Quote
BlueTurns2Grey

HD at numbers 1 in the German album charts. Here's an article from NTV about this

It's from the press release by GfK Entertainment - [iorr.org] .

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

"More honest down to earth"?!!!!

"They have nothing of consequence to say here, even after losing the band’s anchor, nor no indelible riffs to play, even after two decades to write them. Just like the image of its title, Hackney Diamonds isn’t at all full of rare gems; it is, instead, the mess made in the attempt to get easy money from someone else"

In my opinion it is a rancorous, biased review, lacking real content and full of bullshit!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-10-28 11:54 by HardRiffin.

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

So all the other reviews haven’t been honest?? Oh my, so I have been fooled, can’t believe this.

Quote
bobo

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

So all the other reviews haven’t been honest?? Oh my, so I have been fooled, can’t believe this.

He is a troll. Do not feed.....

Hahaha, Keefriffhards - is that review your own work?

We all hear that you don't like the new album, you've said it loud and clear many times. But what is hard to understand is why you keep appearing on this thread to repeat yourself. You don't like it? That's cool, move on. Start a thread about your favourite period, or an observation from an era that you do enjoy. Why dwell on such negativity? My friendly advice is to concentrate on the positives, things that bring you joy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-10-28 12:15 by peoplewitheyes.

Quote
peoplewitheyes
Hahaha, Keefriffhards - is that review your own work?

We all hear that you don't like the new album, you've said it loud and clear many times. But what is hard to understand is why you keep appearing on this thread to repeat yourself. You don't like it? That's cool, move on. Start a thread about your favourite period, or an observation from an era that you do enjoy. Why dwell on such negativity? My friendly advice is to concentrate on the positives, things that bring you joy.

Was about to reply with something slightly less polite but in a similar vein - nicely put

Quote
HardRiffin

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

"More honest down to earth"?!!!!

"They have nothing of consequence to say here, even after losing the band’s anchor, nor no indelible riffs to play, even after two decades to write them. Just like the image of its title, Hackney Diamonds isn’t at all full of rare gems; it is, instead, the mess made in the attempt to get easy money from someone else"

In my opinion it is a rancorous, biased review, lacking real content and full of bullshit!

Well, it is true that there are not many true riffs on the album (the lack of guitar intros is telling too), but you're right that the review is way over the top and certainly not "down to earth" (rather from a dark raging cloud). Personally, the weirdest part is where he claims that Keith used to be an accountant. I am no blind believer in Keith's pirate image, but an accountant?! The most interesting part of the article is that it claims that Sonic Youth was inspired by the Stones. That is interesting if it is true. I never heard of "Slint". Does anyone know if that band is any good?

Someone on this thread mentioned that this album is full of earworms, and this is certainly true, I find myself continuously remembering little bits and pieces of various songs (Dreamy Skies, WWW, Mess It Up, Tell Me Straight). It's that kind of album, and that is quite nice. Maybe one could see the album as a modern version of Aftermath.

Quote
matxil

Someone on this thread mentioned that this album is full of earworms, and this is certainly true, I find myself continuously remembering little bits and pieces of various songs (Dreamy Skies, WWW, Mess It Up, Tell Me Straight). It's that kind of album, and that is quite nice. Maybe one could see the album as a modern version of Aftermath.

somqany
That's an interesting thought..

And yes...never so many quick infiltrating ear-worms on Stones album since... well,..possibly ever !

Quote
matxil

Quote
HardRiffin

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

"More honest down to earth"?!!!!

"They have nothing of consequence to say here, even after losing the band’s anchor, nor no indelible riffs to play, even after two decades to write them. Just like the image of its title, Hackney Diamonds isn’t at all full of rare gems; it is, instead, the mess made in the attempt to get easy money from someone else"

In my opinion it is a rancorous, biased review, lacking real content and full of bullshit!

Well, it is true that there are not many true riffs on the album (the lack of guitar intros is telling too), but you're right that the review is way over the top and certainly not "down to earth" (rather from a dark raging cloud). Personally, the weirdest part is where he claims that Keith used to be an accountant. I am no blind believer in Keith's pirate image, but an accountant?! The most interesting part of the article is that it claims that Sonic Youth was inspired by the Stones. That is interesting if it is true. I never heard of "Slint". Does anyone know if that band is any good?

Someone on this thread mentioned that this album is full of earworms, and this is certainly true, I find myself continuously remembering little bits and pieces of various songs (Dreamy Skies, WWW, Mess It Up, Tell Me Straight). It's that kind of album, and that is quite nice. Maybe one could see the album as a modern version of Aftermath.

I think that when posters give 10 out of 10 to these new tracks it's biased against their back catalogue, it shows a disrespect or lack of understanding of just how great the Stones have been creatively.
I don't agree with all of the review, obviously this album isn't about a money grab.
Also if there is another album to follow shortly I'd like to think if it as the B side of Tattoo You in relation to the A side.
I hope its not in your face shouting, wouldn't it be nice if the next album offers something more soulfull.

Today I received the Japan cd jewelcase version from Jpc.de with “Living in a Ghost Town” as bonustrack

for the stones i think its not a business case to sell music albums.

Quote
matxil

Quote
HardRiffin

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

"More honest down to earth"?!!!!

"They have nothing of consequence to say here, even after losing the band’s anchor, nor no indelible riffs to play, even after two decades to write them. Just like the image of its title, Hackney Diamonds isn’t at all full of rare gems; it is, instead, the mess made in the attempt to get easy money from someone else"


In my opinion it is a rancorous, biased review, lacking real content and full of bullshit!

Well, it is true that there are not many true riffs on the album (the lack of guitar intros is telling too), but you're right that the review is way over the top and certainly not "down to earth" (rather from a dark raging cloud). Personally, the weirdest part is where he claims that Keith used to be an accountant. I am no blind believer in Keith's pirate image, but an accountant?! The most interesting part of the article is that it claims that Sonic Youth was inspired by the Stones. That is interesting if it is true. I never heard of "Slint". Does anyone know if that band is any good?

Someone on this thread mentioned that this album is full of earworms, and this is certainly true, I find myself continuously remembering little bits and pieces of various songs (Dreamy Skies, WWW, Mess It Up, Tell Me Straight). It's that kind of album, and that is quite nice. Maybe one could see the album as a modern version of Aftermath.

I think it’s just not true to say there are no riffs on this album. Angry has a riff. Get Close has a riff, Depending on you has an acoustic 5 string riff intro (like Moonlight Mile), Whole Wide world starts with a riff, Mess it up starts with a riff and has funky riffing all throughout, Live By the Sword has a riff, etc etc.

I agree there is no Satisfaction or Jumping Jack Flash style riff, but so what? The last time they had an album with a single iconic riff was Tattoo Youz

Yes it is not true. There's Enough riffs and rhytms on Hackney :-)

Quote
matxil

Quote
HardRiffin

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

"More honest down to earth"?!!!!

"They have nothing of consequence to say here, even after losing the band’s anchor, nor no indelible riffs to play, even after two decades to write them. Just like the image of its title, Hackney Diamonds isn’t at all full of rare gems; it is, instead, the mess made in the attempt to get easy money from someone else"

In my opinion it is a rancorous, biased review, lacking real content and full of bullshit!

Well, it is true that there are not many true riffs on the album (the lack of guitar intros is telling too), but you're right that the review is way over the top and certainly not "down to earth" (rather from a dark raging cloud). Personally, the weirdest part is where he claims that Keith used to be an accountant. I am no blind believer in Keith's pirate image, but an accountant?! The most interesting part of the article is that it claims that Sonic Youth was inspired by the Stones. That is interesting if it is true. I never heard of "Slint". Does anyone know if that band is any good?

Someone on this thread mentioned that this album is full of earworms, and this is certainly true, I find myself continuously remembering little bits and pieces of various songs (Dreamy Skies, WWW, Mess It Up, Tell Me Straight). It's that kind of album, and that is quite nice. Maybe one could see the album as a modern version of Aftermath.

I like Slint, post-rock top stuff, Spiderland I have on vinyl, like it a lot
spun off to Palace Brothers (Will Oldha/Bonnie Prince Billy).

Actually I had not even got to the point in which Slint are quoted in a 2023 RS review. that's quite wild. As it is the connection with Sonic Youth. The only stones connection that I reckon in relation to SY is a Kim Gordon wearing a tongue logo t-shirt back in the day. Far fetched less you connect their "dirty" sound via Pussy Galore. Far fetched.

Pitchfork rview is not bad because it criticizes HD or the Stones (me I like the record but not all and not screaming at a miracle), is bad because, yes I agree, so over the top and unpro that is useless (just as the over the top praising one repeating clichès after clichès)


back on HD: love Get Close and Sweet Sounds, like Angry, Whole Wide World, Depending on you and Sword, and RS Blues is ok. Bite my head is funny. the rest don't move me.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-10-28 14:48 by maumau.

Hackney Diamonds is a stunning album. My top-three picks are (more or less) riff based Whole Wide World, Mess it up and Live by Sword. Going back in time the new album beats Bridges to Babylon from 1997 but falls short in comparison with Wandering Spirit from 1993. It feels like MJ contributes more than on any other Stones album to the songwriting input. Keith of course plays really well on the songs and puts his twist to them but is bringing very few (I think sadly) original ideas to the table. With more classic Keith input there would have been more original riffs and beautiful melodies.

Fave tracks on a very strong album:
Sweet Sounds Of Heaven.
Tell Me Straight.
Rolling Stone Blues.
Whole Wide World.
Angry.

Every guest is on point and not overused. The sax in Get Close is reminiscent of Ernie Watts. It’s absolutely stunning to make this that late in the game. SSOH could’ve been on EOMS, not because it’s gospel/soul, but because it actually has the quality.

JumpingKentFlash

Quote
JumpingKentFlash
Fave tracks on a very strong album:
Sweet Sounds Of Heaven.
Tell Me Straight.
Rolling Stone Blues.
Whole Wide World.
Angry.

Every guest is on point and not overused. The sax in Get Close is reminiscent of Ernie Watts. It’s absolutely stunning to make this that late in the game. SSOH could’ve been on EOMS, not because it’s gospel/soul, but because it actually has the quality.

That is probably my fav aspect of the album, and the fact that they believe in it and want to play it live (hope it's true and remain a strong purpose for the 2024 tour)

This album is getting better every day. It's unbelievable to be honest.

The delicious licks and interplay on Whole Wide World from 3.30 are my favorite this day.

Stunning.

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

laughable on a lot of levels.

Quote
PaintMonkeyManBlack

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

laughable on a lot of levels.

I hate how some people call negative opinions "honest" which consequently says that all positive opinions are not honest.

Some people just like to spread hate and that has nothing to do with honesty.

Quote
StonedRambler

Quote
PaintMonkeyManBlack

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

laughable on a lot of levels.

I hate how some people call negative opinions "honest" which consequently says that all positive opinions are not honest.

Some people just like to spread hate and that has nothing to do with honesty.

Agreed. The arguments are just laughable. I am critical of the Stones. All the complilations etc you can use the easy money argument. But this is just crazy.

I read some 50/50 reviews which where very good reviews (although I do not agree). But rating this album 4,5 out 10 with the arguments given is laughable. Seems like writen by a guy who want to be that guy running against the stream. We all know someone who is like that..

Quote
jahisnotdead
Cult band?!

Emphasis on the cult.

Wanted to give it a week of listening to see if any of my thoughts changed. Played it at least 2x per day since the release and that stretch of Depending On You, Bite My Head Off, Whole Wide World, Dreamy Skies is superb. I also think Mess It Up and Get Close are solid while Rolling Stone Blues is a fitting closer. I’m still not sure how to place the Live By The Sword, Driving Me Too Hard, Tell Me Straight stretch. I think I would’ve liked 1 more rocker in there. Overall, this is a really solid album that really surpassed my expectations. Much credit to Andrew Watt. They all should be proud. Can’t wait for the 2024 Tour


Let the old still believe that they’re young

In my 60 years of being a fan, this is really the first album I like from start to finish. When I walk around the house with mp3 player, I have to turn it off 100 times only to have my wife nag at my head. What do you say etc. Then when I'm outside working, lovely to play the album, no cold, no pain in my back with backyard sweeping. Music is good medicine.

Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
matxil

Quote
HardRiffin

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

"More honest down to earth"?!!!!

"They have nothing of consequence to say here, even after losing the band’s anchor, nor no indelible riffs to play, even after two decades to write them. Just like the image of its title, Hackney Diamonds isn’t at all full of rare gems; it is, instead, the mess made in the attempt to get easy money from someone else"

In my opinion it is a rancorous, biased review, lacking real content and full of bullshit!

Well, it is true that there are not many true riffs on the album (the lack of guitar intros is telling too), but you're right that the review is way over the top and certainly not "down to earth" (rather from a dark raging cloud). Personally, the weirdest part is where he claims that Keith used to be an accountant. I am no blind believer in Keith's pirate image, but an accountant?! The most interesting part of the article is that it claims that Sonic Youth was inspired by the Stones. That is interesting if it is true. I never heard of "Slint". Does anyone know if that band is any good?

Someone on this thread mentioned that this album is full of earworms, and this is certainly true, I find myself continuously remembering little bits and pieces of various songs (Dreamy Skies, WWW, Mess It Up, Tell Me Straight). It's that kind of album, and that is quite nice. Maybe one could see the album as a modern version of Aftermath.

I think that when posters give 10 out of 10 to these new tracks it's biased against their back catalogue, it shows a disrespect or lack of understanding of just how great the Stones have been creatively.
I don't agree with all of the review, obviously this album isn't about a money grab.
Also if there is another album to follow shortly I'd like to think if it as the B side of Tattoo You in relation to the A side.
I hope its not in your face shouting, wouldn't it be nice if the next album offers something more soulfull.

Exactly! Like Sweet Sounds of Heaven! Wait...

Quote
peoplewitheyes
Hahaha, Keefriffhards - is that review your own work?

We all hear that you don't like the new album, you've said it loud and clear many times. But what is hard to understand is why you keep appearing on this thread to repeat yourself. You don't like it? That's cool, move on. Start a thread about your favourite period, or an observation from an era that you do enjoy. Why dwell on such negativity? My friendly advice is to concentrate on the positives, things that bring you joy.

Because that is what trolls do. This is how you know he is trolling. He is subtle, but still obvious.Do not engage trolls, other than to point out that they are indeed...... trolls.

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

You were riding this Pitchfork review already from page 5 onwards in this thread, why do you bring it up again? Just because it's the rare or even the only one that supports your negativity? Look, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but what you do smells of campaigning and, by the way, what's exactly your individual point with this album that could indicate that your opinion is at least well formed?

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

You were riding this Pitchfork review already from page 5 onwards in this thread, why do you bring it up again? Just because it's the rare or even the only one that supports your negativity? Look, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but what you do smells of campaigning and, by the way, what's exactly your individual point with this album that could indicate that your opinion is at least well formed?

It's the first time I've noticed this review, haven't read many as it's obvious most favorable reviews seem to be the same like when the Stones kick off a tour and every review is just listing the songs played and its the same gushing story.
I was reading reviews this morning to see if anyone noticed that if these songs were played on the radio with another singer could anyone distinguish that it's actually Keith on guitar, this review kind of gets the fakery of it all, trying to sound young and energetic.
I just hope the next Stones album is more authentic, the Stones ( Mick & Keith ) sounding who they are as opossed to trying to sound how they think the Stones should sound.
It shouldn't really matter to me that it's completely different to what i expected, although 18 years was a long wait.
I'm happy with Mick, i understand where Mick is coming from, but Keith has always banged on about Mick's Rock, I'm Roll.
Not much roll coming from Keith here and where are his killer riffs he said he had in the can, is he saving them for his next solo album lol.
For me Keith's lost a lot of credibility, he's kind of revealed he's been full of BS over the years, i just wanted to discuss that i didn't want to be seen as spoiling the party for all you guys clearly loving the album.
Back in the day, long before i started posting here there where some great discussions that went deep about this band, it wasn't just posters being fanboys, people could actually be democratic and have different points of view.
Remember HMS the guy who loved Dirty Work, so funny the crap that guy put up with because he defended that album, times have changed.

Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

You were riding this Pitchfork review already from page 5 onwards in this thread, why do you bring it up again? Just because it's the rare or even the only one that supports your negativity? Look, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but what you do smells of campaigning and, by the way, what's exactly your individual point with this album that could indicate that your opinion is at least well formed?

It's the first time I've noticed this review, haven't read many as it's obvious most favorable reviews seem to be the same like when the Stones kick off a tour and every review is just listing the songs played and its the same gushing story.
I was reading reviews this morning to see if anyone noticed that if these songs were played on the radio with another singer could anyone distinguish that it's actually Keith on guitar, this review kind of gets the fakery of it all, trying to sound young and energetic.
I just hope the next Stones album is more authentic, the Stones ( Mick & Keith ) sounding who they are as opossed to trying to sound how they think the Stones should sound.
It shouldn't really matter to me that it's completely different to what i expected, although 18 years was a long wait.
I'm happy with Mick, i understand where Mick is coming from, but Keith has always banged on about Mick's Rock, I'm Roll.
Not much roll coming from Keith here and where are his killer riffs he said he had in the can, is he saving them for his next solo album lol.
For me Keith's lost a lot of credibility, he's kind of revealed he's been full of BS over the years, i just wanted to discuss that i didn't want to be seen as spoiling the party for all you guys clearly loving the album.
Back in the day, long before i started posting here there where some great discussions that went deep about this band, it wasn't just posters being fanboys, people could actually be democratic and have different points of view.
Remember HMS the guy who loved Dirty Work, so funny the crap that guy put up with because he defended that album, times have changed.

As a Keith' fan too, I have to disagree there. Dynamite Riffs are there : WWW, Get Close, Mess It Up, LBTS..... The only problem is that Mick's contribution (kind of poor chorus) made those riffs "under-exploited". Unfortunately, since Mick discovered he can make music with an Ipad, he made hundreds (99% shitty) while Keith only made few (but 99% good)...

Quote
Jackda

Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
keefriffhards
A more honest down to earth review from a guy who actually knows this band/music and their potential.
[pitchfork.com]

You were riding this Pitchfork review already from page 5 onwards in this thread, why do you bring it up again? Just because it's the rare or even the only one that supports your negativity? Look, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but what you do smells of campaigning and, by the way, what's exactly your individual point with this album that could indicate that your opinion is at least well formed?

It's the first time I've noticed this review, haven't read many as it's obvious most favorable reviews seem to be the same like when the Stones kick off a tour and every review is just listing the songs played and its the same gushing story.
I was reading reviews this morning to see if anyone noticed that if these songs were played on the radio with another singer could anyone distinguish that it's actually Keith on guitar, this review kind of gets the fakery of it all, trying to sound young and energetic.
I just hope the next Stones album is more authentic, the Stones ( Mick & Keith ) sounding who they are as opossed to trying to sound how they think the Stones should sound.
It shouldn't really matter to me that it's completely different to what i expected, although 18 years was a long wait.
I'm happy with Mick, i understand where Mick is coming from, but Keith has always banged on about Mick's Rock, I'm Roll.
Not much roll coming from Keith here and where are his killer riffs he said he had in the can, is he saving them for his next solo album lol.
For me Keith's lost a lot of credibility, he's kind of revealed he's been full of BS over the years, i just wanted to discuss that i didn't want to be seen as spoiling the party for all you guys clearly loving the album.
Back in the day, long before i started posting here there where some great discussions that went deep about this band, it wasn't just posters being fanboys, people could actually be democratic and have different points of view.
Remember HMS the guy who loved Dirty Work, so funny the crap that guy put up with because he defended that album, times have changed.

As a Keith' fan too, I have to disagree there. Dynamite Riffs are there : WWW, Get Close, Mess It Up, LBTS..... The only problem is that Mick's contribution (kind of poor chorus) made those riffs "under-exploited". Unfortunately, since Mick discovered he can make music with an Ipad, he made hundreds (99% shitty) while Keith only made few (but 99% good)...

Ha, ha, I always have a good laugh when I read "as a Keith fan" because it makes clear why this album is not for you, because it's not a Keith solo album but a band effort and as such you have to deal with a lead singer that once in a while dares to sing above the wonderful riffing, like it or not.

If you want, I can direct you to some great guitar tutorial CDs in the "Keith - His 10 Most Famous Riffs" vein where you can listen to guitar tracks without disturbing singers, albeit not played by the riffmaster himself, but sounding pretty close. There's even some brandnew guitar tutorials of HD tracks on YouTube where the main riffs are played loud (!) over the original album sound so that in the end Mick is barely audible, sure these will satisfy ya!