 2, 2024 22:51
....and so it should ....
Its got humour ... massive riff ....
Mick spittin' out thee lyrics.... Classic Stones ....
ROCKMAN
Its got humour ... massive riff ....
Mick spittin' out thee lyrics.... Classic Stones ....
ROCKMAN
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: January 3, 2024 04:03
Quote
Spud
It's just a fact that virtually everything is overproduced these days...
No. That's wrong. Bad "fact". Fake fact. Not a fact at all. I understand your... I get it. But it's not true.
There is a lot that is appropriately produced.
You can't simplify such a thing: producing a record is expensive and a lot of artists pay their own way or pay a portion (or have a small budget from their record label) so there is no "virtually everything" in that regard. Some can get whatever sound without spending a ton of money - that's not being overproduced.
That's way off the mark in regard to reality. You can't take a single from the new Stones album and say OH IT'S OVERPRODUCED EVERYONE IS DOING THIS.
Overproduced?
That's called Phil Spector. And he ain't around anymore.
What do you mean by overproduced? That Mick used a vocoder for this that and the other for vocals opposed to spending days and nights doubling, tripling and quadrupling various vocal lines with vocal overdubs?
He doesn't do coke anymore. It's not 1977-1983.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-01-03 04:05 by GasLightStreet.
Re: Angry - Track Talk
Posted by:
rattler2004
()
Date: January 3, 2024 17:54
This is played for all the NFL, and College Football bumper music between commercials. Gets stuck in my head, not that that’s a bad thing.
the shoot 'em dead, brainbell jangler!
the shoot 'em dead, brainbell jangler!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
1962 , Adams , BeastyBurdeny , Bjorn , ChrisL , daspyknows , DGA35 , Doxa , Glimmerest , HardRiffin , Joce , kkhoranstoned , manu3121 , Pablo , RollingFreak , Shotaway2 , spunky , StonedRambler , Stoneswolf , StonyRoad , straycatuk , syrel , thorgal34 , TooTight , Topi , TW2019 , Undercover1 , WelshEdge1 , welshphil
Guests:
1479
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10