ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
A Bigger Bang World Tour 2005 - 2006
Gracias Lour!
Bradley Center, Milwaukee - 8th September 2005
© 2005 Tom Lynn with special thanks to Montana!
[ ROCKSOFF.ORG ] [ IORR NEWS ] [ SETLISTS 1962-2005 ] [ FORO EN ESPAÑOL ] [ BIT TORRENT TRACKER ] [ BIRTHDAY'S LIST ] [ MICK JAGGER ] [ KEITHFUCIUS ] [ CHARLIE WATTS ] [ RONNIE WOOD ] [ BRIAN JONES ] [ MICK TAYLOR ] [ BILL WYMAN ] [ IAN "STU" STEWART ] [ NICKY HOPKINS ] [ MERRY CLAYTON ] [ IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN ] [ LINKS ] [ PHOTOS ] [ JIMI HENDRIX ] [ TEMPLE ] [ GUESTBOOK ] [ ADMIN ]
CHAT ROOM aka The Fun HOUSE Rest rooms last days
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: 'Bigger Bang' finds The Stones rolling again (USA Today) Return to archive
September 6th, 2005 08:12 AM
Gazza 'Bigger Bang' finds The Stones rolling again
By Edna Gundersen, USA TODAY

The original bad-boy band is once again hot stuff.

A Bigger Bang boils the Stones down to their scrappy and earthy essence.
AP photo

And not just on the concert trail. The Rolling Stones have been playing with fire in the studio.

Recognized as the world's leading musical box-office draw, the Stones haven't generated similar stampedes for new recordings in the past decade or two. Their last No. 1 album was Tattoo You in 1981.

Fans seem content sweating to the oldies, and critics routinely trot out the canard that the band has lost the hustle and hunger that built its classics.

Get ready for some jumping jacked-up flashbacks. A Bigger Bang (* * * ½ out of four) arrives today as a jolting reminder of the iconic British rock band's indestructible chemistry and primitive instincts. (Note: Our weekly collection of album reviews, Listen Up, will run in Wednesday's edition)

Bang, recorded in Paris and mixed in Los Angeles with Don Was co-producing, boils the Stones down to their scrappy and earthy essence, without the techno-frills and interlopers that diversified past efforts but also camouflaged the band's natural assets. Stripping down the sound pumps grit and immediacy into the thumping grooves, nasty riffs and sly vocals.

Bang finds singer Mick Jagger and guitarist Keith Richards in peak form again. Their collaboration yields tunes steeped in rock and blues roots but not mired in the past. It's a mature record, yet it retains the Stones' signature swagger and defiance. And it may be their most topically diverse and emotionally honest album to date.

The first surprise is Sweet Neo-Con, Jagger's swipe at U.S. foreign policy. On the socio-political front, he also examines urban decay in the funk-shaded Rain Fall Down and snarls in Dangerous Beauty at a female torturer who is "painfully shamefully doing ya duty." The details evoke Abu Ghraib.

Jagger's strongest vocals and lyrics focus on romantic obsession, missteps and betrayal. He's stung by loss and remorse in the aching Streets of Love and plagued by suspicion in the country-hued Let Me Down Slow. The Biggest Mistake deals with the regret of mishandling a soul mate: "I acted impatient, acted unkind/I took her for granted, I played with her mind."

Jagger's spunk returns in Back of My Hand, a raw, harmonica-soaked blues tune haunted by fever-dream lyrics, and Oh No, Not You Again and Look What the Cat Dragged In, both propelled by unbridled cheek.

Richards submits lead vocals on a pair of charmers, the rickety piano ballad This Place Is Empty and sweet-and-sour Infamy.

There's not a clunker in the bunch. At 16 tracks, A Bigger Bang is the band's longest studio album since 1972's Exile on Main Street. It's unfair to expect the Stones, or any band, to match the brilliance of that landmark, but they've certainly found their way back inside Main Street's ZIP code. And compared with most rock records falling off the assembly line today, Bigger is better.

[Edited by Gazza]
September 6th, 2005 08:14 AM
egon "but they've certainly found their way back inside Main Street's ZIP code"


nice one
September 6th, 2005 08:16 AM
glencar I can't wait for later today!
September 6th, 2005 08:17 AM
Gazza Edna nails it, as usual...
September 6th, 2005 08:37 AM
gimmekeef Yes she usually has a pretty good and honest read on things.But one question then...if most reviewers are giving Bang 3.5/4
September 6th, 2005 08:37 AM
gimmekeef What cds deserve a 4!!!!!!!??????????
September 6th, 2005 09:19 AM
Nasty Habits
quote:
gimmekeef wrote:
What cds deserve a 4!!!!!!!??????????



Love and Theft.
September 6th, 2005 09:24 AM
Gazza
quote:
gimmekeef wrote:
What cds deserve a 4!!!!!!!??????????



Exile
Some Girls
Sticky Fingers
Born to run
Highway 61
Bringing it all back home
Blonde on blonde
blood on the tracks
Love & theft (thank you, Nasty)
Abbey road
Berlin
Whos next
Elvis is back
The Sun Collection
London Calling
Car wheels on a gravel road

and several others

....you get the drift

Its excellent - but theres 'excellent' and theres 'classic'

[Edited by Gazza]
September 6th, 2005 09:29 AM
glencar Many of those wouldn't have recieved 4 stars on initial release. I have only heard the songs so far here & at rs.com but it sounds like 4 stars to me. Time will tell.
September 6th, 2005 09:32 AM
Nasty Habits
quote:
Gazza wrote:


Elvis is back



Noice one.

September 6th, 2005 09:59 AM
time is on my side
quote:
glencar wrote:
Many of those wouldn't have received 4 stars on initial release. I have only heard the songs so far here & at rs.com but it sounds like 4 stars to me. Time will tell.



Excellent point. EVERYBODY, including just about every critic known to mankind, tends to give earlier albums by artist (especially well known ones and ones that have been around a number of years) higher ratings than any of their later or current releases.

The reason is that over TIME there is usually a consensus that develops over what particular albums defined an artist career. They feel these albums help define the artist style or reputation. As a result, there does appear to be a tendency to overestimate earlier albums and undervalue later releases.

For instance, look at the all music guide and look at how many 5 star rating they give to artist like the STONES or SPRINGSTEEN to albums released early in their career.

The bottom line is that all of this instant analyst will not necessarily determine how an album will be viewed years on down the road (Exile being the classic example). Only TIME will tell.
September 6th, 2005 10:19 AM
Gazza True, although "love and theft" came out at a stage in Dylan's career that the Stones are at now and was instantly hailed as a classic that was comparable to his best work.

Not sure of Nasty deliberately mentioned that one due to the fact that Edna Gunderson was probably the first music critic to write about that record, a couple of months before its release, and published a review of it that had Dylan fans salivating with anticipation - so, I guess she would have given it the 4-star treatment as well.
September 6th, 2005 10:43 AM
time is on my side
quote:
Gazza wrote:
True, although "love and theft" came out at a stage in Dylan's career that the Stones are at now and was instantly hailed as a classic that was comparable to his best work.

Not sure of Nasty deliberately mentioned that one due to the fact that Edna Gunderson was probably the first music critic to write about that record, a couple of months before its release, and published a review of it that had Dylan fans salivating with anticipation - so, I guess she would have given it the 4-star treatment as well.



Agree, Love and Theft by most people's estimation is a true classic and was thought that way by many upon it's intial release. It's interesting to point out that it was preceded by TIME OUT OF MIND an album almost as good & had already awaken people to the idea that Dylan's best work wasn't necessarily behind him.

Also, Love and Theft illustrates my point. If you look over at all music guide, you'll see it was only given 4 1/2 stars. Why not five???

The only reason I can think of is because later releases tend to get undervalued.






[Edited by time is on my side]
September 6th, 2005 11:21 AM
IanBillen [quote]Gazza wrote:


Exile
Some Girls
Sticky Fingers
Born to run
Highway 61
Bringing it all back home
Blonde on blonde
blood on the tracks
Love & theft (thank you, Nasty)
Abbey road
Berlin
Whos next
Elvis is back
The Sun Collection
London Calling
Car wheels on a gravel road

and several others

....you get the drift

Its excellent - but theres 'excellent' and theres 'classic'

___________________________________________________________________________

All true classic fours. Don't forget, and deny(as much as axle is an asshole///)" Appetite for Destruction. A total 4 star all the way home.

Pearl Jam's second album to me is a ten (pun intended I guess). ....."Verses"

Let it Bleed to me is a 4 star puppy. So is Beggars. Don't forget Ricky Martin's second album as well. OK last ones a joke as you all hoped.

Ian


[Edited by IanBillen]
September 6th, 2005 12:05 PM
glencar It's "versus" ya moron!
September 6th, 2005 12:42 PM
Nasty Habits
quote:
Gazza wrote:
True, although "love and theft" came out at a stage in Dylan's career that the Stones are at now and was instantly hailed as a classic that was comparable to his best work.

Not sure of Nasty deliberately mentioned that one due to the fact that Edna Gunderson was probably the first music critic to write about that record, a couple of months before its release, and published a review of it that had Dylan fans salivating with anticipation - so, I guess she would have given it the 4-star treatment as well.



Thanks for noticing, Gazza! That was part of it. It was also because as far as post 60 year olds playing rock and roll goes, Love and Theft is the ideal to which all geezers must aspire. Anything less is clearly dockable. And although Bigger Bang is a damn fine album, it clearly ain't no Love and Theft.

September 6th, 2005 08:06 PM
Soldatti
quote:
There's not a clunker in the bunch


Agree, maybe SNC is the only weak track but is not so bad.
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
The Rolling Stones World Tour 2005 Rolling Stones Bigger Bang Tour 2005 2006 Rolling Stones Forum - Rolling Stones Message Board - Mick Jagger - Keith Richards - Brian Jones - Charlie Watts - Ian Stewart - Stu - Bill Wyman - Mick Taylor - Ronnie Wood - Ron Wood - Rolling Stones 2005 Tour - Farewell Tour - Rolling Stones: Onstage World Tour A Bigger Bang US Tour

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED)