| January 12th, 2005 12:42 AM |
|
|
| glencar |
I can't believe someone dissed "Undercover." |
| January 12th, 2005 03:27 AM |
|
|
| IanBillen |
[quote]glencar wrote:
I can't believe someone dissed "Undercover."
I agree. I always said Undercover....is Underated.
A real good album from Start to Finish. And the songs Undercover and She was Hot are classic to me. Great songs.
Ian |
| January 12th, 2005 03:44 AM |
|
|
| FotiniD |
quote:
IanBillen wrote:
A real good album from Start to Finish. And the songs Undercover and She was Hot are classic to me. Great songs.
Ian
Hmm, I don't know really... I think the major part of the eighties wasn't too good for the Stones, neither musically nor in their relationships with each other.
And it's only normal, everything in life reaches a very high point, then starts going down... And then it may start rising again. But I don't think it is objective on our part to consider everything the Stones have ever produced as a masterpiece. It's not that terrible to accept they've had a bad record! Only natural...
Thus said, I don't like that much some of their eighties' work, and that includes tracks like "She was Hot" and "Undercover" or albums like Dirty Work. They just have this fuzzy sound and the stupid electronic-sounding 80's beats that just don't remind me of the real Stones at all. Jeez, hope I didn't make it to your list already just by that, Bill Perks 
|
| January 12th, 2005 03:50 AM |
|
|
| F505 |
quote:
FotiniD wrote:
Hmm, I don't know really... I think the major part of the eighties wasn't too good for the Stones, neither musically nor in their relationships with each other.
And it's only normal, everything in life reaches a very high point, then starts going down... And then it may start rising again. But I don't think it is objective on our part to consider everything the Stones have ever produced as a masterpiece. It's not that terrible to accept they've had a bad record! Only natural...
Thus said, I don't like that much some of their eighties' work, and that includes tracks like "She was Hot" and "Undercover" or albums like Dirty Work. They just have this fuzzy sound and the stupid electronic-sounding 80's beats that just don't remind me of the real Stones at all. Jeez, hope I didn't make it to your list already just by that, Bill Perks
Well spoken FotiniD. Apart from the sound most of the songs are of a poor quality, These records have nothing to do with the Stones of the 60's and 70's. |
| January 12th, 2005 04:38 AM |
|
|
| IanBillen |
quote:
F505 wrote:
Well spoken FotiniD. Apart from the sound most of the songs are of a poor quality, These records have nothing to do with the Stones of the 60's and 70's.
I wouldn't say they have nothing to do with The Stones roots or sound of the 60's and 70's. It is all still blues based rock n roll with open tuning no matter what album it is from 68 onwards. Sure some have different sounds and feels and different production techniques but it is still the same band. Just different era's and different type albums is all.
And I don't think the Stones wanted to sound like it was 1975 in 1983. I love the raucoust/dance sound of Undercover. It is hard to come up with a raucoust song that you still want to dance to. If not, then what is so bad about She was Hot? That's basically Rock n Roll.
The reason the Stones have been around so long is they can adjust with the times, yet still stick to their out-look and musical roots, give er take. If every album had the same style as Sticky Fingers or Beggars Banquet it would really limit this very universal band. Also I don't think we would have a variety and selection as we can pick from now. Also it kept the Stones current.
Ian
Ian |
| January 12th, 2005 05:15 AM |
|
|
| F505 |
quote:
IanBillen wrote:
I wouldn't say they have nothing to do with The Stones roots or sound of the 60's and 70's. It is all still blues based rock n roll with open tuning no matter what album it is from 68 onwards. Sure some have different sounds and feels and different production techniques but it is still the same band. Just different era's and different type albums is all.
And I don't think the Stones wanted to sound like it was 1975 in 1983. I love the raucoust/dance sound of Undercover. It is hard to come up with a raucoust song that you still want to dance to. If not, then what is so bad about She was Hot? That's basically Rock n Roll.
The reason the Stones have been around so long is they can adjust with the times, yet still stick to their out-look and musical roots, give er take. If every album had the same style as Sticky Fingers or Beggars Banquet it would really limit this very universal band. Also I don't think we would have a variety and selection as we can pick from now. Also it kept the Stones current.
Ian
Ian
In the sixties and seventies they showed various styles: Black and Blue and Beggars Banquet are two complete different albums. No problem. I wasn't talking about styles. I was talking about poor written uninspired songs. The Stones in the 80s and 90s is rock 'n' roll without soul. |
| January 12th, 2005 05:24 AM |
|
|
| IanBillen |
quote:
F505 wrote:
In the sixties and seventies they showed various styles: Black and Blue and Beggars Banquet are two complete different albums. No problem. I wasn't talking about styles. I was talking about poor written uninspired songs. The Stones in the 80s and 90s is rock 'n' roll without soul.
Tattoo You and Voodoo Lounge didn't have any soul to you?
I think tattoo You had tons of soul. Look at the heart felt ballads of side B. Voodoo Lounge had a little of both in my opinion.
Bridges to Babylon lacked soul on most of the album except for Theif in the Night and some of How Can I Stop but it did have some well written songs I think. I think they tried to get away from the soulful grooves on that one for the most part.
I think Vodoo Lounge has alot of inspiration. That is what it is noted for in many areas. Stones seem together and natural again.
Ian |
| January 12th, 2005 05:25 AM |
|
|
| Zack |
One brief observation about the two mid-80s Stones offerings apart from their dated production and that same riff style and drumming song after song.
Their lyric content involves violence, executions, suicide, serial killers, blood, cheap sluts, pederasty, fights, feuds, and, er, dirty work.
Sure, earlier work such as Gimme Shelter had dark and even violent themes, but they were somehow more appropriate; this stuff just gets gross.
It's no wonder Stones babes like Fotini (tough as she is to hang with the RO boys) and probably the others in the chick clique don't care for them. I don't really in part for that reason. I certainly wouldn't put them on to get a date in the mood! |
| January 12th, 2005 05:42 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
glencar wrote:
Wow, Dirty Work is taking some hits here today. The title track is outstanding. Shit, I even like that video with all the black folks. That girl is smoking hot. Keith in his hat is nice & Jagger's got some great moves. Yes, the album cover is badly done but I blame Leibowitz. And I don't diss "Back To Zero" whatsoever. I alwasy found that more likeable than Hold Back. That's the pooper on that one!
"Hold Back" is IMO one of the very few songs the Stones have ever released that is completely unlistenable. The lyrics actually arent bad, but everything about the record, vocally and musically, is painful to listen to. |
| January 12th, 2005 05:47 AM |
|
|
| FotiniD |
Words do count my dear Zack, but what's more important to me (and the one that's killing the whole Stones 80's sound for me) is the repetitive theme, as you suggest, in most of their work of that era. I can't really find a proper way to describe it, but most of the songs just sound void, boring and kind of like they could perfectly fit into a cheap soundtrack of an action b-movie.
Of course I'm not referring to the whole lot of all Stones 80's songs.. But most of them, well, they just don't do it. |
| January 12th, 2005 05:49 AM |
|
|
| F505 |
quote:
IanBillen wrote:
Tattoo You and Voodoo Lounge didn't have any soul to you?
I think tattoo You had tons of soul. Look at the heart felt ballads of side B. Voodoo Lounge had a little of both in my opinion.
Bridges to Babylon lacked soul on most of the album except for Theif in the Night and some of How Can I Stop but it did have some well written songs I think. I think they tried to get away from the soulful grooves on that one for the most part.
I think Vodoo Lounge has alot of inspiration. That is what it is noted for in many areas. Stones seem together and natural again.
Ian
Tattoo You is their last good album imo. There are some jewels on that album.So I was talking about the post Tattoo period. I don't think albums like Voodoo Lounge and Bridges will be remembered when people talk about the Stones in let's say 3005. |
| January 12th, 2005 06:51 AM |
|
|
| Navin |
The Stones 1975 onward make The Clash look like a skiffle group |
| January 12th, 2005 09:11 AM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
Navin wrote:
The Stones 1975 onward make The Clash look like a skiffle group
" It's a pity that The Clash broke up as I thought that they were a really great band . " ( Peter Denis Blandford Townshend , November , 1985 ) |
| January 12th, 2005 09:48 AM |
|
|
| glencar |
He never heard "Rock The Casbah" did he? |
| January 12th, 2005 09:50 AM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
glencar wrote:
He never heard "Rock The Casbah" did he?
Blue .............................................
" NEW WHO ALBUM – WHO2 will not be a concept album. That is, in itself, a concept for me. Roger and I meet in mid December to play what we have written. If we move ahead from there, we may have a CD ready to release in the spring. My working-title for the project - ‘Who2’ - is only partly tongue- in-cheek. If the recording works out we will tour with the usual band in the first half of 2005.
THE BOY WHO HEARD MUSIC is a short story I finished some time ago. It will not be the title of the next Who album. It is not autobiographical. It is a continuation of the LIFEHOUSE chronicles, and features the LIFEHOUSE METHOD (music generated from data gathered from various individuals). I hope to develop this as an animation feature with music in the second half of 2005. I would also like to see a concert version. With everything LIFEHOUSE-related I know I must dream on. "
|
| January 12th, 2005 09:54 AM |
|
|
| glencar |
I'll be sure to be on the lookout for this! |
| January 12th, 2005 09:56 AM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
glencar wrote:
I'll be sure to be on the lookout for this!
 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| January 12th, 2005 09:57 AM |
|
|
| glencar |
You know, to warn the others... |
| January 12th, 2005 10:00 AM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
glencar wrote:
You know, to warn the others...
You make Joey sad . |
| January 12th, 2005 10:01 AM |
|
|
| glencar |
Gotcha! |
| January 12th, 2005 10:28 AM |
|
|
| jb |
mANY SAY THAT THE cLASH OPENING FOR THE wHO AT sHE sTADIUN WAS ONE OF THE GREATEST CONCERTS EVER....(mICK jONES IS jEWISH).... |
| January 12th, 2005 10:35 AM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
jb wrote:
mANY SAY THAT THE cLASH OPENING FOR THE wHO AT sHE sTADIUN WAS ONE OF THE GREATEST CONCERTS EVER....(mICK jONES IS jEWISH)....
The Clash , Jethro Tull , and John Cougar Mellencamp all opened for THE WHO at Folsum Field , Boulder , CO , 1982 . Word !
http://www.thewholive.de/1982/
Is Mick Jones REALLY  ?!?!
......................................................
[Edited by Joey] |
| January 12th, 2005 10:43 AM |
|
|
| glencar |
No. |
| January 12th, 2005 11:48 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Joey wrote:
Is Mick Jones REALLY ?!?!
No, he's just not too fast at buying a drink, hence the confusion...
[Edited by Gazza] |
| January 12th, 2005 12:06 PM |
|
|
| Joey |
" No, he's just not too fast at buying a drink, hence the confusion... "
Gazza ....................you make Joey giggle !
HOOPTIE !!!!!!!!!!
.......................................................
[ Edited by ]
[Edited by Joey] |
| January 12th, 2005 12:24 PM |
|
|
| BILL PERKS |
THE WHO'S 1982 US TOUR WAS THE BIGGEST RIPOFF JOKE OF THE 20TH CENTURY..ABYSMAL..LISTEN TO THAT WONDERFUL LIVE RECORD OF THAT TOUR..THERE IS NOTHING IN THE STONES CATALOG THAT I DONT LISTEN TO EVERY FEW MONTHS AND THAT INCLUDES GOT LIVE IF YOU WANT IT.I LIKE EVERYTHING THEY HAVE DONE.THE GUITARS ON HOLD BACK SNARL,BABY. |
| January 12th, 2005 12:31 PM |
|
|
| jb |
Yes he was Joey..............
http://www.artofthemix.org/FindAMix/getcontents.asp?strMixID=58698 |
| January 12th, 2005 12:34 PM |
|
|
| jb |
quote:
jb wrote:
Yes he was Joey..............
http://www.artofthemix.org/FindAMix/getcontents.asp?strMixID=58698
|
| January 12th, 2005 12:35 PM |
|
|
| Navin |
quote:
glencar wrote:
He never heard "Rock The Casbah" did he?
Dear Glencar,
Sorry about my last post (now deleted)...I misunderstood "he never heard" to refer to myself, but you probably meant that line to refer to Peter Dennis Blandford Townshend
|
| January 12th, 2005 12:36 PM |
|
|
| jb |
quote:
jb wrote:
Yes he was Joey..............
http://www.artofthemix.org/FindAMix/getcontents.asp?strMixID=58698
|
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]