I think "quality" is just the wrong category for comparisons in music and especially in the Stones' catalogue. I would neeever say Emotional Rescue or Undercover are better than Let it Bleed, yet I listen to them more. There's a Stones album for every mood and that's the beautiful thing about this band. On many occasions the fun and lightness of albums like Undercover, where it doesn't seem like they take themselves that seriously, just hits a spot. While on other days an album like Let it Bleed fits my temper better. I'm sure Hackney Diamonds will find a place on the spectrum of moods and that alone is enough to make it worthwile.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-11-01 16:29 by MonkeyMan2000.

Quote
StonedRambler
What's far more difficult IMHO is the question "Bridges to Babylon vs Hackney Diamonds".

I'd go for Hackney here at the moment, but surely some time needs to pass before you definitely can say how they compare

There's at least one point in favour of B2B: Keith's tunes on that versus Tell me straight. The latter is a sweet little song but nothing spectacular as the final 1-2 punch of Thief in the night and How can I stop, masterpieces.

Quote
maumau

Quote
StonedRambler
What's far more difficult IMHO is the question "Bridges to Babylon vs Hackney Diamonds".

I'd go for Hackney here at the moment, but surely some time needs to pass before you definitely can say how they compare

There's at least one point in favour of B2B: Keith's tunes on that versus Tell me straight. The latter is a sweet little song but nothing spectacular as the final 1-2 punch of Thief in the night and How can I stop, masterpieces.

+1

Time will tell. Now, lets enjoy the thing

I have never heard Jagger singing/saving "c'mon" so many times,on an album.

Quote
rollingrichard
I have never heard Jagger singing/saving "c'mon" so many times,on an album.

There was the first single...I think he says it more there.

High pitch singing with the help of autotune ruins a lot

Hackney Diamonds is like a long lost lover who you've pined over for many years but who suddenly walks through your door and returns to your life.

Quote
RollingFreak
To me its unquestionably A Bigger Bang. Hackney sounds like a band trying to be "hip", and more accurately "Mick Jagger trying to be hip". Doesn't feel like a Stones album to me at all, it feels like a desperate attempt to grab the "it" producer of the day and have some new music just to have it. Whereas, truly, I felt like they were going for something with A Bigger Bang. Solid songs in Let Me Down Slow, Biggest Mistake, Back Of My Hand, Infamy. Back Of My Hand harkens back to You Gotta Move, Rough Justice harkens back to a classic Stones riff and actually trying to create something memorable. Its absolutely bloated, but overall it felt like a band, or at least Mick and Keith, that got into a room and tried to make a record, as opposed to this new one sounds like the backing band could be anyone.

If anything, my biggest sadness is I feel A Bigger Bang is the ONLY album of value since Tattoo You. 40 years (1983-2023) and one good album to show for it. Granted, the band made masterpiece after masterpiece in the 60s and 70s, so they owe us nothing, and thats one album in only a list of 7 so its not really THAT many records. But seriously, I can't cobble together as many good songs from all those albums as I can good ones that exist on A Bigger Bang alone.

Agree with this, except I would not say ABB is the ONLY good music since '81, but the analysis of HD is spot on--it's fine, but it mostly sounds like a Jagger solo pop record. But they're freaking 80, so I'll take it and be glad.

Quote
KeithNacho
Time will tell. Now, lets enjoy the thing

Yes! Exactly! Enjoy it!

Indeed, fine enjoying from this real new Rolling Stones album, now in 2023.

Quote
StonedRambler

Quote
bobo
A Bigger Bang is nowhere close to the new album. But then again, many on this forum seems to live in the past, mostly three to five decades backwards. Thankfully Rolling Stones adapts and evolve as time goes by.

Someone had to say it.

I understand being open to things, but also on the flip side there are people who are just complete sycophants of older bands with their new albums and feel like they HAVE to defend and champion them. I'm not saying thats happening here, but I'm just saying finding a legitimate middle ground is very difficult most times with fanbase. Its usually skewed far too much to either side.

I've been a Bruce Springsteen fan forever, and I bring him up because in the last 20 years he's tried to put out releases that feel like they are adding to his legacy, not just an album for an album. For awhile, he did a really good job. There was a 10 year period from 09-19 where his albums were shit. But as fans feel like they have to do, they were all "instant masterpieces". There was an 8 minute song on one of them. When it was released, it was hailed as an epic. Nowadays, with hindsight, its seen as an embarrassment largely. I actually think its neither. It was a gamble, it was something different, its fine. It didn't have to be greatest thing ever or worst thing ever, but thats fans for ya. There's been a lot of reevaluation of those records and they are held in less esteem, which is fine, but I think at the time the most annoying thing is saying those bad albums were "instant masterpieces" was an insult to some of his work in the 10 years before that which truly stands up with his golden years material.

I was never expecting this album to be the next Sticky Fingers, but if you think it is, power to ya! I'll be curious what you think in 10 years but hey, if you like it you like it. Its all about the enjoyment. I'm really happy the Stones are still making new music, regardless of the quality. There was a long period that they didn't. The overzealous nature comes with the territory and I think its laughable to call ANYTHING since Some Girls anywhere near the par of that material, but if you feel you have to do that thats what makes horse races.

Quote
georgelicks
It was #3 on the first week, that's the second week projection.

[www.billboard.com]

Thanks, Mr Licks. You use the word “projection” so the actual second week position remains to be seen.

Quote
Silver Dagger
Hackney Diamonds is like a long lost lover who you've pined over for many years but who suddenly walks through your door and returns to your life.

nice. the wife might have a problem with that though!

The Springsteen records since Ghost of Tom Joad have been underwhelming to say the least. I do like Western Stars. And the Rising has many fine moments as well. Magic had a couple decent tracks.

I think the 8 minute song you are referring to is “Outlaw Pete”, which was expansive but also terrible. The rest of that record is unlistenable.

(I meant to quote an earlier post, which is why this post is exclusive to Bruce)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-11-01 20:50 by JimmyTheSaint.

Quote
Silver Dagger
Hackney Diamonds is like a long lost lover who you've pined over for many years but who suddenly walks through your door and returns to your life.

It was the exact opposite for me. I broke up with my gf of 3 years the day HD came out. It's already a heartbreaking, nostalgic album for me. The girl is caught in a cult and I just can't get her out. I gave up.

Either way works. It's a lot like Goats Head Soup in that regard.

A latecomer’s first-hand account of HD.

Finally I got the CD (digi-pack version) at our local branch of Fopp yesterday. Prior to that, I had never been exposed to the songs from the album except a few viewings of the Angry video — other than that, not even one note. Today I christened it for just one listen.
Very good to excellent tracks all the way. No fillers, basically. A collection of strong material, really. And there is drive on many of them — or the whole album for that matter. To quote Keith’s word, blitzkrieg of an album.
Sounds very modern. Of course. This is 2023, not 1972. Okay, admittedly some may feel the production is overpowering. It doesn’t bother me.
After all, this is a modern Stones album by the modern Stones. And of very high level at that. What’s wrong with it?

Quote
josepi

Quote
Silver Dagger
Hackney Diamonds is like a long lost lover who you've pined over for many years but who suddenly walks through your door and returns to your life.

It was the exact opposite for me. I broke up with my gf of 3 years the day HD came out. It's already a heartbreaking, nostalgic album for me. The girl is caught in a cult and I just can't get her out. I gave up.

Either way works. It's a lot like Goats Head Soup in that regard.

She's a Taylor Swift fan?

HD is climbing up the US ITunes Charts again. At #3 today.
Would be a good time for a third single.

Quote
MonkeyMan2000
I think "quality" is just the wrong category for comparisons in music and especially in the Stones' catalogue. I would neeever say Emotional Rescue or Undercover are better than Let it Bleed, yet I listen to them more. There's a Stones album for every mood and that's the beautiful thing about this band. On many occasions the fun and lightness of albums like Undercover, where it doesn't seem like they take themselves that seriously, just hits a spot. While on other days an album like Let it Bleed fits my temper better. I'm sure Hackney Diamonds will find a place on the spectrum of moods and that alone is enough to make it worthwile.

That's a great point.

I hardly listen to LET IT BLEED-EXILE, with BLEED and STICKY in a tie for the best Stones album ever. Yet TATTOO YOU is my favorite Stones album, with UNDERCOVER and GOATS HEAD SOUP... etc.

It's not about the critical aspect of an album being the best or better in regard to quality. Those are a given. One would have to have a heart of wet soupy manure to not be able to hear how excellent LET IT BLEED or STICKY FINGERS is/are - just by existence, not even in catalog. The musicianship, the writing, the production - they are perfection.

Where as their mid 1970s albums had this kind of tidal action going on, with perhaps IORR being slack tide, they brought it in big time with SOME GIRLS and it relaxed with EMOTIONAL RESCUE and then had a bit of a surge with UNDERCOVER (because TATTOO YOU isn't a true follow up if you go by "recording") and then the goddamn ocean emptied.

U is such a wrench in the cocktail of the Stones catalog. It's borderline too different. Which is what I've always loved about U. I don't think it was necessarily them being "modern", they were just going with the flow, with the one exception probably being (the brilliant) Too Much Blood, yet made something that has, in a way, an alternative edge to it.

BRIDGES has that energy, while, like She Was Hot, maintaining their truism (Flip The Switch, Lowdown, Too Tight).

What a true joy of art, The Rolling Stones, and their albums. Some artists have more albums. Whatever. HACKNEY DIAMONDS is The Rolling Stones in 2023. Ok. That's great. 10 years isn't that far away, they'll probably be done by then, and this album will be (enter whatever here) but at least it's a really good album. It's a great album. Great like BLEED or STICKY? No... but in the same sense as this is now, absolutely.

They're still rolling, they aren't going limp.

Quote
rollingrichard
I have never heard Jagger singing/saving "c'mon" so many times,on an album.

Ha, I noticed that too

Quote
MonkeyMan2000
I think "quality" is just the wrong category for comparisons in music and especially in the Stones' catalogue. I would neeever say Emotional Rescue or Undercover are better than Let it Bleed, yet I listen to them more. There's a Stones album for every mood and that's the beautiful thing about this band. On many occasions the fun and lightness of albums like Undercover, where it doesn't seem like they take themselves that seriously, just hits a spot. While on other days an album like Let it Bleed fits my temper better. I'm sure Hackney Diamonds will find a place on the spectrum of moods and that alone is enough to make it worthwile.

Yes

Quote
Mr. Jimi

Quote
rollingrichard
I have never heard Jagger singing/saving "c'mon" so many times,on an album.

Ha, I noticed that too

It sounds a bit cheap, like in a beginners band. Or he is trying to fill up an empty space, as a singer. Mainly when you feel a bit insecure. ( Like I did in my band )
He should know other ways to do that, or to hide that.

Overall, a nice album, but not a masterpiece, IMHO.

Jaggers just takin the micky
and needlin' us that its sixty years
since they dropped that first single on us .... Come On ....



ROCKMAN

I know I’m reading way too much into this, but did you realize that the first word on the first Stones album was “Well”. The last word on the last Stones album was also “Well”.
Well if you ever plan to motor west…
He’s gonna be a rolling stone… oh well…

Both cover songs too.

Gives entirely new meaning to this one: [youtu.be]

JumpingKentFlash

Quote
Rockman
Jaggers just takin the micky
and needlin' us that its sixty years
since they dropped that first single on us .... Come On ....

I wish that was true !

It looks as if he is trying to put more energy in the band. Whipping them up. Strange, as they are powerful enough on this album.

The Rolling Stones scoren als eerste artiesten in elk decennium.
[www.msn.com]


The Rolling Stones are the first artists to score in any decade
© ANP
The Rolling Stones are the first music artists to have charted in the top 10 albums in the United States every decade since the 1960s. Their latest album Hackney Diamonds debuted this week at number three on the Billboard 200, the official album chart of the United States. The album is the group's 38th album to enter the top 10.

No other artist has managed to do that so far. Barbra Streisand has the chance to match the performance, she currently has 34 top 10 listings. The Beatles and Frank Sinatra follow with 32 albums. Of the 38 top 10s, nine of the Stones' albums reached the top spot, including Sticky Fingers, Exile on Main St. and Tattoo You.
The Stones were already record holders in their own country. The British rock band will present the BRIT Billion Award this week for reaching 1 billion streams in the United Kingdom.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-11-02 10:28 by Idorh.

I haven’t contributed very much to the Hackney Diamonds discussion, as I don’t believe I have anything particularly unique to say. I will refrain from offering a full-on review, here, but would like to say that I do think Hackney Diamonds is a relatively strong release. It does seem to me that it’s Andrew Watt’s production, and the overall sound, that the detractors have issue with. I say this because, whilst one may not find the song-writing remarkable, I struggle to see how anyone can think these are ‘bad songs’ There’s tuneful, pleasing melodies throughout, and the record has a conciseness that, for me, only makes the likes of A Bigger Bang feel that much more bloated. I’m not too sure where I would place Hackney Diamonds in an overall album-ranking, but I would say it’s their best since Steel Wheels. Okay, actually, here’s how I would rank the albums from the 80’s to present:

1. Tattoo You
2. Undercover
3. Steel Wheels
4. Hackney Diamonds
5. Voodoo Lounge
6. Bridges to Babylon
7. Emotional Rescue
8. A Bigger Bang
9. Blue & Lonesome
10. Dirty Work