It’s kind of obvious you weren’t impressed by the picture! You were fair, though. I liked Angry. It’s funny they record that years after Keith’s Happy.
I do feel this review has started with a view that it wont be any good so lets find the reasons to confirm that. All I can say is after listening to it once I listened again and again and now I think its a great album. There are some very good tracks on it and there isnt any that I would call fillers that you see on many albums . Every track stands alone and deserves its place. Nice variation and you dont know whats coming next. Not as raw as early stones but thoroughly justifies its release. Production is top notch and Micks singing gives no indication of his age and there great song writing ability is on display.
I have not heard or listened to this album fully. BUT–I agree with others. The Stones don't need to prove themselves any longer. BUT–I also think they would like to play and write to the level they once did. Bottom line. I'm just happy they are still out there and still performing! A big regret. I've never seen them live and now I can't afford tickets. I so missed out in the '70's!
Eric, THANK YOU for your HONEST and what I would also say with you that this was a dissapointment album for me. And I LOVE the Stones! The album sounds like a computer genertaed and produced tin can. The only spark of old Stones magic for me was also Keith’s singing track. Anytime Keith sings on a Stones album, I feel the smoke in the room and an aroma of Jack and Coke in the air. And thats what makes the Stones dirty and enjoyable. But every other song sounds computer clean. And I was completely turned off by it. One other bright spot is the video that accompanies the “Angry” song. That AI video does show the nostalgia of the Stones and almost brings us right back to the 70’s and 80’s in that video. We miss the Stones in their prime and was a great flashback moment. I think the Stones should stop soon as they have ZERO to prove by touring or making forgetable albums. Thank you again Eric for your true and honest take here. You Rock man!
I appreciate your comments but I totally disagree with your overall evaluation. This album sounds like what the Rolling Stones should sound like. It's unmistakably them, regardless of the shine that Andrew Watt puts on the production. To me, the album has a modern feel without abandoning the classic sound that is properly that of the Rolling Stones. The Stones explore different genres (blues, country, gospel, disco, punk, straight-ahead rock, etc…) as they've done often before over the course of their lengthy career. I've listened to the album many times from start to finish since its release on October 20th, and I am blown away by what they've succeeded in accomplishing. It's too soon to say where it ranks in the Stones' catalog, but it is truly worthy of the legendary status of this band. Mick, especially, sounds like he's still 30 years old, truly remarkable. Again, I very much respect your opinion, and I am sure we could have a great discussion about it if we were to chat face to face, but I am at the opposite end of you when it comes to my appreciation of "Hackney Diamonds".
Definitely a valid opinion, but I think this is the kind of album that The Rolling Stones do. They always try to be moderns, in all decades after they 60's. They don't try to be over the top with complex songs, I was expecting a modern album and I think they did it great! Love the song and they have a really great sound.
You said "would we we're talking about this album if it wouldn't be a Rolling Stones album?" But if a new band releases something like this I would become a fan instantly.
I like how positive reviews that praise and defend this bloated monstrosity claim that "such good production and the writing on the songs! So contemporary, fresh and original! Even micks voice sounds incredible!" While a man who's 80 has to resort to using autotune to fix his wail and trick people into thinking he still has talent. And that's another ironic thing, what's now original, fresh, contemporary, and profitable on the rock scene in 2023, are young bands who embrace the old school rolling stones, beatles and led zeppelin classic rock sound, who then later on find thier own sonic feet, and go further on from there. From Greta Van Fleet, to Måneskin, to The Killers. By trying to "Contemporize" the stones have quite frankly snuffed out any chance of them achieving any kind of actual relevance in the future. You guys could transition in to a sunset strip indie rock group with two nights playing at the whiskey a go go and still be way more ahead of the curb than this muck!
No no no – cmon give them a break. We don’t need the stones to sing about aging cmon – Get Close?? Listen to that riff a few times and it sounds like 1972 – yea it’s not as dirty and smoky as the old ones but again, after 18 yrs – it’s a solid solid album
I think you need to do a reassessment of this album. You seem to be looking for something where The Stones reinvent themselves but this was not their aim when they recorded this album. They are the Stones just being the Stones with some modern production touches is the results of this album and the Stones are doing a damn good job of it at this late stage in the game.
mudthehunter6618,The Beatles were a great* rock band* the greatest ever,but they were also the most diverse and prolific rock band ever so even though they wrote and played plenty of great rock music from the beginning, they wrote all styles of music.
The All Music Guide classifies both The Beatles and The Rolling Stones as pop rock and they have similar descriptions for both bands styles of many of their songs and albums.
In 1963 Mick Jagger asked John Lennon and Paul McCartney if they had any songs for them because The Rolling Stones were only recording cover songs on their first several albums.
So John and Paul wrote the rock and roll song I Wanna Be Your Man right in front of Keith Richards and Mick Jagger who were really impressed that they could write a song just like that to order and it inspired them to start writing their own songs and both bands became good friends and hung out together from then on.
And John Lennon played Keith Richards guitar and Paul McCartney played Bill Wyman's bass as they wrote it right in front of them and it became one of The Rolling Stones first hit songs.
John Lennon and Paul McCartney were such amazingly talented song writers that they also wrote hit songs for other music artists in 1963 just as their own song writing success was getting off the ground such as Peter and Gordon, Billy J Kramer And The Dakota's, and singer Cilla Black.
The Rolling Stones also wrote more than a few songs that can be described as pop songs such as Ruby Tuesday,As Tears Go By,Happy,Lady Jane, Waiting On Friend, She's A Rainbow, and their two disco songs that I never could stand Miss You and Emotional Rescue etc.
Also for Rolling Stones fans that say that The Rolling Stones have stayed together for 61 years, well The Beatles didn't even have to stay together much longer because they wrote and played like 50 years worth of mostly great and what wasn't great was still good,critically acclaimed popular songs and albums of all different styles in just an amazing 8 year recording career and nobody else has done this before during or since!
But what does it really say about The Rolling Stones when fans often say they hadn't made a great album in 30 or 40 years but many of their fans claim that they stayed together for 61 years but The Beatles broke up in 1970.
Well The Beatles wrote, played and recorded like 50 years worth of mostly great and what wasn't great was still good, critically acclaimed popular songs and albums of all different styles of music including plenty of great rock music from the beginning,in only an 8 year recording career and nobody else has done this before during or since and they are also the most covered music artists and band of all time by all different types of music artists including Motown, classical,jazz,pop,and even heavy metal.
scott963 In 1963 Mick Jagger asked John Lennon and Paul McCartney if they had any songs for them because they were only recording cover songs on their first several albums.
So John and Paul wrote the rock and roll song I Wanna Be Your Man right in front of Keith Richards and Mick Jagger who were really impressed that they could write a song just like that to order and it inspired them to start writing their own songs and both bands became good friends and hung out together from then on.
And John Lennon played Keith Richards guitar and Paul McCartney played Bill Wyman's bass as they wrote it right in front of them and it became one of The Rolling Stones first hit songs.
John Lennon and Paul McCartney were such amazingly talented song writers that in 1963 they also wrote hit songs for other music artists just as their own song writing success was getting off the ground such as Peter and Gordon, Billy J Kramer And The Dakota's,and singer Cilla Black.
And I got news for you Keith Richards has always been an outspoken big Beatles fan.
@williamlangan5902
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
It’s kind of obvious you weren’t impressed by the picture! You were fair, though. I liked Angry. It’s funny they record that years after Keith’s Happy.
@user-ky9px1po1g
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
What a crap .Great Album.
@john8660
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
So the album is lacking because The Rolling Stones made a Rolling Stones album instead of confronting their mortality like Bowie did? Thats funny.
@bjs7442
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
I do feel this review has started with a view that it wont be any good so lets find the reasons
to confirm that. All I can say is after listening to it once I listened again and again and now
I think its a great album. There are some very good tracks on it and there isnt any that I would call fillers that you see on many albums . Every track stands alone and deserves its place. Nice variation and you dont know whats coming next. Not as raw as early stones but thoroughly justifies its release. Production is top notch and Micks singing gives no indication of his age and there great song writing ability is on display.
@kview130
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
I have not heard or listened to this album fully. BUT–I agree with others. The Stones don't need to prove themselves any longer. BUT–I also think they would like to play and write to the level they once did. Bottom line. I'm just happy they are still out there and still performing! A big regret. I've never seen them live and now I can't afford tickets. I so missed out in the '70's!
@domingosricao
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
Awesome album!
@scottmunds2786
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
Eric, THANK YOU for your HONEST and what I would also say with you that this was a dissapointment album for me. And I LOVE the Stones! The album sounds like a computer genertaed and produced tin can. The only spark of old Stones magic for me was also Keith’s singing track. Anytime Keith sings on a Stones album, I feel the smoke in the room and an aroma of Jack and Coke in the air. And thats what makes the Stones dirty and enjoyable. But every other song sounds computer clean. And I was completely turned off by it. One other bright spot is the video that accompanies the “Angry” song. That AI video does show the nostalgia of the Stones and almost brings us right back to the 70’s and 80’s in that video. We miss the Stones in their prime and was a great flashback moment. I think the Stones should stop soon as they have ZERO to prove by touring or making forgetable albums. Thank you again Eric for your true and honest take here. You Rock man!
@luizoswaldoabreu2752
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
A superb, outstanding album.
@michael1415
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
I appreciate your comments but I totally disagree with your overall evaluation. This album sounds like what the Rolling Stones should sound like. It's unmistakably them, regardless of the shine that Andrew Watt puts on the production. To me, the album has a modern feel without abandoning the classic sound that is properly that of the Rolling Stones. The Stones explore different genres (blues, country, gospel, disco, punk, straight-ahead rock, etc…) as they've done often before over the course of their lengthy career. I've listened to the album many times from start to finish since its release on October 20th, and I am blown away by what they've succeeded in accomplishing. It's too soon to say where it ranks in the Stones' catalog, but it is truly worthy of the legendary status of this band. Mick, especially, sounds like he's still 30 years old, truly remarkable. Again, I very much respect your opinion, and I am sure we could have a great discussion about it if we were to chat face to face, but I am at the opposite end of you when it comes to my appreciation of "Hackney Diamonds".
@grooveyerbouti
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
As a fan I'd agree it's fun but it doesn't push any boundaries, within thier field.
@Open_Culture
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
This album way exceeded expectations. Spend two weeks with it. Give it several listens. And you end up realizing it's a surprise and a gift.
@luksgibson
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
Definitely a valid opinion, but I think this is the kind of album that The Rolling Stones do. They always try to be moderns, in all decades after they 60's. They don't try to be over the top with complex songs, I was expecting a modern album and I think they did it great! Love the song and they have a really great sound.
You said "would we we're talking about this album if it wouldn't be a Rolling Stones album?" But if a new band releases something like this I would become a fan instantly.
@Romchikthelemon
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
I don't give a damn about RS. I just love your channel.
@notramesses4790
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
I like how positive reviews that praise and defend this bloated monstrosity claim that "such good production and the writing on the songs! So contemporary, fresh and original! Even micks voice sounds incredible!" While a man who's 80 has to resort to using autotune to fix his wail and trick people into thinking he still has talent. And that's another ironic thing, what's now original, fresh, contemporary, and profitable on the rock scene in 2023, are young bands who embrace the old school rolling stones, beatles and led zeppelin classic rock sound, who then later on find thier own sonic feet, and go further on from there. From Greta Van Fleet, to Måneskin, to The Killers. By trying to "Contemporize" the stones have quite frankly snuffed out any chance of them achieving any kind of actual relevance in the future. You guys could transition in to a sunset strip indie rock group with two nights playing at the whiskey a go go and still be way more ahead of the curb than this muck!
@DevastacionAnalogica
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
En mi vida he escuchado otra psh canción que no sea paint it black y la vd no me está convenciendo mucho de hacerlo, pa
@RobissimoFC
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
No no no – cmon give them a break. We don’t need the stones to sing about aging cmon – Get Close?? Listen to that riff a few times and it sounds like 1972 – yea it’s not as dirty and smoky as the old ones but again, after 18 yrs – it’s a solid solid album
@thejoyofthemusicinmylife7897
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
I think you need to do a reassessment of this album. You seem to be looking for something where The Stones reinvent themselves but this was not their aim when they recorded this album. They are the Stones just being the Stones with some modern production touches is the results of this album and the Stones are doing a damn good job of it at this late stage in the game.
@gcrichman53
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
mudthehunter6618,The Beatles were a great* rock band* the greatest ever,but they were also the most diverse and prolific rock band ever so even though they wrote and played plenty of great rock music from the beginning, they wrote all styles of music.
The All Music Guide classifies both The Beatles and The Rolling Stones as pop rock and they have similar descriptions for both bands styles of many of their songs and albums.
In 1963 Mick Jagger asked John Lennon and Paul McCartney if they had any songs for them because The Rolling Stones were only recording cover songs on their first several albums.
So John and Paul wrote the rock and roll song I Wanna Be Your Man right in front of Keith Richards and Mick Jagger who were really impressed that they could write a song just like that to order and it inspired them to start writing their own songs and both bands became good friends and hung out together from then on.
And John Lennon played Keith Richards guitar and Paul McCartney played Bill Wyman's bass as they wrote it right in front of them and it became one of The Rolling Stones first hit songs.
John Lennon and Paul McCartney were such amazingly talented song writers that they also wrote hit songs for other music artists in 1963 just as their own song writing success was getting off the ground such as Peter and Gordon, Billy J Kramer And The Dakota's, and singer Cilla Black.
The Rolling Stones also wrote more than a few songs that can be described as pop songs such as Ruby Tuesday,As Tears Go By,Happy,Lady Jane, Waiting On Friend, She's A Rainbow, and their two disco songs that I never could stand Miss You and Emotional Rescue etc.
Also for Rolling Stones fans that say that The Rolling Stones have stayed together for 61 years, well The Beatles didn't even have to stay together much longer because they wrote and played like 50 years worth of mostly great and what wasn't great was still good,critically acclaimed popular songs and albums of all different styles in just an amazing 8 year recording career and nobody else has done this before during or since!
@gcrichman53
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
richardrfortuna
@gcrichman53
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
scott963 Is this what you wrongly think about all of The Beatles music or just the new song Now And Then?
@gcrichman53
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
But what does it really say about The Rolling Stones when fans often say they hadn't made a great album in 30 or 40 years but many of their fans claim that they stayed together for 61 years but The Beatles broke up in 1970.
Well The Beatles wrote, played and recorded like 50 years worth of mostly great and what wasn't great was still good, critically acclaimed popular songs and albums of all different styles of music including plenty of great rock music from the beginning,in only an 8 year recording career and nobody else has done this before during or since and they are also the most covered music artists and band of all time by all different types of music artists including Motown, classical,jazz,pop,and even heavy metal.
@gcrichman53
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
scott963 In 1963 Mick Jagger asked John Lennon and Paul McCartney if they had any songs for them because they were only recording cover songs on their first several albums.
So John and Paul wrote the rock and roll song I Wanna Be Your Man right in front of Keith Richards and Mick Jagger who were really impressed that they could write a song just like that to order and it inspired them to start writing their own songs and both bands became good friends and hung out together from then on.
And John Lennon played Keith Richards guitar and Paul McCartney played Bill Wyman's bass as they wrote it right in front of them and it became one of The Rolling Stones first hit songs.
John Lennon and Paul McCartney were such amazingly talented song writers that in 1963 they also wrote hit songs for other music artists just as their own song writing success was getting off the ground such as Peter and Gordon, Billy J Kramer And The Dakota's,and singer Cilla Black.
And I got news for you Keith Richards has always been an outspoken big Beatles fan.
@vishnualcyone9170
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
Proving why The Beatles are better! Lol!
@DannyGadish
April 25, 2024 at 10:39 pm
Agree 100%