Quote
retired_dog

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!

Quote
Jackda

Quote
retired_dog

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!

You are wrong, I like the album : the first in decades I don't have to skip all those ridiculous 100% Mick's tracks, at first listen (Street Of Love, Rain Fall Down, Out Of Tears, Sweethearts......)

If you can read between the lines, I think that Keith has made a great work on all of the tunes on this Album.

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)...

Quote
donvis
After reading the booklet in the blu ray box, it seems like Keith was the impetus for:
Get Close
Depending on You
Driving Me Too Hard and
Tell Me Straight.
Mick was the impetus for the other 7 originals. Not really a solo Mick album at all.

Quote
keefriffhards

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)...

Wow this is nice, an actual discussion about the album talking about the sounds made from the musicians as opossed to track listing songs individually blah blah blah. It sounds like a Jagger solo album because it is without Charlie there for Keith.
Yes those Riffs are under exploited to extinction, beggars the question what's up with Keith, has he lost the plot in old age, I'm a huge fan of Keith i think everyone knows that here but he's just this grinning chimp blissfully unaware he has given it up as far as Stones product goes.
Same on stage the other day, unaware his guitar was turned low throughout, i hope someone close to him is looking out for him right now because he's not the same, hey maybe he became enlightened and realises he lost that vital Stones Charlie lifeline as far as studio work goes because he can't connect to Mick and Andrews Ipad or maybe he just doesn't care all that much anymore. he's just riding the wave because he's done it all and has nothing to prove, give it over to Mick now because Mick has the energy and momentum and he loves him.

Quote
Stoneage

Quote
donvis
After reading the booklet in the blu ray box, it seems like Keith was the impetus for:
Get Close
Depending on You
Driving Me Too Hard and
Tell Me Straight.
Mick was the impetus for the other 7 originals. Not really a solo Mick album at all.

Driving Me Too Hard and Tell Me Straight are generic Keith songs. The other ones sound more Jaggerish.

Quote
rtr
In an interview Steve Jordan talked about his allegiance to the original recordings iconic drum hooks and restoring them back to the live renditions, (*extra points to Steve for research and reverence). He also acknowledged the recognized fact that Charlie's playing followed Keith's, but went on to say that he doesn't do that(!), choosing instead to drive the band and have the players follow him.....This surprised me, that with his insight and loyalty he would miss the historic importance of the dynamic established between Keith and Charlie that resulted in the band's unique and inimitable "feel" that set them apart from other "rock" bands, (*subtract points for messing with magic??). On HD The two new tracks Charlie played on literally jump out, (IMHO), with the drums sounding and the band feeling like classic Stones. I am curious to hear any of your thoughts.

Quote
MonkeyMan2000

Quote
Stoneage

Quote
donvis
After reading the booklet in the blu ray box, it seems like Keith was the impetus for:
Get Close
Depending on You
Driving Me Too Hard and
Tell Me Straight.
Mick was the impetus for the other 7 originals. Not really a solo Mick album at all.

Driving Me Too Hard and Tell Me Straight are generic Keith songs. The other ones sound more Jaggerish.

Get Close is Keith all over with the typical Open-G minor chords in the chorus and the riffage during the verses.

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.

Quote
rtr
In an interview Steve Jordan talked about his allegiance to the original recordings iconic drum hooks and restoring them back to the live renditions, (*extra points to Steve for research and reverence). He also acknowledged the recognized fact that Charlie's playing followed Keith's, but went on to say that he doesn't do that(!), choosing instead to drive the band and have the players follow him.....This surprised me, that with his insight and loyalty he would miss the historic importance of the dynamic established between Keith and Charlie that resulted in the band's unique and inimitable "feel" that set them apart from other "rock" bands, (*subtract points for messing with magic??). On HD The two new tracks Charlie played on literally jump out, (IMHO), with the drums sounding and the band feeling like classic Stones. I am curious to hear any of your thoughts.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
jahisnotdead
Here's hoping the Stones get the cover of the US Rolling Stone, but I won't be surprised if they don't. I like Rolling Stone, but it's clear the US version is trying to focus on the younger crowd now.

I've been taking a break from HD for a few days, in anticipation for a little listening party tonight after I get my physical copies! Totally psyched.

If they want to move physical copies of the magazine (and I have no idea if that's even their business model anymore), having them on the cover is guaranteed to move product. Look at all the physical copies of media we're willing to buy.

I haven't bought a copy of Rolling Stone in over 2 decades, but I would buy if they're on the cover now.

Quote
StonedRambler

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
StonedRambler

Quote
bitusa2012

Apart from Mess it Up. Still don’t get that! I can’t say I like it just because Charlie’s on it, or because Mick sings it all so well (he does) or because it’s harks back to Miss You/Dance/Emotional Rescue. It’s still just a bad song.

I think Mess it up is the best song on the album. Deserves to be the 3rd single.
The Spotify streaming counts also speak for the song, beside Angry and SSOH it's the most streamed from the album

Great that everyone’s tastes are different. Boring otherwise! To me though Mess it Up sounds like 3 songs cut and paste together. None of them terribly good to me!!

That's what I find interesting about it. It's not the usual verse/chorus structure or blues chord scheme we heard on thousands of Stones numbers but it actually has a great arc of suspense. And it's the most catchy Stones tune in a long time. It's stuck in my head for a week now ("you think I mess it up, mess it up, mess it up all for you"). Yes, it's very pop like but it's fantastic at what it is. I think it has lots of potential as the 3rd single to be actually played on pop radio stations.

But I gotta say I also like Miss You, while for some people here that song is called the "toilet break".

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
StonedRambler

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
StonedRambler

Quote
bitusa2012

Apart from Mess it Up. Still don’t get that! I can’t say I like it just because Charlie’s on it, or because Mick sings it all so well (he does) or because it’s harks back to Miss You/Dance/Emotional Rescue. It’s still just a bad song.

I think Mess it up is the best song on the album. Deserves to be the 3rd single.
The Spotify streaming counts also speak for the song, beside Angry and SSOH it's the most streamed from the album

Great that everyone’s tastes are different. Boring otherwise! To me though Mess it Up sounds like 3 songs cut and paste together. None of them terribly good to me!!

That's what I find interesting about it. It's not the usual verse/chorus structure or blues chord scheme we heard on thousands of Stones numbers but it actually has a great arc of suspense. And it's the most catchy Stones tune in a long time. It's stuck in my head for a week now ("you think I mess it up, mess it up, mess it up all for you"). Yes, it's very pop like but it's fantastic at what it is. I think it has lots of potential as the 3rd single to be actually played on pop radio stations.

But I gotta say I also like Miss You, while for some people here that song is called the "toilet break".

When A BIGGER BANG came out I was in a very distraught place in my life (called Hurricane Katrina). Rough Justice had already made an influence days before life became completely screwed up but that was it for awhile.

A few months went by and I was finally able to listen enough. I really dug the album. I was on the go between Louisiana and Alabama so it was just whatever. In the winter of 2006 I was finally able to listen.

At the time it was invigorating.

But things started becoming obvious.

3 years later, 4 after its release, I thought Streets Of Love was the worst thing I'd heard in a long time.

That hasn't really changed. A few others were deemed similar.

HACKNEY isn't anywhere near as long and has much better songs.

My aspect of ABB is different from any other Stones album. So I give it that aspect of respect to not just dismiss it: there are some excellent tunes.

Perhaps judging HACKNEY so quick is detrimental to being a fan. Then again some people still can't stand IORR or BAB.

There is, nicely, a looseness about HACKNEY.

That's really nice. So much so that it's certainly gotten my attention.

That's way more than ABB.

Quote
Jackda

Quote
keefriffhards

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)...

Wow this is nice, an actual discussion about the album talking about the sounds made from the musicians as opossed to track listing songs individually blah blah blah. It sounds like a Jagger solo album because it is without Charlie there for Keith.
Yes those Riffs are under exploited to extinction, beggars the question what's up with Keith, has he lost the plot in old age, I'm a huge fan of Keith i think everyone knows that here but he's just this grinning chimp blissfully unaware he has given it up as far as Stones product goes.
Same on stage the other day, unaware his guitar was turned low throughout, i hope someone close to him is looking out for him right now because he's not the same, hey maybe he became enlightened and realises he lost that vital Stones Charlie lifeline as far as studio work goes because he can't connect to Mick and Andrews Ipad or maybe he just doesn't care all that much anymore. he's just riding the wave because he's done it all and has nothing to prove, give it over to Mick now because Mick has the energy and momentum and he loves him.

No Charlie in Main Offender ("only" Steve), but still the best "Stones" album since Some Girls.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
StonedRambler

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
StonedRambler

Quote
bitusa2012

Apart from Mess it Up. Still don’t get that! I can’t say I like it just because Charlie’s on it, or because Mick sings it all so well (he does) or because it’s harks back to Miss You/Dance/Emotional Rescue. It’s still just a bad song.

I think Mess it up is the best song on the album. Deserves to be the 3rd single.
The Spotify streaming counts also speak for the song, beside Angry and SSOH it's the most streamed from the album

Great that everyone’s tastes are different. Boring otherwise! To me though Mess it Up sounds like 3 songs cut and paste together. None of them terribly good to me!!

That's what I find interesting about it. It's not the usual verse/chorus structure or blues chord scheme we heard on thousands of Stones numbers but it actually has a great arc of suspense. And it's the most catchy Stones tune in a long time. It's stuck in my head for a week now ("you think I mess it up, mess it up, mess it up all for you"). Yes, it's very pop like but it's fantastic at what it is. I think it has lots of potential as the 3rd single to be actually played on pop radio stations.

But I gotta say I also like Miss You, while for some people here that song is called the "toilet break".

When A BIGGER BANG came out I was in a very distraught place in my life (called Hurricane Katrina). Rough Justice had already made an influence days before life became completely screwed up but that was it for awhile.

A few months went by and I was finally able to listen enough. I really dug the album. I was on the go between Louisiana and Alabama so it was just whatever. In the winter of 2006 I was finally able to listen.

At the time it was invigorating.

But things started becoming obvious.

3 years later, 4 after its release, I thought Streets Of Love was the worst thing I'd heard in a long time.

That hasn't really changed. A few others were deemed similar.

HACKNEY isn't anywhere near as long and has much better songs.

My aspect of ABB is different from any other Stones album. So I give it that aspect of respect to not just dismiss it: there are some excellent tunes.

Perhaps judging HACKNEY so quick is detrimental to being a fan. Then again some people still can't stand IORR or BAB.

There is, nicely, a looseness about HACKNEY.

That's really nice. So much so that it's certainly gotten my attention.

That's way more than ABB.

Ever since about Undercover, every time a new stones album came out I feel like I had to 'train' myself to learn the new songs on the album, before I figured out which ones I liked, and which ones were more 'meh'.

Every album starting with Dirty Work has at least some good songs one them (Dirty Work clearly the fewest), and some that more than a few more. ABB had some really good songs, but probably 5 duds...it was just too bloated an album.

Hackney Diamonds is a revelation...back to my first Stones album Emotional Rescue, and then Tattoo YOu, and then the wonderful weird midlife crisis of Undercover. For me that band could do no wrong. That band is back.

I completely see Hackney Diamonds creeping into my top 10 RS albums...I'll hold off for awhile before I make that judgement...it's just a joy as one track moves to the next along with the change in musical style.

It's better than I could have hoped and as close to perfect we'll get at this stage.

Quote
jahisnotdead
Perhaps the Jordan vs. Watts approach deserves its own thread. It's an interesting subject. From what I see, on the album credits Don Was is credited with producing the drums on Live By The Sword. So, if everything else was re-recorded, isn't it by definition Keith Richards following Charlie Watts instead of the inverse? Unless there's some studio trickery involved.

Quote
MonkeyMan2000
[...]
Get Close is Keith all over with the typical Open-G minor chords in the chorus and the riffage during the verses.

Quote
matxil

Quote
MonkeyMan2000
[...]
Get Close is Keith all over with the typical Open-G minor chords in the chorus and the riffage during the verses.

To me, the guitars in "Get Close" are not playing a riff. I don't see why one would even bother tuning the guitar in Open-G to play those chords. Maybe arthritis is the explanation.

Quote
matxil

Quote
MonkeyMan2000
[...]
Get Close is Keith all over with the typical Open-G minor chords in the chorus and the riffage during the verses.

To me, the guitars in "Get Close" are not playing a riff. I don't see why one would even bother tuning the guitar in Open-G to play those chords. Maybe arthritis is the explanation.

Quote
matxil

Quote
MonkeyMan2000
[...]
Get Close is Keith all over with the typical Open-G minor chords in the chorus and the riffage during the verses.

To me, the guitars in "Get Close" are not playing a riff. I don't see why one would even bother tuning the guitar in Open-G to play those chords. Maybe arthritis is the explanation.

Quote
MonkeyMan2000

Quote
matxil

Quote
MonkeyMan2000
[...]
Get Close is Keith all over with the typical Open-G minor chords in the chorus and the riffage during the verses.

To me, the guitars in "Get Close" are not playing a riff. I don't see why one would even bother tuning the guitar in Open-G to play those chords. Maybe arthritis is the explanation.

It is a riff, it has a distinct rhythm in conversation with the drums and you can sing it. It's not just strumming.

Quote
StonedRambler

Quote
MonkeyMan2000

Quote
matxil

Quote
MonkeyMan2000
[...]
Get Close is Keith all over with the typical Open-G minor chords in the chorus and the riffage during the verses.

To me, the guitars in "Get Close" are not playing a riff. I don't see why one would even bother tuning the guitar in Open-G to play those chords. Maybe arthritis is the explanation.

[youtu.be]

[youtu.be]


It is a riff, it has a distinct rhythm in conversation with the drums and you can sing it. It's not just strumming.

And even of it wasn't - wherefrom comes the assumption that Keith Richards is only allowed to play riffs in Open G? Keith Richards is allowed to play anything in Open G that he wants. It's his signature sound.

You can play all Open-G Stones songs also in Standard tuning. It just doesn't sound the same.