Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
TW2019
Just listened in full again after putting it down around August once the tour ended. It still hits. My top 3 songs in Spotify wrapped 2024 were all HD haha

and what pray tell are those top 3?

Whole Wide World, BMHO, Angry

Oh hell, forgot how chaotic and ridiculous they were at that 2005 Dallas press conference. Out of curiosity I looked at the 2006 European dates and what Michael Cohl announced was way off!

It's been over a year since their last album .. WTH .. one could say that I'm Angry

I made two versions of a REWIND 1971-2023 playlist and have Angry after Start Me Up (went between the US and UK track listing for beginning, middle and end). It fits in excellently, as do the others (Get Close, Depending On You, Driving Me Too Hard and Tell Me Straight - only Angry made the edited version).

Quote
mick64

Will the one that comes out on the 6th have a sticker like the other editions?

Yes:


[www.hhv.de]

Quote
TW2019

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
TW2019
Just listened in full again after putting it down around August once the tour ended. It still hits. My top 3 songs in Spotify wrapped 2024 were all HD haha

and what pray tell are those top 3?

Whole Wide World, BMHO, Angry

Nice. There's a lot to like on that album. I thing my top 3 would be WWW, Get Close and Depending on You (or SSoH).

Good old album. Sounds damn good. Just like the albums once did.

Best album for ages. By anyone.

- Doxa

There is the listening experience to regard:

I don't have HD on vinyl so I'll skip that but on CD I let it play. It's awesome.

I don't have Spotify etc just copied the CD on my PC. That ends up with playlists.

So...

Angry, Get Close, Depending On You, Driving Me Too Hard and Tell Me Straight. I might have SSOH on another.

The HD tracks stand up, and even leer over, Start Me Up, UOTN... basically 1981-2016.

HD will, should, go down in Stones history as OMFG REALLY!!!?? Best work since that leftover shamble TATTOO YOU.

I admittedly cherry pick songs from Tattoo You onwards, I don’t find myself playing those albums all the way through. With that being said, HD is one of the few I will absolutely play in full along with Exile, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers, Goats Head Soup. To me that’s a real testament to how much I really liked it. Over a year later and I’m still pretty amazed they had some of these songs up their sleeve

Makes me wonder what else they hopefully got comin’ for us



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-12-07 06:52 by TW2019.

hmmm...it seems I wasn't the only one not enthralled with "Live By The Sword", one of the more famous sidemen agree with me!

[www.guitarworld.com]

Quote
treaclefingers
hmmm...it seems I wasn't the only one not enthralled with "Live By The Sword", one of the more famous sidemen agree with me!

[www.guitarworld.com]

Strange that Bill didn't have a mix of, well, just two guitars, for his overdub session.

-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-12-10 03:01 by Stoneage.

What makes HD stand out to me in regard to, eh, 1989 onward, since it's not very many albums in comparison to 1964-1983, is the depth of the album in its place. Like SOME GIRLS it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there, as well as a nice variance throughout the rest of the album, whatever you want to call it, genres or stylings.

Where as BRIDGES was them attempting to be modern, at times, it sounds really good compared to VOODOO or BANG, with VOODOO sounding flat and BANG sounding overcooked. HD has that same element that BRIDGES has only with much better songs, which is probably why people have liked HD so much.

I listened to HD again tonight and think Dreamy Skies is one of the best songs they’ve done in decades. Same with Get Close.

A pity that we don’t get new live recordings from the HD Tour this year. If you release an anniversary edition give us new content.

Whole Wide World is a great song, with some of Mick’s best lyrics

I will never forget my first listen to this album. I was nodding along, enjoying myself but it was Live By the Sword that got me up and dancing aroundthe room. I found it utterly joyous and I still do. I feel sorry for anyone who isn't grabbed by it the way I am, but that's the mystery of taste I suppose...

totally agree. Angry and LBTS are my two favorites from HD. I wish they had done LBTS on tour.

Quote
bakersfield
I will never forget my first listen to this album. I was nodding along, enjoying myself but it was Live By the Sword that got me up and dancing aroundthe room. I found it utterly joyous and I still do. I feel sorry for anyone who isn't grabbed by it the way I am, but that's the mystery of taste I suppose...

Same here, that first listening was utterly joyous! It was two days prior to release, unexpectedly that day sent to me by a dearly departed good friend - 4pm, after work, took myself off to the upstairs with laptop and a can of ice cold Coke. Closed the door, and with headphones spent an hour and a half playing the album fully through, with repeats for quite a few of the songs. The first Stones album of originals since 2005, a hell of a long time - and the wait was definitely worth it!

That first listening was magic, and it's an album I still return to and love. Best since Tattoo You? Maybe, but I do rate all of the albums since, particularly Babylon and Steel Wheels. Hackney is just a great Stones album, and one I'm delighted we received.

Quote
GasLightStreet
What makes HD stand out to me in regard to, eh, 1989 onward, since it's not very many albums in comparison to 1964-1983, is the depth of the album in its place. Like SOME GIRLS it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there, as well as a nice variance throughout the rest of the album, whatever you want to call it, genres or stylings.

Where as BRIDGES was them attempting to be modern, at times, it sounds really good compared to VOODOO or BANG, with VOODOO sounding flat and BANG sounding overcooked. HD has that same element that BRIDGES has only with much better songs, which is probably why people have liked HD so much.

Good analysis

Quote
keefgotsoul
I listened to HD again tonight and think Dreamy Skies is one of the best songs they’ve done in decades. Same with Get Close.

Totally agree. I love the whole album and Dreamy Skies is great maybe because I really didn't expect something like that.

I really like HD a lot, but it still hasn't fully won me. Babylon and Bang, with all their limitations, produced emotions that were - and still are - way more visceral.

It tells a lot that I still have not listened to HD through proper loudspeakers. Only headphones and via apple music. LP still sealed and I don't even own the CD.

Or, maybe, this is the reason.

Tomorrow morning definitely I will try the LP at a proper volume level!

C

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet
What makes HD stand out to me in regard to, eh, 1989 onward, since it's not very many albums in comparison to 1964-1983, is the depth of the album in its place. Like SOME GIRLS it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there, as well as a nice variance throughout the rest of the album, whatever you want to call it, genres or stylings.

Where as BRIDGES was them attempting to be modern, at times, it sounds really good compared to VOODOO or BANG, with VOODOO sounding flat and BANG sounding overcooked. HD has that same element that BRIDGES has only with much better songs, which is probably why people have liked HD so much.

Good analysis

Really? To me it's just more of his incoherent rambling.
What does 'the depth of the album in its place' mean?

What does 'it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there' mean?

What does 'Where as Bridges was them attempting to be modern, at times' mean?

Voodoo sounds 'flat?' I'm assuming you agree with that so what does it mean? Is it the flattest sounding Stones album in your opinion or are there others that I should know about?

Ask yourself why you praise such drivel.

Quote
Swayed1967

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet
What makes HD stand out to me in regard to, eh, 1989 onward, since it's not very many albums in comparison to 1964-1983, is the depth of the album in its place. Like SOME GIRLS it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there, as well as a nice variance throughout the rest of the album, whatever you want to call it, genres or stylings.

Where as BRIDGES was them attempting to be modern, at times, it sounds really good compared to VOODOO or BANG, with VOODOO sounding flat and BANG sounding overcooked. HD has that same element that BRIDGES has only with much better songs, which is probably why people have liked HD so much.

Good analysis

Really? To me it's just more of his incoherent rambling.
What does 'the depth of the album in its place' mean?

What does 'it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there' mean?

What does 'Where as Bridges was them attempting to be modern, at times' mean?

Voodoo sounds 'flat?' I'm assuming you agree with that so what does it mean? Is it the flattest sounding Stones album in your opinion or are there others that I should know about?

Ask yourself why you praise such drivel.

Ask yourself "why such anger"?

I wouldn't give you the dignity of answering your unrequested attack questions, but will simply say that whatever resentment you harbour for this poster, I believe for you the best decision is to simply, "say nothing".

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Swayed1967

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet
What makes HD stand out to me in regard to, eh, 1989 onward, since it's not very many albums in comparison to 1964-1983, is the depth of the album in its place. Like SOME GIRLS it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there, as well as a nice variance throughout the rest of the album, whatever you want to call it, genres or stylings.

Where as BRIDGES was them attempting to be modern, at times, it sounds really good compared to VOODOO or BANG, with VOODOO sounding flat and BANG sounding overcooked. HD has that same element that BRIDGES has only with much better songs, which is probably why people have liked HD so much.

Good analysis

Really? To me it's just more of his incoherent rambling.
What does 'the depth of the album in its place' mean?

What does 'it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there' mean?

What does 'Where as Bridges was them attempting to be modern, at times' mean?

Voodoo sounds 'flat?' I'm assuming you agree with that so what does it mean? Is it the flattest sounding Stones album in your opinion or are there others that I should know about?

Ask yourself why you praise such drivel.

Ask yourself "why such anger"?

I wouldn't give you the dignity of answering your unrequested attack questions, but will simply say that whatever resentment you harbour for this poster, I believe for you the best decision is to simply, "say nothing".

So you're conceding that I'm right but in the interest of preserving harmony and the wacko belief that HD is a great album we should just let him ramble on. OK.

But if you're not conceding that I'm right, answer my F'in 'angry' questions.

Hackney Diamonds is ‘fine’; yet it’ll never be in regular rotation. Like Steel Wheels - an album I am fond of, however - I’ll randomly stream the occasional track.

Quote
Swayed1967

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Swayed1967

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet
What makes HD stand out to me in regard to, eh, 1989 onward, since it's not very many albums in comparison to 1964-1983, is the depth of the album in its place. Like SOME GIRLS it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there, as well as a nice variance throughout the rest of the album, whatever you want to call it, genres or stylings.

Where as BRIDGES was them attempting to be modern, at times, it sounds really good compared to VOODOO or BANG, with VOODOO sounding flat and BANG sounding overcooked. HD has that same element that BRIDGES has only with much better songs, which is probably why people have liked HD so much.

Good analysis

Really? To me it's just more of his incoherent rambling.
What does 'the depth of the album in its place' mean?

What does 'it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there' mean?

What does 'Where as Bridges was them attempting to be modern, at times' mean?

Voodoo sounds 'flat?' I'm assuming you agree with that so what does it mean? Is it the flattest sounding Stones album in your opinion or are there others that I should know about?

Ask yourself why you praise such drivel.

Ask yourself "why such anger"?

I wouldn't give you the dignity of answering your unrequested attack questions, but will simply say that whatever resentment you harbour for this poster, I believe for you the best decision is to simply, "say nothing".

So you're conceding that I'm right but in the interest of preserving harmony and the wacko belief that HD is a great album we should just let him ramble on. OK.

But if you're not conceding that I'm right, answer my F'in 'angry' questions.

LOL...I concede nothing except that I refuse to get sucked into your pit of dismay. I can only presume other things aren't going right in your life right now, so I do wish you well and Merry Christmas if you observe that holiday!

I wonder if Darryl wasn't really available, or if it was just a happy coincidence? This is the best bass on a Stones album since Steel Wheels. Even Andrew Watt's playing is better on their albums than they've had in decades. I wonder if they'll buckle under and use Darryl if they put out another album. That would make me sad, because the bass was really 'there' on Hackney Diamonds. It got the emotional underpinning their records have sorely missed since Bill walked away.

Quote
Swayed1967

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet
What makes HD stand out to me in regard to, eh, 1989 onward, since it's not very many albums in comparison to 1964-1983, is the depth of the album in its place. Like SOME GIRLS it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there, as well as a nice variance throughout the rest of the album, whatever you want to call it, genres or stylings.

Where as BRIDGES was them attempting to be modern, at times, it sounds really good compared to VOODOO or BANG, with VOODOO sounding flat and BANG sounding overcooked. HD has that same element that BRIDGES has only with much better songs, which is probably why people have liked HD so much.

Good analysis

Really? To me it's just more of his incoherent rambling.
What does 'the depth of the album in its place' mean?

What does 'it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there' mean?

What does 'Where as Bridges was them attempting to be modern, at times' mean?

Voodoo sounds 'flat?' I'm assuming you agree with that so what does it mean? Is it the flattest sounding Stones album in your opinion or are there others that I should know about?

Ask yourself why you praise such drivel.

Such drivel.

Your response, Sway1967, waffles on cognitive dissonance.

You're not able - or are purposely choosing not to - understand what I said, which, forgive me for saying such a thing, "incoherent rambling" is an

opinion

You don't like it.

I respect that. I respect "drivel".

Perhaps you're a bit stuck in the past? I don't really know. Maybe 1967 reveals?

I'm am totally at open arms upon receiving otherwise and learning - iorr knows, in places, all too well, that I am an @#$%& about DIRTY WORK.

You clearly missed the point. So I will respond, with your whatever in italics:

To me it's just more of his incoherent rambling.
What does 'the depth of the album in its place' mean?

In absolute regard to its (the album alone) existence in place of The Rolling Stones' discography. There's absolutely zero about that that is "incoherent rambling". It's specific. I'm sorry you couldn't understand that aspect. I thought I was clear.

What does 'it has a country song that takes, rather than just sits there' mean?

If you can't get that I don't know what else to tell you. But I will help: Faraway Eyes was (is) cheeky, at the time, but since then is great silly. Dreamy Skies is, from what I can tell, from the heart.

Big difference.

What does 'Where as Bridges was them attempting to be modern, at times' mean?

If you can't understand that there's nothing to say.


Voodoo sounds 'flat?' I'm assuming you agree with that so what does it mean? Is it the flattest sounding Stones album in your opinion or are there others that I should know about?

VOODOO is a waffle or pancake: not much to it. It indeed sounds flat. The only other album that comes close to that sound is, bizarrely, BLACK AND BLUE, which, given its clarity, is a rather flat sounding album. The beauty is it's more clear.

My "incoherent rambling" is entertaining and baffling. Without going too into it, perhaps get another opinion, say, by Dandelion. There may be an understanding that you could find a way to appreciate. More so of purpose than taste, because, as the saying goes, "there's no accounting for taste".

If you choose to stay on your view, fine. Consider anything I say to be "incoherent rambling" and don't bother. Or do. And deal with other.

I've been whatever about whatever and have been told, in whatever ways, and have found otherwise because of... we're all humans. No opinion is better. No opinion is better. There are no trophies for opinions.

No reason to act like people are getting trophies. We're all "just saying" except, unlike that saying, we back it up, regardless of taste, and not empty unreasoning and lies.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-12-14 08:02 by GasLightStreet.

Quote
Big Al
Hackney Diamonds is ‘fine’; yet it’ll never be in regular rotation. Like Steel Wheels - an album I am fond of, however - I’ll randomly stream the occasional track.

I agree with the comparison with Steel Wheels: fine but nothing great. Wishy-washy. (Although Slipping Away on Steel Wheels is close to great.)
Their other post-Tattoo You albums are more unbalanced, with some songs that are very bad and occasionally some songs that are great, or at least good fun.