For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
NashvilleBluesQuote
liddasQuote
Big Al
I find Andrew Watt’s production to be popish and contemporary
Blame my daughters, but I am quite exposed to contemporary pop music. Well I can hardly remember any guitar driven pop songs charting on spotyfy, forget songs with bum notes, a real drummer, etc etc,
C
HD is very meaty, bouncy and punchy. For lack of a better word, the production sounds cartoonish and exaggerated. Not a criticism, just an opinion.
Quote
keefriffhardsQuote
NashvilleBluesQuote
liddasQuote
Big Al
I find Andrew Watt’s production to be popish and contemporary
Blame my daughters, but I am quite exposed to contemporary pop music. Well I can hardly remember any guitar driven pop songs charting on spotyfy, forget songs with bum notes, a real drummer, etc etc,
C
HD is very meaty, bouncy and punchy. For lack of a better word, the production sounds cartoonish and exaggerated. Not a criticism, just an opinion.
Predictable for lack of a better word.
Stones by numbers by Stones by numbers= not Stones at all.
Quote
retired_dogQuote
keefriffhardsQuote
NashvilleBluesQuote
liddasQuote
Big Al
I find Andrew Watt’s production to be popish and contemporary
Blame my daughters, but I am quite exposed to contemporary pop music. Well I can hardly remember any guitar driven pop songs charting on spotyfy, forget songs with bum notes, a real drummer, etc etc,
C
HD is very meaty, bouncy and punchy. For lack of a better word, the production sounds cartoonish and exaggerated. Not a criticism, just an opinion.
Predictable for lack of a better word.
Stones by numbers by Stones by numbers= not Stones at all.
Maybe the problem is not the Stones but unreasonable expectations on your side.
Have you ever thought about that?
Quote
keefriffhardsQuote
retired_dogQuote
keefriffhardsQuote
NashvilleBluesQuote
liddasQuote
Big Al
I find Andrew Watt’s production to be popish and contemporary
Blame my daughters, but I am quite exposed to contemporary pop music. Well I can hardly remember any guitar driven pop songs charting on spotyfy, forget songs with bum notes, a real drummer, etc etc,
C
HD is very meaty, bouncy and punchy. For lack of a better word, the production sounds cartoonish and exaggerated. Not a criticism, just an opinion.
Predictable for lack of a better word.
Stones by numbers by Stones by numbers= not Stones at all.
Maybe the problem is not the Stones but unreasonable expectations on your side.
Have you ever thought about that?
I have thought about that, a guy called Maxil said the same thing to me, but why would my expectations be low when we are talking about two geniuses, Mick clearly over the so called Wall and Keith not so long ago impressed me with CH.
I think Andrew Watt has done a great job with other older artists bringing their talents the attention they might have not received, but the Stones are different, with the right production they could have made a truly great album, not an album trying to be something but an album that really was something.
Quote
keefriffhardsQuote
retired_dogQuote
keefriffhardsQuote
NashvilleBluesQuote
liddasQuote
Big Al
I find Andrew Watt’s production to be popish and contemporary
Blame my daughters, but I am quite exposed to contemporary pop music. Well I can hardly remember any guitar driven pop songs charting on spotyfy, forget songs with bum notes, a real drummer, etc etc,
C
HD is very meaty, bouncy and punchy. For lack of a better word, the production sounds cartoonish and exaggerated. Not a criticism, just an opinion.
Predictable for lack of a better word.
Stones by numbers by Stones by numbers= not Stones at all.
Maybe the problem is not the Stones but unreasonable expectations on your side.
Have you ever thought about that?
I have thought about that, a guy called Maxil said the same thing to me, but why would my expectations be low when we are talking about two geniuses, Mick clearly over the so called Wall and Keith not so long ago impressed me with CH.
I think Andrew Watt has done a great job with other older artists bringing their talents the attention they might have not received, but the Stones are different, with the right production they could have made a truly great album, not an album trying to be something but an album that really was something.
Quote
keefriffhardsQuote
retired_dogQuote
keefriffhardsQuote
NashvilleBluesQuote
liddasQuote
Big Al
I find Andrew Watt’s production to be popish and contemporary
Blame my daughters, but I am quite exposed to contemporary pop music. Well I can hardly remember any guitar driven pop songs charting on spotyfy, forget songs with bum notes, a real drummer, etc etc,
C
HD is very meaty, bouncy and punchy. For lack of a better word, the production sounds cartoonish and exaggerated. Not a criticism, just an opinion.
Predictable for lack of a better word.
Stones by numbers by Stones by numbers= not Stones at all.
Maybe the problem is not the Stones but unreasonable expectations on your side.
Have you ever thought about that?
I have thought about that, a guy called Maxil said the same thing to me, but why would my expectations be low when we are talking about two geniuses, Mick clearly over the so called Wall and Keith not so long ago impressed me with CH.
I think Andrew Watt has done a great job with other older artists bringing their talents the attention they might have not received, but the Stones are different, with the right production they could have made a truly great album, not an album trying to be something but an album that really was something.
Quote
DoxaQuote
keefriffhardsQuote
retired_dogQuote
keefriffhardsQuote
NashvilleBluesQuote
liddasQuote
Big Al
I find Andrew Watt’s production to be popish and contemporary
Blame my daughters, but I am quite exposed to contemporary pop music. Well I can hardly remember any guitar driven pop songs charting on spotyfy, forget songs with bum notes, a real drummer, etc etc,
C
HD is very meaty, bouncy and punchy. For lack of a better word, the production sounds cartoonish and exaggerated. Not a criticism, just an opinion.
Predictable for lack of a better word.
Stones by numbers by Stones by numbers= not Stones at all.
Maybe the problem is not the Stones but unreasonable expectations on your side.
Have you ever thought about that?
I have thought about that, a guy called Maxil said the same thing to me, but why would my expectations be low when we are talking about two geniuses, Mick clearly over the so called Wall and Keith not so long ago impressed me with CH.
I think Andrew Watt has done a great job with other older artists bringing their talents the attention they might have not received, but the Stones are different, with the right production they could have made a truly great album, not an album trying to be something but an album that really was something.
Could it be easier for you to admit that you don't like The Rolling Stones in the form they nowadays are? You loved some band that doesn't exist any longer (or only exists in your imagination), since their muse have driven them into direction that goes out of your taste and interest. Many has made that conclusion ages ago - some over 50 years ago - but they don't use this site or especially a new Stones album thread for a personal therapy session or trying to convince anybody how much the contemporary version of the Stones sucks (or how stupid people are for thinking that they are still great or something). Jeez, it's just music. The idea of claiming 'that is no Stones any longer' is not solely stupid and arrogant, but a serious sign of not understanding who is the artist - the leader - and who is the fan - the follower - here. The Stones are/do what they are/do, that's Mick and Keith's, no one else's business to determine. Watt works for them, not the other way around. We might like it or not, but nothing else.
Personally I made a peace with Keith's solo stuff. Yes, I once loved it - TALK IS CHEAP was a very important album for me at one time, although MAIN OFFENDER was a huge disappointment - but after CROSSEYED HEART I realized that I am not really that fond of that sort of stuff any longer, so why I should cry here how much I don't like it - or, say, Keith is not something any longer I'd like him to be. Why should I bother myself or anyone else with negative stuff like that? I mean, I don't go to the Beatles sites to tell people how little that band moves me. It is not an obligatory thing to always have an opinion on anything somehow Stones-related. I mean, why just let it go. Better to stick on stuff that moves you.
Things like that happen. The life goes on.
It's Only Rock'n'Roll.
- Doxa
Quote
Rockman
YEah thats right Palace ....
I usually live by the play 5 times before ya listen
rule... But Hack has to be lived with ...
its a new to the ear wall of sound at first but ya gotta
let it move in and live with ya ..... ...
Then ya start to learn more about Hack everyday .....
It just keeps on giving ...........
Musta hammered Angry a few thousand times before Hack release
but it still bursts open the album ..... stunning stuff still rips me...
Quote
georgelicks
Final US sales predictions are in, it looks like the album will sell more in the UK this week...
Quote
DoxaQuote
georgelicks
Final US sales predictions are in, it looks like the album will sell more in the UK this week...
Interestingly, the trend of BLUE & LONESOME seem to continue here - the album selling about the same amount of copies in UK and US market despite the latter being five times bigger or something. For decades - especially during the 70's - the Stones were relatively taken much better seller in USA than at their home market (actually for years The US sales covered about 50% of their worldwide sales). The British seemingly have re-established their love for their prodigal sons, while the Americans have lost interest in them as recording artists (or buying albums altogether if someone's name is not Taylor Swift). Since VOODOO LOUNGE the following new studio album always drops about half in sales in US market (almost like a mathematical model no matter how many years there are between the releases...). The British Invasion is finally over?
Anyway, if we compare the first week sales of the blues album (UK: 106 000, #1; US: 123 000, #4), the approximated numbers of HACKNEY DIAMONDS will be seemingly pretty far behind in both markets. Same chartings, though. Reflects pretty much the change of people buying albums in 7 years I guess. That's shit, but it is what it is.
- Doxa
Quote
Rockman
The CD era was not a very good for album format as an art form
The old days most artists cranked the CD time right out
to the full 70 min mark ... which led ta more filler than
Joan River's left arse cheek ....
Hack clocks in at 48.13 which is like 24mins a side
like the good ole days of albums .....
Both sides go in and attack early... shell shock
Get in.. do the damage on ya ... then get out early .....
bandage ya back tagether with Dreamy & Tell Me Straight ....
Clever stuff from Wattsee and them Glimmers guys
Hey remember those early Al Green albums .... like 15 mins a side ...
Quote
keefriffhards
Its ridiculous to say I'm not a Stones fan because i can't understand the new album, i remember how thrilled i was when i first played Steel Wheels and Voodoo Lounge, it's surely okay to be confused by the direction you see 80 year old Keith take.
It's not that I'm not a Stones fan it's that this is a Jagger/ Andrew Watts solo album with Keith on it.
It's not a Stones album and i stand by that and no one can convince me otherwise. Its an abomination of a Stones album period, why only 2 tracks with Charlie, what happened to those sessions, why disregard those, he himself said what happened to the album to Ronnie in an interview, it's like they dumped that album for this solo album.
Quote
georgelicksQuote
DoxaQuote
georgelicks
Final US sales predictions are in, it looks like the album will sell more in the UK this week...
Interestingly, the trend of BLUE & LONESOME seem to continue here - the album selling about the same amount of copies in UK and US market despite the latter being five times bigger or something. For decades - especially during the 70's - the Stones were relatively taken much better seller in USA than at their home market (actually for years The US sales covered about 50% of their worldwide sales). The British seemingly have re-established their love for their prodigal sons, while the Americans have lost interest in them as recording artists (or buying albums altogether if someone's name is not Taylor Swift). Since VOODOO LOUNGE the following new studio album always drops about half in sales in US market (almost like a mathematical model no matter how many years there are between the releases...). The British Invasion is finally over?
Anyway, if we compare the first week sales of the blues album (UK: 106 000, #1; US: 123 000, #4), the approximated numbers of HACKNEY DIAMONDS will be seemingly pretty far behind in both markets. Same chartings, though. Reflects pretty much the change of people buying albums in 7 years I guess. That's shit, but it is what it is.
- Doxa
The american market could care less about new Stones music, their last Hot 100 hit was in 2003 (with a new song in 1998 with Saint Of Me) and outside the die hard fan base (which drops every year due to age) the general audience only cares about the hits and that's all, the tours are hits but the new music don't move a thing outside the die hards.
In the UK for example the general people still care, Angry was a Top 40 hit and a Top 10 Airplay hit, Ghost Town and Doom And Gloom were minor hits too, the album sales are way better in a market 6-7 times lower than the US.
In Germany, the Stones are selling almost the same in 2023 than Taylor Swift, as crazy as that, in many european markets too.
Sadly not in the US.
It's not a problem for the Stones only in the US, almost every act of certain age (+40-45) is ignored with their new stuff there, let alone from an artist with a recording carrer dating from over 60 years ago.
From that point of view, a Top 4-5 debut in the biggest world market in 2023 which is 90% stream based is not a bad thing at all, it's impressive actually.
Quote
Rockman
YEah thats right Palace ....
I usually live by the play 5 times before ya listen
rule... But Hack has to be lived with ...
its a new to the ear wall of sound at first but ya gotta
let it move in and live with ya ..... ...
Then ya start to learn more about Hack everyday .....
It just keeps on giving ...........
Musta hammered Angry a few thousand times before Hack release
but it still bursts open the album ..... stunning stuff still rips me...