Tell Me :
Talk
Cheers Roger!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 04:20 by usetobesampeg.
Well, as I have said before, here in the U.K., it does very much seem as if the Stones have undergone a definite renaissance in popularity. That, in my opinion, is the reasoning for their seeming rise in popularity and greatly-improved album-sales. It really does seem that there has been a change in the air, regarding how they’re perceived. Take the New Musical Express. (NME) from the about he mid-1970’s through to the early 00’s, they absolutely rinsed the Stones. Somewhere online, you may be able to come across their ‘review’ of the Stones’ Shepherd’s Bush Empire performance from 1999; it’s not pretty. In fact, as recently as the Licks Tour, they were, largely, unfavourable. Now, they absolutely adore the Stones. Maybe, it can partly be put down to the NME giving-up their mantle as the voice of contemporary rock and alternative, but it’s a wider happening. The Stones, on home soil, are just flat-out cherished. Long may it continue!
Edit: but why the newly-found appreciation and nostalgia? Perhaps, in part, it could be to do with the lack of a 'current' and meaningful music-scene in the U.K. Tjere hasn't been one here, in the U.K., since the mid-1990's.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 10:23 by Big Al.
Not considered a Stones album? I wish you well and a merry christmas
They're not the only band who draws in younger fans, you'd be surprised to see how many young people attend Springsteen gigs in some countries for example. But they have retained/reclaimed a coolness factor that's bigger than that of other artists imo.
First off with only two original members left it's not a Stones album, the fact there are no killer riffs therefore Keith doesn't really give a damn for this album leaves us with Mick, so it's a Mick album ( other than a few Keith tracks ) with Ronnie on it as a session musician.
Basically it's a Jagger/ Andrew Watts album with Keith and Ronnie contractually obligated to play on it abd promote it, I haven't heard Keith praise this album once, like he said he's just riding the wave now.
Got to hand it to Mick though, it's a good solo album after nearly 20 years of writers block, hey wait a minute maybe this is a Andrew Watts written album with a few of his Stones chums playing on it
Whatever it is it's good, but it isn't the Stones.
Oh yeah, Merry Christmas.
Do you want to start with all that BS again after a few weeks break?
Haha, anyway, Merry Christmas!
I remember hearing this is 2016.
I agree 100%. We may be in the minority on this board, but there are others who agree. As one critic wrote here
Watt did what he does and heavily processed and compressed Jagger’s vocals throughout the album so that the unique bottom end of his voice and his great sense of dynamics are totally missing. Pitch correction is constant and frequently obvious, eliminating the blues and R&B note-bending that is the hallmark of his style. Just enough essence of Jagger remains to satisfy the fans. Watt also mixed the vocals way up above the band, making Hackney Diamonds sound like a Jagger solo album. The signature Ronnie/Keith interplay is all but unheard because the guitars are so heavily compressed, distorted and equalized that they are hard to tell apart amid the grunge. Most importantly, the band’s unique, simultaneously ahead and behind the beat swing that made Jagger and Richards rock gods is quantized and “corrected” into that contemporary, generic stiff pound-and-thud.
This is not the band that I fell in love with. It's got sparks of brilliance here and there, and overall it is quite an accomplishment given their age. SSOH makes me tingle, but for the most part I'll pass.
Drew
I believe the band consisted of four original members, plus Taylor, at the time
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 21:33 by SomeGuy.
Dammit, they are going to have a number one Christmas week album. Two months after its release. Santa Claus is busy.. (or a fan of them too..)
Otherwise, if we look at both singles and album top five, it's only the Stones, Swift and Johan Strauss not doing Christmas stuff... As far as singles go, the streaming era makes it certain that the charts will be full of nothing but Christmas songs. Well, that's what people are listening now.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 22:10 by Doxa.
Let’s not forget Black and Blue. Several guitar players who is not in the band and even Billy singin. Can’ be a real Stones album
Yeah i hear you Drew, SSOH is something else as you say spine tinglingly good and for that and a few other tracks I'm pleased they made this album.
But if there's another one in the can i hope Steve Jordan produces it, but from what ive heard Andrew Watt had already produced the songs that didn’t make it on HD.
I find with this album a lot of people really like it that maybe don't usually like or buy Stones albums, it obviously appeals to more people and that was the intention.
Just like when you see a Stones show, it's geared towards casual fans, so you get the hit singles but that's not the whole story of the Stones they have so much more to offer than the hits.
I like that review, condensed, that's the perfect word for the sound of this album, the sound is squashed down, condensed it's restricted and feels artificial, maybe that's why i like it but don't love it.
A rolling stone gathers no moss.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
usetobesampeg
()
Date: December 20, 2023 04:19
Quote
rogerriffin
They will keep us happy till April 24, this live sounds really good, very good rehearsed and energized songs!
Cheers Roger!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 04:20 by usetobesampeg.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
Big Al
()
Date: December 20, 2023 10:11
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
Big AlLike you, I'm not entirely sure. However, considering the Stones can still sell-out stadiums in the States, it's less-than-stellar performance sale-wise is certainly nothing to do with the group's popularity there. Could be to do with the demographic that purchases 'rock albums'? I'm not sure where I'm going with that, exactly, but the Stones' genre(s) caters to more of a niche market, perhaps. In the States, anyway. Pop, latin-pop, country, hip-hop, etc; they're all vying for sales in the States. I can't speak for mainland Europe, but here in the U.K., the market is probably narrower. In other words: 'rock acts' in general, have a better chance of charting more highly and selling well in the U.K.Quote
treaclefingersQuote
MadMetaphoricalMax
The sales numbers tracking, since the sales are so good for this day and age, is great, the fact that the album may be the UK's Christmas no 1 is fantastic, another frickin' miracle no one would have anticipated.
In fact, I recall the absolute certainty with which a number of posters on here predicted that after a week in the charts it would drop into oblivion, and have no impact outside of the circle of deluded old saps who frequent iorr. Not so!!
The live tracks, however much tweaked, are a great listen, the album is shaping into one of their classics - every time I play it, I find I have to play the whole thing through - and it's been in the UK charts for almost two months, and maybe heading back to the top spot.
A Christmas miracle ....!
I'm not sure you could have found even one person that could have predicted this. You're right, it's nothing short of a Christmas miracle. The fact that in North America it's all but disappeared from the charts and in Europe you have a top ten hit (number one??? WTF?!) 2 months after it's release is startling.
One has to ask, "what's the difference, what went right in Europe and wrong in North America?"
.
BTW, how is it playing in South America, Asia & Australia by comparison?
I think someone pointed out earlier that until Blue & Lonesome, and since EXILE, Stones albums generally underperformed in the UK; in fact Blue and Lonesome outsold every Stones album but Tattoo You and Some Girls since Exile.
There's obviously an explanation, I just don't know what it is!
Well, as I have said before, here in the U.K., it does very much seem as if the Stones have undergone a definite renaissance in popularity. That, in my opinion, is the reasoning for their seeming rise in popularity and greatly-improved album-sales. It really does seem that there has been a change in the air, regarding how they’re perceived. Take the New Musical Express. (NME) from the about he mid-1970’s through to the early 00’s, they absolutely rinsed the Stones. Somewhere online, you may be able to come across their ‘review’ of the Stones’ Shepherd’s Bush Empire performance from 1999; it’s not pretty. In fact, as recently as the Licks Tour, they were, largely, unfavourable. Now, they absolutely adore the Stones. Maybe, it can partly be put down to the NME giving-up their mantle as the voice of contemporary rock and alternative, but it’s a wider happening. The Stones, on home soil, are just flat-out cherished. Long may it continue!
Edit: but why the newly-found appreciation and nostalgia? Perhaps, in part, it could be to do with the lack of a 'current' and meaningful music-scene in the U.K. Tjere hasn't been one here, in the U.K., since the mid-1990's.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 10:23 by Big Al.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
keefriffhards
()
Date: December 20, 2023 13:53
Reflecting on this album, played it in my car for a couple weeks until i put something else in the CD player, it's a good album but i doubt i will go back to it very often as it's not what i consider a Stones album.
That's not saying it's not good, just saying if i wanted that sound I'd listen to it from another band, as said before it will go on the back burner along with ABB.
That's not saying it's not good, just saying if i wanted that sound I'd listen to it from another band, as said before it will go on the back burner along with ABB.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
bobo
()
Date: December 20, 2023 14:12
Quote
keefriffhards
Reflecting on this album, played it in my car for a couple weeks until i put something else in the CD player, it's a good album but i doubt i will go back to it very often as it's not what i consider a Stones album.
That's not saying it's not good, just saying if i wanted that sound I'd listen to it from another band, as said before it will go on the back burner along with ABB.
Not considered a Stones album? I wish you well and a merry christmas
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
KeVvV2011
()
Date: December 20, 2023 14:35
Older music is listened to much more by young people in general in the streaming age. But the Stones have done a really amazing job in managing to have cross-generational appeal while being an ongoing band. It's quite a feat to be actively performing in your late 70s and still being perceived as cool by a significant portion of the younger generations. Who'd have thought, eh?Quote
Big Al
Well, as I have said before, here in the U.K., it does very much seem as if the Stones have undergone a definite renaissance in popularity. That, in my opinion, is the reasoning for their seeming rise in popularity and greatly-improved album-sales. It really does seem that there has been a change in the air, regarding how they’re perceived. Take the New Musical Express. (NME) from the about he mid-1970’s through to the early 00’s, they absolutely rinsed the Stones. Somewhere online, you may be able to come across their ‘review’ of the Stones’ Shepherd’s Bush Empire performance from 1999; it’s not pretty. In fact, as recently as the Licks Tour, they were, largely, unfavourable. Now, they absolutely adore the Stones. Maybe, it can partly be put down to the NME giving-up their mantle as the voice of contemporary rock and alternative, but it’s a wider happening. The Stones, on home soil, are just flat-out cherished. Long may it continue!
Edit: but why the newly-found appreciation and nostalgia? Perhaps, in part, it could be to do with the lack of a 'current' and meaningful music-scene in the U.K. Tjere hasn't been one here, in the U.K., since the mid-1990's.
They're not the only band who draws in younger fans, you'd be surprised to see how many young people attend Springsteen gigs in some countries for example. But they have retained/reclaimed a coolness factor that's bigger than that of other artists imo.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
keefriffhards
()
Date: December 20, 2023 15:49
Quote
boboQuote
keefriffhards
Reflecting on this album, played it in my car for a couple weeks until i put something else in the CD player, it's a good album but i doubt i will go back to it very often as it's not what i consider a Stones album.
That's not saying it's not good, just saying if i wanted that sound I'd listen to it from another band, as said before it will go on the back burner along with ABB.
Not considered a Stones album? I wish you well and a merry christmas
First off with only two original members left it's not a Stones album, the fact there are no killer riffs therefore Keith doesn't really give a damn for this album leaves us with Mick, so it's a Mick album ( other than a few Keith tracks ) with Ronnie on it as a session musician.
Basically it's a Jagger/ Andrew Watts album with Keith and Ronnie contractually obligated to play on it abd promote it, I haven't heard Keith praise this album once, like he said he's just riding the wave now.
Got to hand it to Mick though, it's a good solo album after nearly 20 years of writers block, hey wait a minute maybe this is a Andrew Watts written album with a few of his Stones chums playing on it
Whatever it is it's good, but it isn't the Stones.
Oh yeah, Merry Christmas.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
liddas
()
Date: December 20, 2023 16:19
This I don't get. A good album is a good album. If it is released by the stones, then it is a good Stones album.
C
C
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
MonkeyMan2000
()
Date: December 20, 2023 16:22
Quote
keefriffhardsQuote
boboQuote
keefriffhards
Reflecting on this album, played it in my car for a couple weeks until i put something else in the CD player, it's a good album but i doubt i will go back to it very often as it's not what i consider a Stones album.
That's not saying it's not good, just saying if i wanted that sound I'd listen to it from another band, as said before it will go on the back burner along with ABB.
Not considered a Stones album? I wish you well and a merry christmas
First off with only two original members left it's not a Stones album, the fact there are no killer riffs therefore Keith doesn't really give a damn for this album leaves us with Mick, so it's a Mick album ( other than a few Keith tracks ) with Ronnie on it as a session musician.
Basically it's a Jagger/ Andrew Watts album with Keith and Ronnie contractually obligated to play on it abd promote it, I haven't heard Keith praise this album once, like he said he's just riding the wave now.
Got to hand it to Mick though, it's a good solo album after nearly 20 years of writers block, hey wait a minute maybe this is a Andrew Watts written album with a few of his Stones chums playing on it
Whatever it is it's good, but it isn't the Stones.
Oh yeah, Merry Christmas.
Do you want to start with all that BS again after a few weeks break?
Haha, anyway, Merry Christmas!
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
stanlove
()
Date: December 20, 2023 16:46
Quote
DoxaQuote
treaclefingersQuote
Doxa
Europeans love the Stones. Stupid Americans do not.
But so what - there will be not world for any longer in 2025 - Trump and Putin will guarantee you that!
- Doxa
Doxa! It may be the holiday season, but no drunk posting!
So what. Let us bullshit now. Next year we all we will explode, as our sweet Trump will take the command as the "smart people" of US will love to have. There are people on this site that that have orgasms for that guy, go figure. For the rest of us, we now there is no tomorrow. Fascism is back here.
- Doxa
I remember hearing this is 2016.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
drewmaster
()
Date: December 20, 2023 17:41
Quote
keefriffhards
First off with only two original members left it's not a Stones album, the fact there are no killer riffs therefore Keith doesn't really give a damn for this album leaves us with Mick, so it's a Mick album ( other than a few Keith tracks ) with Ronnie on it as a session musician.
Basically it's a Jagger/ Andrew Watts album with Keith and Ronnie contractually obligated to play on it abd promote it, I haven't heard Keith praise this album once, like he said he's just riding the wave now.
Got to hand it to Mick though, it's a good solo album after nearly 20 years of writers block, hey wait a minute maybe this is a Andrew Watts written album with a few of his Stones chums playing on it
Whatever it is it's good, but it isn't the Stones.
Oh yeah, Merry Christmas.
I agree 100%. We may be in the minority on this board, but there are others who agree. As one critic wrote here
Watt did what he does and heavily processed and compressed Jagger’s vocals throughout the album so that the unique bottom end of his voice and his great sense of dynamics are totally missing. Pitch correction is constant and frequently obvious, eliminating the blues and R&B note-bending that is the hallmark of his style. Just enough essence of Jagger remains to satisfy the fans. Watt also mixed the vocals way up above the band, making Hackney Diamonds sound like a Jagger solo album. The signature Ronnie/Keith interplay is all but unheard because the guitars are so heavily compressed, distorted and equalized that they are hard to tell apart amid the grunge. Most importantly, the band’s unique, simultaneously ahead and behind the beat swing that made Jagger and Richards rock gods is quantized and “corrected” into that contemporary, generic stiff pound-and-thud.
This is not the band that I fell in love with. It's got sparks of brilliance here and there, and overall it is quite an accomplishment given their age. SSOH makes me tingle, but for the most part I'll pass.
Drew
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
MadMetaphoricalMax
()
Date: December 20, 2023 17:57
That review is striving to be authoritative, but it's an opinion that doesnt ring true to my ears when I put on the album. There's wonderful Ronnie Keith weaving, I don't hear jagger too high in the mix, and yes, it is 'produced' heavily, but it works so well, it;'s become an album I love, and I do hear and feel Keith all over it. To call it a Jagger solo album, as KeefRiffhards does, doesnt ring to true to me. And Ronnie is a Rolling Stone and he is in no wayt session musician but integral and at his very best on record here! But hey, that's also just my opinion. Merry Christmas....Quote
drewmasterQuote
keefriffhards
First off with only two original members left it's not a Stones album, the fact there are no killer riffs therefore Keith doesn't really give a damn for this album leaves us with Mick, so it's a Mick album ( other than a few Keith tracks ) with Ronnie on it as a session musician.
Basically it's a Jagger/ Andrew Watts album with Keith and Ronnie contractually obligated to play on it abd promote it, I haven't heard Keith praise this album once, like he said he's just riding the wave now.
Got to hand it to Mick though, it's a good solo album after nearly 20 years of writers block, hey wait a minute maybe this is a Andrew Watts written album with a few of his Stones chums playing on it
Whatever it is it's good, but it isn't the Stones.
Oh yeah, Merry Christmas.
I agree 100%. We may be in the minority on this board, but there are others who agree. As one critic wrote here
Watt did what he does and heavily processed and compressed Jagger’s vocals throughout the album so that the unique bottom end of his voice and his great sense of dynamics are totally missing. Pitch correction is constant and frequently obvious, eliminating the blues and R&B note-bending that is the hallmark of his style. Just enough essence of Jagger remains to satisfy the fans. Watt also mixed the vocals way up above the band, making Hackney Diamonds sound like a Jagger solo album. The signature Ronnie/Keith interplay is all but unheard because the guitars are so heavily compressed, distorted and equalized that they are hard to tell apart amid the grunge. Most importantly, the band’s unique, simultaneously ahead and behind the beat swing that made Jagger and Richards rock gods is quantized and “corrected” into that contemporary, generic stiff pound-and-thud.
This is not the band that I fell in love with. It's got sparks of brilliance here and there, and overall it is quite an accomplishment given their age. SSOH makes me tingle, but for the most part I'll pass.
Drew
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
SomeGuy
()
Date: December 20, 2023 19:43
Ronnie is the guy who replaced the guy who replaced Brian. Technically he is a Stone, as in: official band member.
But really, are all members of Lynyrd Skynyrd 'real' band members too? I believe none of the original members are still there, like in that other southern band, Molly Hatchet, same story. Or take Kiss, or Judas Priest with only the singer and bassist left in the band, or Uriah Heep, only the guitarist left.
I do think the record is rather great, but a point could be made about how this is a proper Rolling Stones album or not. It's just that it doesn't strike me as anything other than that. Which to me is a good thing because I didn't like what I heard on the tour from Charlie's replacement.
But really, are all members of Lynyrd Skynyrd 'real' band members too? I believe none of the original members are still there, like in that other southern band, Molly Hatchet, same story. Or take Kiss, or Judas Priest with only the singer and bassist left in the band, or Uriah Heep, only the guitarist left.
I do think the record is rather great, but a point could be made about how this is a proper Rolling Stones album or not. It's just that it doesn't strike me as anything other than that. Which to me is a good thing because I didn't like what I heard on the tour from Charlie's replacement.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: December 20, 2023 19:56
Interesting ... Exile is not a Stones album either it seems. No Brian - and Bill missing on many tracks. I need to revise my top 5 Stones album list!
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
georgelicks
()
Date: December 20, 2023 20:35
UK Midweek Update (Friday/Tuesday sales)
1 The Rolling Stones - Hackney Diamonds (12,272) [11,817 physicals, 204 downloads, 251 streaming]
2 Michael Bublé - Christmas (9,829)
3 Taylor Swift - 1989 (Taylor's Version) (8,162)
4 Cher - Christmas (5,729)
5 André Rieu & His Johann Strauss Orchestra - Jewels of Romance (5,249)
From Music Week:
"Wham! continue to target this year’s Christmas No.1 with Last Christmas, which has accumulated 39,669 sales so far this week.
Sam Ryder holds second place with You’re Christmas To Me, which has 35,350 sales so far, whilst Mariah Carey’s All I Want For Christmas Is You (31,510 sales), Noah Kahan’s Stick Season (27,721 sales) and Ed Sheeran and Elton John’s Merry Christmas (27,302 sales) round off the Top 5.
Meanwhile, the Rolling Stones are on the way to having this year's official Christmas No.1 album with Hackney Diamonds, which has 12,272 sales so far this week. The record is boosted significantly by its physical release, which accounts for 11,817 sales, whilst streams account for 251 units and downloads account for 204.
Michael Bublé sits at No.2 with Christmas, which has 9,829 sales so far, whilst Taylor Swift’s 1989 (Taylor’s Version) (8,162 sales), Cher’s Christmas (5,729 sales) and Jewels Of Romance (5,249 sales) by André Rieu and the Johann Strauss Orchestra complete the Top 5."
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 20:37 by georgelicks.
1 The Rolling Stones - Hackney Diamonds (12,272) [11,817 physicals, 204 downloads, 251 streaming]
2 Michael Bublé - Christmas (9,829)
3 Taylor Swift - 1989 (Taylor's Version) (8,162)
4 Cher - Christmas (5,729)
5 André Rieu & His Johann Strauss Orchestra - Jewels of Romance (5,249)
From Music Week:
"Wham! continue to target this year’s Christmas No.1 with Last Christmas, which has accumulated 39,669 sales so far this week.
Sam Ryder holds second place with You’re Christmas To Me, which has 35,350 sales so far, whilst Mariah Carey’s All I Want For Christmas Is You (31,510 sales), Noah Kahan’s Stick Season (27,721 sales) and Ed Sheeran and Elton John’s Merry Christmas (27,302 sales) round off the Top 5.
Meanwhile, the Rolling Stones are on the way to having this year's official Christmas No.1 album with Hackney Diamonds, which has 12,272 sales so far this week. The record is boosted significantly by its physical release, which accounts for 11,817 sales, whilst streams account for 251 units and downloads account for 204.
Michael Bublé sits at No.2 with Christmas, which has 9,829 sales so far, whilst Taylor Swift’s 1989 (Taylor’s Version) (8,162 sales), Cher’s Christmas (5,729 sales) and Jewels Of Romance (5,249 sales) by André Rieu and the Johann Strauss Orchestra complete the Top 5."
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 20:37 by georgelicks.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
SomeGuy
()
Date: December 20, 2023 20:56
Quote
LeonidP
Interesting ... Exile is not a Stones album either it seems. No Brian - and Bill missing on many tracks. I need to revise my top 5 Stones album list!
I believe the band consisted of four original members, plus Taylor, at the time
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 21:33 by SomeGuy.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: December 20, 2023 22:07
Quote
georgelicks
UK Midweek Update (Friday/Tuesday sales)
1 The Rolling Stones - Hackney Diamonds (12,272) [11,817 physicals, 204 downloads, 251 streaming]
2 Michael Bublé - Christmas (9,829)
3 Taylor Swift - 1989 (Taylor's Version) (8,162)
4 Cher - Christmas (5,729)
5 André Rieu & His Johann Strauss Orchestra - Jewels of Romance (5,249)
From Music Week:
"Wham! continue to target this year’s Christmas No.1 with Last Christmas, which has accumulated 39,669 sales so far this week.
Sam Ryder holds second place with You’re Christmas To Me, which has 35,350 sales so far, whilst Mariah Carey’s All I Want For Christmas Is You (31,510 sales), Noah Kahan’s Stick Season (27,721 sales) and Ed Sheeran and Elton John’s Merry Christmas (27,302 sales) round off the Top 5.
Meanwhile, the Rolling Stones are on the way to having this year's official Christmas No.1 album with Hackney Diamonds, which has 12,272 sales so far this week. The record is boosted significantly by its physical release, which accounts for 11,817 sales, whilst streams account for 251 units and downloads account for 204.
Michael Bublé sits at No.2 with Christmas, which has 9,829 sales so far, whilst Taylor Swift’s 1989 (Taylor’s Version) (8,162 sales), Cher’s Christmas (5,729 sales) and Jewels Of Romance (5,249 sales) by André Rieu and the Johann Strauss Orchestra complete the Top 5."
Dammit, they are going to have a number one Christmas week album. Two months after its release. Santa Claus is busy.. (or a fan of them too..)
Otherwise, if we look at both singles and album top five, it's only the Stones, Swift and Johan Strauss not doing Christmas stuff... As far as singles go, the streaming era makes it certain that the charts will be full of nothing but Christmas songs. Well, that's what people are listening now.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-12-20 22:10 by Doxa.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
bobo
()
Date: December 20, 2023 22:41
Quote
LeonidP
Interesting ... Exile is not a Stones album either it seems. No Brian - and Bill missing on many tracks. I need to revise my top 5 Stones album list!
Let’s not forget Black and Blue. Several guitar players who is not in the band and even Billy singin. Can’ be a real Stones album
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
Peachykindagirl
()
Date: December 20, 2023 23:31
No killer riffs?? Keith kills it on Whole Wide World!!!
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
Peachykindagirl
()
Date: December 20, 2023 23:39
Pitch correction is constant and frequently obvious, eliminating the blues and R&B note-bending that is the hallmark of his style.
No way!! No auto tuning on Depending On You. Listen to the line “now I’m just a story you tell”. Maybe the person that posted that has no intonation skills
No way!! No auto tuning on Depending On You. Listen to the line “now I’m just a story you tell”. Maybe the person that posted that has no intonation skills
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
HardRiffin
()
Date: December 21, 2023 00:53
Quote
georgelicks
UK Midweek Update (Friday/Tuesday sales)
1 The Rolling Stones - Hackney Diamonds (12,272) [11,817 physicals, 204 downloads, 251 streaming]
2 Michael Bublé - Christmas (9,829)
3 Taylor Swift - 1989 (Taylor's Version) (8,162)
4 Cher - Christmas (5,729)
5 André Rieu & His Johann Strauss Orchestra - Jewels of Romance (5,249)
From Music Week:
"Wham! continue to target this year’s Christmas No.1 with Last Christmas, which has accumulated 39,669 sales so far this week.
Sam Ryder holds second place with You’re Christmas To Me, which has 35,350 sales so far, whilst Mariah Carey’s All I Want For Christmas Is You (31,510 sales), Noah Kahan’s Stick Season (27,721 sales) and Ed Sheeran and Elton John’s Merry Christmas (27,302 sales) round off the Top 5.
Meanwhile, the Rolling Stones are on the way to having this year's official Christmas No.1 album with Hackney Diamonds, which has 12,272 sales so far this week. The record is boosted significantly by its physical release, which accounts for 11,817 sales, whilst streams account for 251 units and downloads account for 204.
Michael Bublé sits at No.2 with Christmas, which has 9,829 sales so far, whilst Taylor Swift’s 1989 (Taylor’s Version) (8,162 sales), Cher’s Christmas (5,729 sales) and Jewels Of Romance (5,249 sales) by André Rieu and the Johann Strauss Orchestra complete the Top 5."
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
GJV
()
Date: December 21, 2023 01:24
Oh! Nooo! Not Adre Rieu! Even in other countries this fellow Dutchman is terrorizing people's tastes with his obligatory shitty music, with a course: how do I kill beautiful classical music and bring it to the mass, who can shout along to it.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
keefriffhards
()
Date: December 21, 2023 01:42
Quote
drewmasterQuote
keefriffhards
First off with only two original members left it's not a Stones album, the fact there are no killer riffs therefore Keith doesn't really give a damn for this album leaves us with Mick, so it's a Mick album ( other than a few Keith tracks ) with Ronnie on it as a session musician.
Basically it's a Jagger/ Andrew Watts album with Keith and Ronnie contractually obligated to play on it abd promote it, I haven't heard Keith praise this album once, like he said he's just riding the wave now.
Got to hand it to Mick though, it's a good solo album after nearly 20 years of writers block, hey wait a minute maybe this is a Andrew Watts written album with a few of his Stones chums playing on it
Whatever it is it's good, but it isn't the Stones.
Oh yeah, Merry Christmas.
I agree 100%. We may be in the minority on this board, but there are others who agree. As one critic wrote here
Watt did what he does and heavily processed and compressed Jagger’s vocals throughout the album so that the unique bottom end of his voice and his great sense of dynamics are totally missing. Pitch correction is constant and frequently obvious, eliminating the blues and R&B note-bending that is the hallmark of his style. Just enough essence of Jagger remains to satisfy the fans. Watt also mixed the vocals way up above the band, making Hackney Diamonds sound like a Jagger solo album. The signature Ronnie/Keith interplay is all but unheard because the guitars are so heavily compressed, distorted and equalized that they are hard to tell apart amid the grunge. Most importantly, the band’s unique, simultaneously ahead and behind the beat swing that made Jagger and Richards rock gods is quantized and “corrected” into that contemporary, generic stiff pound-and-thud.
This is not the band that I fell in love with. It's got sparks of brilliance here and there, and overall it is quite an accomplishment given their age. SSOH makes me tingle, but for the most part I'll pass.
Drew
Yeah i hear you Drew, SSOH is something else as you say spine tinglingly good and for that and a few other tracks I'm pleased they made this album.
But if there's another one in the can i hope Steve Jordan produces it, but from what ive heard Andrew Watt had already produced the songs that didn’t make it on HD.
I find with this album a lot of people really like it that maybe don't usually like or buy Stones albums, it obviously appeals to more people and that was the intention.
Just like when you see a Stones show, it's geared towards casual fans, so you get the hit singles but that's not the whole story of the Stones they have so much more to offer than the hits.
I like that review, condensed, that's the perfect word for the sound of this album, the sound is squashed down, condensed it's restricted and feels artificial, maybe that's why i like it but don't love it.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
VoodooLounge13
()
Date: December 21, 2023 03:31
Man I am the minority of the minority around here! LOL HD underwhelms AND SSOH is the weakest track to me!!! LOL Can't get anymore not with the masses than that! Clearly Chanel was brought onboard to sing Gaga's part on tour. I do look forward to having her at the shows!!!!! At least BS will be back in one form!!! >
< 
< Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
liddas
()
Date: December 21, 2023 12:10
It is easier to find cross-party consensus in the Italian parliament than in a group of Stones' fans.
There is a reason for this.
Music fans in general don't like changes, and the Stones changed continuously along their whole career, following different trends, replacing key members, compromising between opposites, including in the mix new instruments, technologies etc.
As a result we have fans of the BJ era, of the MT era, of the RW era, of the BW era, of the R&B era, of the pop era, etc. etc.
How can HD make an exception?
In fact, given the above premises, I find it incredible that so many here on IORR love the album!
C
There is a reason for this.
Music fans in general don't like changes, and the Stones changed continuously along their whole career, following different trends, replacing key members, compromising between opposites, including in the mix new instruments, technologies etc.
As a result we have fans of the BJ era, of the MT era, of the RW era, of the BW era, of the R&B era, of the pop era, etc. etc.
How can HD make an exception?
In fact, given the above premises, I find it incredible that so many here on IORR love the album!
C
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: December 21, 2023 12:15
Only wet babies like change ..........
ROCKMAN
ROCKMAN
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: December 21, 2023 12:44
At least we have an album to discuss. Who would have thought that after such a long time? And, all in all, I would say the album is better than expected.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: December 21, 2023 12:59
well I'm still spinning it a lot two months on...and still hearing new things in it to love...so that has to be some proof of the pudding.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
StonedRambler
()
Date: December 21, 2023 16:06
If you don't like that HD sounds like an album from 2023 go and listen to Exile On Main Street
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: December 21, 2023 16:55
That sums up the problem...
...in the modern sanitised musical world, you just couldn't get away with Exile on Main Street.
A great shame...but there it is.
...in the modern sanitised musical world, you just couldn't get away with Exile on Main Street.
A great shame...but there it is.
Re: Hackney Diamonds - Album Talk
Posted by:
jahisnotdead
()
Date: December 21, 2023 17:34
Quote
Rockman
Only wet babies like change ..........
A rolling stone gathers no moss.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
babyblue , chpoutre , falo01 , Irix , jason8903 , Justjon , keefmick , philrock90 , poti , Richard from Canada , spidey39 , Stilllife09 , StonedRambler , TumblinDice76 , wachterc , waterrats
Guests:
2046
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10