Quote
dedospegajosos

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
dedospegajosos

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Rockman


Classic Rock album of 2023 ....

Thanks Rockman. Certainly a "fair and objective" review.

Yeah, it reminds me of the time when the The Force Awakens came out, every critic said it was the best star wars movie since Some Girls, sorry, The Empire Strikes Back..

A weak quip to be sure, but I salute you on the effort of your "campaign". A little "obsessive-compulsive" but certainly unwaivering.

ha ha ha that's funny, can we talk about the album now instead of me treacle? ?

Indeed it was funny. You brought Star Wars sequels into the conversation!

May the stones be with you!

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
dedospegajosos

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
dedospegajosos

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Rockman


Classic Rock album of 2023 ....

Thanks Rockman. Certainly a "fair and objective" review.

Yeah, it reminds me of the time when the The Force Awakens came out, every critic said it was the best star wars movie since Some Girls, sorry, The Empire Strikes Back..

A weak quip to be sure, but I salute you on the effort of your "campaign". A little "obsessive-compulsive" but certainly unwaivering.

ha ha ha that's funny, can we talk about the album now instead of me treacle? ?

Indeed it was funny. You brought Star Wars sequels into the conversation!

May the stones be with you!

May I say, this is a damn fine sentence! May the Stones be with us all..ALWAYS!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2024-04-15 21:09 by dedospegajosos.

In my opinion there are no objective reviews either. Obviously in other sectors yes, doctors are not objective, they give a scientific opinion, which is a very different thing. This doesn't exist in music, it's based on sensations, listening, etc. but then there is the musical sensitivity of the listener not to mention the context. Some songs and albums to which we are linked find explanation precisely in the context in which the album was released, we were young or it reminds us of good moments and what we like seems magical to us.

To me reviews can be useful to discover new music.

If I already have the record and I like it, I don't bother reading them, unless they are informative at some level.

It happens, at time, that a good review of a record I considered bad males me want to give it a second chance. It even happened that I changed my mind!

The reverse never occurred and a bad review won't affect my enjoyment.

That is to say, no matter what Gas writes, I still love Dirty Work!


C



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-04-16 19:30 by liddas.

Quote
liddas
To me reviews can be useful to discover new music.

If I already have the record and I like it, I don't bother reading them, unless they are informative at some level.

It happens, at time, that a good review of a record I considered bad males me want to give it a second chance. It even happened that I changed my mind!

The reverse never occurred and a bad review won't affect my enjoyment.

That is to say, no matter what Gas writes, I still love Dirty Work!


C

I love UNDERCOVER and EMOTIONAL RESCUE - but those aren't heralded as their worst album! Tossed off about, yes, but nowhere near as bad!

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
liddas
To me reviews can be useful to discover new music.

If I already have the record and I like it, I don't bother reading them, unless they are informative at some level.

It happens, at time, that a good review of a record I considered bad males me want to give it a second chance. It even happened that I changed my mind!

The reverse never occurred and a bad review won't affect my enjoyment.

That is to say, no matter what Gas writes, I still love Dirty Work!


C

I love UNDERCOVER and EMOTIONAL RESCUE - but those aren't heralded as their worst album! Tossed off about, yes, but nowhere near as bad!

I'm sure it was unintentional, but saying "near as bad" would give one the impression they are some level of bad, with which I'm sure you would disagree.

I think Emotional Rescue is a 4/5 stars and Undercover a 4.5/5 stars. They are both just awesome albums, notwithstanding the band was almost 20 years in before the first of them came out.

In my mind the first real misstep was Dirty Work, and we know all the reasons for that. And after DW, none of the albums are bad, just varying levels of goodness.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
liddas
To me reviews can be useful to discover new music.

If I already have the record and I like it, I don't bother reading them, unless they are informative at some level.

It happens, at time, that a good review of a record I considered bad males me want to give it a second chance. It even happened that I changed my mind!

The reverse never occurred and a bad review won't affect my enjoyment.

That is to say, no matter what Gas writes, I still love Dirty Work!


C

I love UNDERCOVER and EMOTIONAL RESCUE - but those aren't heralded as their worst album! Tossed off about, yes, but nowhere near as bad!

I'm sure it was unintentional, but saying "near as bad" would give one the impression they are some level of bad, with which I'm sure you would disagree.

I think Emotional Rescue is a 4/5 stars and Undercover a 4.5/5 stars. They are both just awesome albums, notwithstanding the band was almost 20 years in before the first of them came out.

In my mind the first real misstep was Dirty Work, and we know all the reasons for that. And after DW, none of the albums are bad, just varying levels of goodness.

Critically, the music writers, and the band members, have said whatever about - it has to be taken with a shaker of salt: there's what Ronnie says and then there's what Mick and Keith say (about UNDERCOVER):

I think Mick has done an incredible job. I think he's taken quite a leap forward, lyric-wise, on this album.

- Keith Richards, 1983

Yeah, I liked (Undercover). It didn't sell perhaps as much as I would have liked, though it sold over 2 million copies - I shouldn't really complain. There was plenty of stuff on it that was mine: Undercover, She Was Hot. Keith contributed to all that stuff. Some was completely his. But it wasn't like I was frustrated with it because it wasn't my material.

- Mick Jagger, 1984

Not a very special record.

- Mick Jagger, 1995

In terms of the musical peaks on that album, there really aren't that many. That was definitely a time of disruption - and not one that I refer to very often.

- Ron Wood, 2003

[timeisonourside.com]

Yet they've played UOTN, She Was Hot and Wanna Hold You over the years.


ER - nowhere near that, in fact, except for 2013, nothing since the BANG tour.

They absolutely lost their way with DIRTY WORK. Harlem Shuffle aside, it's brutally bad.


I was really looking forward to doing (the album). I mean the fact was that it was really a bit long in the making. And it wasn't always that great fun but I think the actual album is really good.

- Mick Jagger, March 1986


The album wasn't that good. It was OKAY. It certainly wasn't a great Rolling Stones album. The feeling inside the band was very bad, too. The relationships were terrible. The health was diabolical. I wasn't in particularly good shape. The rest of the band, they couldn't walk across the Champs Elysées, much less go on the road.

- Mick Jagger, 1989


(It's n)ot special.

- Mick Jagger, 1995



(The '80s was a d)ifficult period... There's a couple of good things on Dirty Work.

- Keith Richards, July 2002



[timeisonourside.com]

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
liddas
To me reviews can be useful to discover new music.

If I already have the record and I like it, I don't bother reading them, unless they are informative at some level.

It happens, at time, that a good review of a record I considered bad males me want to give it a second chance. It even happened that I changed my mind!

The reverse never occurred and a bad review won't affect my enjoyment.

That is to say, no matter what Gas writes, I still love Dirty Work!


C

I love UNDERCOVER and EMOTIONAL RESCUE - but those aren't heralded as their worst album! Tossed off about, yes, but nowhere near as bad!

I'm sure it was unintentional, but saying "near as bad" would give one the impression they are some level of bad, with which I'm sure you would disagree.

I think Emotional Rescue is a 4/5 stars and Undercover a 4.5/5 stars. They are both just awesome albums, notwithstanding the band was almost 20 years in before the first of them came out.

In my mind the first real misstep was Dirty Work, and we know all the reasons for that. And after DW, none of the albums are bad, just varying levels of goodness.

Critically, the music writers, and the band members, have said whatever about - it has to be taken with a shaker of salt: there's what Ronnie says and then there's what Mick and Keith say (about UNDERCOVER):

I think Mick has done an incredible job. I think he's taken quite a leap forward, lyric-wise, on this album.

- Keith Richards, 1983

Yeah, I liked (Undercover). It didn't sell perhaps as much as I would have liked, though it sold over 2 million copies - I shouldn't really complain. There was plenty of stuff on it that was mine: Undercover, She Was Hot. Keith contributed to all that stuff. Some was completely his. But it wasn't like I was frustrated with it because it wasn't my material.

- Mick Jagger, 1984

Not a very special record.

- Mick Jagger, 1995

In terms of the musical peaks on that album, there really aren't that many. That was definitely a time of disruption - and not one that I refer to very often.

- Ron Wood, 2003

[timeisonourside.com]

Yet they've played UOTN, She Was Hot and Wanna Hold You over the years.


ER - nowhere near that, in fact, except for 2013, nothing since the BANG tour.

They absolutely lost their way with DIRTY WORK. Harlem Shuffle aside, it's brutally bad.


I was really looking forward to doing (the album). I mean the fact was that it was really a bit long in the making. And it wasn't always that great fun but I think the actual album is really good.

- Mick Jagger, March 1986


The album wasn't that good. It was OKAY. It certainly wasn't a great Rolling Stones album. The feeling inside the band was very bad, too. The relationships were terrible. The health was diabolical. I wasn't in particularly good shape. The rest of the band, they couldn't walk across the Champs Elysées, much less go on the road.

- Mick Jagger, 1989


(It's n)ot special.

- Mick Jagger, 1995



(The '80s was a d)ifficult period... There's a couple of good things on Dirty Work.

- Keith Richards, July 2002



[timeisonourside.com]

They're a funny lot. Does Mick like Exile on Main Street yet?

Quote
treaclefingers
[
...They're a funny lot. Does Mick like Exile on Main Street yet?

They most certainly are.

I think Mick is perhaps slowly beginning to value past achievements a little more.

He's always been all about now and tomorrow, which has been a great driving force...

..but now , at his age, he's maybe starting to see that the future and the legacy are perhaps one and the same thing.

Edited to add

FWIW, the one redeeming feature of DW is that it has some fantastic guitar playing .



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-04-18 09:56 by Spud.

Quote
Spud

Quote
treaclefingers
[
...They're a funny lot. Does Mick like Exile on Main Street yet?

They most certainly are.

I think Mick is perhaps slowly beginning to value past achievements a little more.

He's always been all about now and tomorrow, which has been a great driving force...

..but now , at his age, he's maybe starting to see that the future and the legacy are perhaps one and the same thing.

Edited to add

FWIW, the one redeeming feature of DW is that it has some fantastic guitar playing .

Jimmy Page is blushing a little, but thanks you.

For me the first misstep was IORR and it’s hit or miss from there with more misses than hits until Voodoo.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Spud

Quote
treaclefingers
[
...They're a funny lot. Does Mick like Exile on Main Street yet?

They most certainly are.

I think Mick is perhaps slowly beginning to value past achievements a little more.

He's always been all about now and tomorrow, which has been a great driving force...

..but now , at his age, he's maybe starting to see that the future and the legacy are perhaps one and the same thing.

Edited to add

FWIW, the one redeeming feature of DW is that it has some fantastic guitar playing .

Jimmy Page is blushing a little, but thanks you.

Suppose I asked for that . Should have added... and not just from J.P.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
liddas
To me reviews can be useful to discover new music.

If I already have the record and I like it, I don't bother reading them, unless they are informative at some level.

It happens, at time, that a good review of a record I considered bad males me want to give it a second chance. It even happened that I changed my mind!

The reverse never occurred and a bad review won't affect my enjoyment.

That is to say, no matter what Gas writes, I still love Dirty Work!


C

I love UNDERCOVER and EMOTIONAL RESCUE - but those aren't heralded as their worst album! Tossed off about, yes, but nowhere near as bad!

I'm sure it was unintentional, but saying "near as bad" would give one the impression they are some level of bad, with which I'm sure you would disagree.

I think Emotional Rescue is a 4/5 stars and Undercover a 4.5/5 stars. They are both just awesome albums, notwithstanding the band was almost 20 years in before the first of them came out.

In my mind the first real misstep was Dirty Work, and we know all the reasons for that. And after DW, none of the albums are bad, just varying levels of goodness.

Critically speaking. Of course ER and U are excellent albums - in different ways than The Big Four + Two.

Yes, since the 1986 disaster, of the four pre-HD, I still find BRIDGES to be the most interesting. As with all four albums, there are great songs, good songs, so so songs and bad songs (not even B-side worthy tunes).

Whatever. With possible exception to STEEL WHEELS, they've all been way too long. So... whatever. For some people BLACK AND BLUE is too short.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
liddas
To me reviews can be useful to discover new music.

If I already have the record and I like it, I don't bother reading them, unless they are informative at some level.

It happens, at time, that a good review of a record I considered bad males me want to give it a second chance. It even happened that I changed my mind!

The reverse never occurred and a bad review won't affect my enjoyment.

That is to say, no matter what Gas writes, I still love Dirty Work!


C

I love UNDERCOVER and EMOTIONAL RESCUE - but those aren't heralded as their worst album! Tossed off about, yes, but nowhere near as bad!

I'm sure it was unintentional, but saying "near as bad" would give one the impression they are some level of bad, with which I'm sure you would disagree.

I think Emotional Rescue is a 4/5 stars and Undercover a 4.5/5 stars. They are both just awesome albums, notwithstanding the band was almost 20 years in before the first of them came out.

In my mind the first real misstep was Dirty Work, and we know all the reasons for that. And after DW, none of the albums are bad, just varying levels of goodness.

By replacing the pretty lightweight Send It To Me and Indian Girl with Claudine and We Had It All plus Think I'm Going Mad ER could have been a 5/5 stars album.

A combination of the best Undercover and Dirty Work tracks could have been a 5/5 stars album.

Same with Voodoo Lounge - replacing some lame ducks with the best songs from Main Offender and Wandering Spirit could have turned this into a 5/5 stars album.

For me, in terms of true greatness these albums are all missed opportunities.

Gave most of it another listen today and it’s the same. Just not aging well. Other than WWW, MIU, LBTS, and the far too short TMS the album is forgettable. For me it’s second shelf quality with ER, U, IORR. Albums I know of but rarely spin. I know TY was a collection of leftovers but my God they went from that to U and folks round here love it!! For me it must have been what everyone felt about GHS after what had preceded it, but GHS is horribly underrated and better than some - most - of the Big 4 IMHO.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-04-20 23:38 by VoodooLounge13.

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
liddas
To me reviews can be useful to discover new music.

If I already have the record and I like it, I don't bother reading them, unless they are informative at some level.

It happens, at time, that a good review of a record I considered bad males me want to give it a second chance. It even happened that I changed my mind!

The reverse never occurred and a bad review won't affect my enjoyment.

That is to say, no matter what Gas writes, I still love Dirty Work!


C

I love UNDERCOVER and EMOTIONAL RESCUE - but those aren't heralded as their worst album! Tossed off about, yes, but nowhere near as bad!

I'm sure it was unintentional, but saying "near as bad" would give one the impression they are some level of bad, with which I'm sure you would disagree.

I think Emotional Rescue is a 4/5 stars and Undercover a 4.5/5 stars. They are both just awesome albums, notwithstanding the band was almost 20 years in before the first of them came out.

In my mind the first real misstep was Dirty Work, and we know all the reasons for that. And after DW, none of the albums are bad, just varying levels of goodness.

By replacing the pretty lightweight Send It To Me and Indian Girl with Claudine and We Had It All plus Think I'm Going Mad ER could have been a 5/5 stars album.

A combination of the best Undercover and Dirty Work tracks could have been a 5/5 stars album.

Same with Voodoo Lounge - replacing some lame ducks with the best songs from Main Offender and Wandering Spirit could have turned this into a 5/5 stars album.

For me, in terms of true greatness these albums are all missed opportunities.

I agree with most of what you say, though combining the best of Undercover and DW essentially means just "adding" OHTTBody to Undercover.

What you are showing though is how great some of the later material actually is, and with some better sequencing and choices of their own material, these could all have been bulletproof, like what Hackney Diamonds actually is.

Quote
VoodooLounge13
Gave most of it another listen today and it’s the same. Just not aging well. Other than WWW, MIU, LBTS, and the far too short TMS the album is forgettable. For me it’s second shelf quality with ER, U, IORR. Albums I know of but rarely spin. I know TY was a collection of leftovers but my God they went from that to U and folks round here love it!! For me it must have been what everyone felt about GHS after what had preceded it, but GHS is horribly u serrated and better than some - most - of the Big 4 IMHO.

Well...you like a third of the songs, for most albums (by other artists), that's a win.

Plus second tier Stones is better than most tier anything else.

PLUS, the albums you put them on par with are awesome. There's more to life than Voodoo Lounge!

I think I can now say I like HD better than U, which was my favourite post-Tattoo You.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-04-20 21:36 by treaclefingers.

Absolutely treacle!! VL isn’t the be all end all. You know what it is?? I’ve been trying to come up with it cuz I just IDK I lack the excitement I usually have for the Stones with new music a new tour. And so far as I can tell I think it’s Charlie’s passing. None of it seems to have the same appeal anymore. And to know an album with Charlie drum I g was shelved cuz it was only going to be mediocre is gut wrenching. I’d rather have a mediocre album with Charlie than anything without him. They can be The Stones if they want but for me they’re certainly not Rolli g anymore. And tho I’m going to Foxboro, I fully expect it to be my final show. Course I’d said that about Nashville in ‘19!!! But it’s just now t the same. And I’m sorry but for me the new album lacks character bite the Stones sound. Depth feeling emotion. It’s a sterile as a hospital ER. I blame Mick for the lack of output over these long 18 years and it was never going to live up to the hype (Chinese Democracy anyone!?) but to me there’s just so many other albums and artists to listen to that I find far more intriguing these days. Have I reached the end of the Stones? No I don’t think so but certainly there’s something not the same for me. And the lack of Charlie is all I can come up.

HD would have made a good Maxi CD Single. Can’t say EP cuz only 4 songs. Or can ya???

We could toss in Angry to make it an EP tho I think it’s not quite as good as the others I mentioned.

"For me the new album lacks character bite the Stones sound. Depth feeling emotion. It’s a sterile as a hospital ER"

For me, it is the exact opposite. So interesting .. I find it packed with bite, weight, feeling, replete with riffs of character and vintage, stronger vocals from Mick than I've heard on record for quite a few records, strong arrangements and lovely detailing - each to our own.
Blasted it out while prepping a good hot chilli last night. I can still connect to the thrill I had when I first heard the bloody thing.
s
Each to our own - and I'll raise a glas to that!

Wish I was in America, with tix. But I'll be watching from afar....

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
liddas
To me reviews can be useful to discover new music.

If I already have the record and I like it, I don't bother reading them, unless they are informative at some level.

It happens, at time, that a good review of a record I considered bad males me want to give it a second chance. It even happened that I changed my mind!

The reverse never occurred and a bad review won't affect my enjoyment.

That is to say, no matter what Gas writes, I still love Dirty Work!


C

I love UNDERCOVER and EMOTIONAL RESCUE - but those aren't heralded as their worst album! Tossed off about, yes, but nowhere near as bad!

I'm sure it was unintentional, but saying "near as bad" would give one the impression they are some level of bad, with which I'm sure you would disagree.

I think Emotional Rescue is a 4/5 stars and Undercover a 4.5/5 stars. They are both just awesome albums, notwithstanding the band was almost 20 years in before the first of them came out.

In my mind the first real misstep was Dirty Work, and we know all the reasons for that. And after DW, none of the albums are bad, just varying levels of goodness.

By replacing the pretty lightweight Send It To Me and Indian Girl with Claudine and We Had It All plus Think I'm Going Mad ER could have been a 5/5 stars album.

A combination of the best Undercover and Dirty Work tracks could have been a 5/5 stars album.

Same with Voodoo Lounge - replacing some lame ducks with the best songs from Main Offender and Wandering Spirit could have turned this into a 5/5 stars album.

For me, in terms of true greatness these albums are all missed opportunities.

I agree with most of what you say, though combining the best of Undercover and DW essentially means just "adding" OHTTBody to Undercover.

What you are showing though is how great some of the later material actually is, and with some better sequencing and choices of their own material, these could all have been bulletproof, like what Hackney Diamonds actually is.

Of course tastes are different, but for me it would mean replacing Feel On Baby, Too Much Blood, All The Way Down and It Must Be Hell with OHTTB, Harlem Shuffle, Had It With You and Too Rude.

Same goes for ABB - just imagine Old Habits Die Hard instead of the absymal Streets Of Love, throw out Driving Too Fast, Dangerous Beauty, Sweet NC, Look What The Cat dragged In, Infamy and add Under The Radar and Jagger's "Blue" could have turned this into a 5/5 stars album without any skipworthy tracks, not unlike HD.

Dreamworld, of course, but at least with HD quality control was actually back in action - a coherent album without any skipworthy tracks, filled with great songs, riffs, hooks, melodies and interesting arrangements, or just like MadMetaphoricalMax perfectly put it above: "...packed with bite, weight, feeling, replete with riffs of character and vintage, stronger vocals from Mick than I've heard on record for quite a few records, strong arrangements and lovely detailing".

What more can one ask for? I just don't hear what the naysayers claim they miss and I just don't understand what more these people actually expected.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-04-21 17:04 by retired_dog.

Hmm... Treacle and R-Dog (doesn't that sound like a rap artist), you have a way lighter way to give stars than I do (of course, the context matters), but your thought experiments are interesting. I don't quite accept the 5/5 stars outcome, but I think what is important to notice is that the greatness, at least the potentiality of it, has been always there, no matter how much certain periods or albums do not quite sound like that or are bashed. That is to say that as song-writers Jagger/Richards have never been really out of it. But I have something else also to say, but I leave it later.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-04-21 17:32 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa
Hmm... Treacle and R-Dog (doesn't that sound like a rap artist), you have a way lighter way to give stars than I do (of course, the context matters), but your thought experiments are interesting. I don't quite accept the 5/5 stars outcome, but I think what is important to notice is that the greatness, at least the potentiality of it, has been always there, no matter how much certain periods or albums do not quite sound like that or are bashed. That is to say that as song-writers Jagger/Richards have never been really out of it. But I have something else also to say, but I leave it later.

- Doxa

Doxa, you must realize by now that being on a fan site by it's very nature means that all our comments are varying levels of hyperbolic!

BTW, Retired Dog and my rap name is actually Tre-Doggie.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
liddas
To me reviews can be useful to discover new music.

If I already have the record and I like it, I don't bother reading them, unless they are informative at some level.

It happens, at time, that a good review of a record I considered bad males me want to give it a second chance. It even happened that I changed my mind!

The reverse never occurred and a bad review won't affect my enjoyment.

That is to say, no matter what Gas writes, I still love Dirty Work!


C

I love UNDERCOVER and EMOTIONAL RESCUE - but those aren't heralded as their worst album! Tossed off about, yes, but nowhere near as bad!

I'm sure it was unintentional, but saying "near as bad" would give one the impression they are some level of bad, with which I'm sure you would disagree.

I think Emotional Rescue is a 4/5 stars and Undercover a 4.5/5 stars. They are both just awesome albums, notwithstanding the band was almost 20 years in before the first of them came out.

In my mind the first real misstep was Dirty Work, and we know all the reasons for that. And after DW, none of the albums are bad, just varying levels of goodness.

Critically, the music writers, and the band members, have said whatever about - it has to be taken with a shaker of salt: there's what Ronnie says and then there's what Mick and Keith say (about UNDERCOVER):

I think Mick has done an incredible job. I think he's taken quite a leap forward, lyric-wise, on this album.

- Keith Richards, 1983

Yeah, I liked (Undercover). It didn't sell perhaps as much as I would have liked, though it sold over 2 million copies - I shouldn't really complain. There was plenty of stuff on it that was mine: Undercover, She Was Hot. Keith contributed to all that stuff. Some was completely his. But it wasn't like I was frustrated with it because it wasn't my material.

- Mick Jagger, 1984

Not a very special record.

- Mick Jagger, 1995

In terms of the musical peaks on that album, there really aren't that many. That was definitely a time of disruption - and not one that I refer to very often.

- Ron Wood, 2003

[timeisonourside.com]

Yet they've played UOTN, She Was Hot and Wanna Hold You over the years.


ER - nowhere near that, in fact, except for 2013, nothing since the BANG tour.

They absolutely lost their way with DIRTY WORK. Harlem Shuffle aside, it's brutally bad.


I was really looking forward to doing (the album). I mean the fact was that it was really a bit long in the making. And it wasn't always that great fun but I think the actual album is really good.

- Mick Jagger, March 1986


The album wasn't that good. It was OKAY. It certainly wasn't a great Rolling Stones album. The feeling inside the band was very bad, too. The relationships were terrible. The health was diabolical. I wasn't in particularly good shape. The rest of the band, they couldn't walk across the Champs Elysées, much less go on the road.

- Mick Jagger, 1989


(It's n)ot special.

- Mick Jagger, 1995



(The '80s was a d)ifficult period... There's a couple of good things on Dirty Work.

- Keith Richards, July 2002



[timeisonourside.com]

They're a funny lot. Does Mick like Exile on Main Street yet?

He certainly didn't like it much in 1987-1995. He thought it "lacked a bit of definition" and it "lacks a little focus" and it's "a bit overrated". It's not as good as the previous 3 albums. There's "not much that's playable".

But. By 2010 he said "there are really great things on it... I always had a lot of respect for it"... so that's basically he likes it.

I can't find Mick saying he wishes he could remix it, which is a bit odd because the mix is great.

Keith still thinks they "put it all out", which they came no where near doing. He said Mick's POV was bullshit about when and where the album was recorded yet... Mick wasn't wrong at all.

He certainly thinks much higher about HACKNEY DIAMONDS than he ever has about EXILE. Which is fitting.

I don't think Mick can always hold a really objective view of the results.

With Exile for example he's probably most thinking about the chaotic process that spawned it...and that he hadn't been in his beloved control of it

The mixing of Exile is one of the worst mixing of a Stones album

Quote
harlem shuffle
The mixing of Exile is one of the worst mixing of a Stones album

Depends on your POV. While it may not have been ideal for a normal album, it completely fit the vibe of that album. A beautiful murky mess.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
harlem shuffle
The mixing of Exile is one of the worst mixing of a Stones album

Depends on your POV. While it may not have been ideal for a normal album, it completely fit the vibe of that album. A beautiful murky mess.

Yeah, imagine a clean and polished sounding Exile. Would not be Exile...

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
VoodooLounge13
Gave most of it another listen today and it’s the same. Just not aging well. Other than WWW, MIU, LBTS, and the far too short TMS the album is forgettable. For me it’s second shelf quality with ER, U, IORR. Albums I know of but rarely spin. I know TY was a collection of leftovers but my God they went from that to U and folks round here love it!! For me it must have been what everyone felt about GHS after what had preceded it, but GHS is horribly u serrated and better than some - most - of the Big 4 IMHO.

Well...you like a third of the songs, for most albums (by other artists), that's a win.

Plus second tier Stones is better than most tier anything else.

PLUS, the albums you put them on par with are awesome. There's more to life than Voodoo Lounge!

I think I can now say I like HD better than U, which was my favourite post-Tattoo You.

For comparison's sake, I think there are at most 4 songs on ABB that I think are 2nd tier/filler. Huge difference. HD doesn't sound different. Not pushing any boundaries. Sounds like anything any band - known or unknown - could have made. There's nothing memorable or new. No RFD. For me it just sounds forced. It's loose, but it also sounds it. Like let's hurry up and record something new to tour behind. It's the Stones trying to be the Stones and it misses by miles. SSOH is horrible retread of YCAGWYW. Dreamy is a feable attempt at country that reminds me of FAE. BMHO is inferior even to ONNYA, which is a better punk song. Yes, Mick's vocals and annunciating hasn't sound this good since '97, but for me, it's just not enough to save this album. I am happy for the majority of fans that love this album. And it is great that they finally put out SOMETHING, but I was expecting more. A longer album, more flushed out songs. TMS sounds like a demo, and is great in its brevity. I do truly wonder if Keef isn't dried up at this point in life, which would really stink. Honestly, I think his cover of the Lou Reed song has more authenticity to it than anything on HD.

But again, this is all just me. Clearly I am in the minority around here.