Friday, October 20, 2023

"Hackney Diamonds": Best Stones Record Since...

 



I hadn't been this excited about a Rolling Stones release since the last season of "Barnaby Jones." And for some reason, I wasn't going into it expecting crap like I did with just about every record since "Undercover." I really believed the hype, not to mention really enjoying the first two singles.

I gave it three uninterrupted plays and each spin felt different.

First play:

I really like this record. 

"Angry" sounded even better coming through the stereo versus YouTube on the computer speakers. That dropout at the 2:00 mark with the handclaps accompanying the guitar solo is bad ass. 

The drum intro of "Get Close" should tip you off immediately that Charlie is missing, but it is a fine groove with Keith miraculously still finding ways to make one or two chords sound massive. 

"Depending On You" was sweet enough, and at this point I thought, "This is a great Jagger solo record." I wasn't really feeling the Stones...yet.

"Bite Your Head Off," the one with Sir Paul, is nasty and in your face and just knowing it is McCartney fuzzing it out really made me happy.

"Whole Wide World" is a hook-filled gem, but again, it isn't feeling like the Stones.

I was looking forward to "Dreamy Skies," the country track. It's a good one, and the first track that reminded me of who I was listening to. Only problem with "Dreamy Skies" is that it never goes anywhere. Same three note melody for 4:38, and it worked better as "No Expectations."

By this time, I had forgotten that there were two songs featuring Charlie and Bill, and I coasted out the rest of the record.

First pass- 7/10. Very satisfied.

Second play:

I cranked this baby and every song sounded better than the first pass. "Depending On You" is now my favorite track on the record. "Dreamy Skies" much better than my first impression. As a matter of fact, I was now hearing the Rolling Stones. Listen to that guitar break right after Paul's bass solo in "Bite Your Face Off." Who the hell else could this be?

Second pass- 9/10

Third play:

It's on and I am working. I am pricing about 50 LPs and every track is sticking. I'm anticipating the vocal inflection on the chorus of "Get Close." I'm harmonizing along with Mick on "Depending On You." By the time it gets to the solo Keef showcase, "Tell Me Straight," I can hear Jagger harmonizing with Keith. At least I think it's Mick. I mean, it's fucking sweet as hell. Could it be Keef harmonizing with himself? This is terrific!

Holy Crap! It's the fucking Stones and they're 80 years old and giving me a ride and a half.

Third pass- 9/10

"Hackney Diamonds" a 9/10 rating? 

Well, yeah. I have to. To say it's the best Stones album since "Steel Wheels" might sound like I am damning with faint praise. But I truly love "Steel Wheels" and I sincerely believe this new record is the best in over 30 years. It could have been crap and that statement might have still rung true. But if you can't hear how the Stones are not just phoning it in on "Hackney Diamonds," you aren't listening.

I'm taking a break and waiting for my vinyl copy to arrive on Monday for spin #4 and hopefully 5 and 6. Let's see if this record has legs. Right now, it sure feels like it does.

God bless you, Andrew Watt.


21 comments:

Chris said...

Two listens in and really enjoying it. Gonna play the vinyl when I get home.

Tumblingdice70 said...

Great comments Sal. It's always hilarious to read the reviews, from way too effusive to someone at Pitchfork whose Mom did not restock their favorite cereal this morning. My thoughts:

1) There is no reason for this to exist other than they genuinely cared to make it. This is not a cash grab, there is no cash to grab selling records, and they're going to sell out shows just by being alive and showing up.
2) These are some of their strongest songs in quite a while, and at 48 minutes it's the right length.
3) Mick's voice is fantastic, I know you can sweeten stuff with autotune but I'll be damned if he doesn't sound great throughout.
4) Andrew Wyatt certainly cares and brought out something special in them. Mick just has to have somebody involved who is tied to current trends, and Wyatt obviously respects their catalog and does it the right way. Good riddance Don Was.
5) I cringed when I saw the guest list when the first reports of the album came out, figuring under Was it would be hacky, but these are people who love the Stones and they all just support the music in the right way. Well done.
6) I can't believe Wyatt got 3 co-writes, somewhere Mick Taylor is doing a spit take.
7) I have found myself driving today, drifting away for a moment and just grooving, then catching myself and thinking, holy crap, this is a new Stones album that came out today. Really could be the last time.
8) Rolling Stone Blues is such a great way to end it.

There's no reason to be hyper-critical. These are the last days of the great dinosaurs walking the earth, not just the Stones but this whole generation that created the rock and roll we love. For goodness sake, let's enjoy it and be grateful.

Bryan

Mark said...

Re: Tumblingdice70 said... "This is not a cash grab"

Not to put too fine a point on it, because I wholly agree with all of your very good points, and I thought you put them all across really well.

I'm not so sure, however, that I can agree with your opinion of this not being a cash grab. Perhaps not the album itself, but with the album being issued and instantly available in your choice of 35+ different cover designs, knowing that there are those -- don't look at me! -- who will buy multiple copies because of variants on sleeve design, well... that particular aspect sure seems to me the definition of "cash grab."

Still, an incredibly welcome return to form, musically. A far better one than anybody had a right to reasonably expect.

Sal Nunziato said...

@ Mark,
Respectfully, it seems unlikely that the boys and Andrew Watt were in the studio working out songs to the specific choreography of "this would sound good on the Chicago White Sox edition of the album." What comes after, well...it's business. And yes, there will be a few who will buy all 35 MLB designs. But let's not mix the two. The music on the record has little to do with how they choose to market it.

Anonymous said...

Really great review, Sal - your comments give me a lot to listen for. I got a purple copy at Target today... woo-hoo!!

I could've listened to it today, but the Missus was home so I'm waiting until tomorrow when she ain't, so I can crank it.

Randy

Mark said...

Sal Nunziato said... "@ Mark...The music on the record has little to do with how they choose to market it."

Absolutely 100% agreed.

Noel M said...

Excellent review. I just can't wait to hear it! Not sure if I can get by a record store this weekend, but if not, very soon.

Anonymous said...

Excellent review write-up, Sal. I had a similar listening experience though I was less satisfied on my first listen than you. But, on my second pass it all clicked for me and I loved what I heard. With each subsequent play I loved the album more. I enjoy how the album seems to include subtle references to earlier Stones albums. I don’t recall listening with so much focus and growing fondness to a Stones album since Tattoo You. I’m looking forward to playing it again!
If this proves to be the band’s final studio effort, it’s a worthy exit after 60 years. Thanks to all for their insights.

Mr. Baez said...

Great review. I'm right there with you Sal. really digging this one!

steve simels said...

Terrific review, Sal. You're a hell of a writer.

Not sure I'm agreeing with you about the record overall, at least yet, but you're right -- they're not phoning it in.

Michael Giltz said...

I know it's only rock n roll, but I like it!

Agree on those who say it ain't a cash grab. (Was it Fleetwood Mac who said why bother making a new album? No one listens to them anymore? They can just tour and make a ton of money.) And agree with those who find the 37 different versions annoying in general.

But not a word on Lady Gaga in this post by anyone. (She has had a very offbeat career, musically!)

Ive enjoyed it on first spin and am just pleased it's not embarrassing. The guest list also worried me. Sigh of relief, though they've never meant as much to me as others. But very cool to see 80 year olds rocking out. Now to see if it holds up.

Mark said...

Michael Giltz said... "But not a word on Lady Gaga in this post by anyone."

I'll cop to having been a bit sceptical when I first read of her involvement, but I reckon she did a fine job. I would've preferred Merry Clayton or Darlene Love - or both! - but Gaga's contribution certainly didn't knock anything down a peg or two.

buzzbabyjesus said...

Best Stones album since "Exile On Main St". Sounds fresh, Rockin', and Mick Jagger is phenomenal.

Makes me happy they pulled this off.

Chris Collins said...

I remember saying "Do I dare hope for a good Stones record?" on this site and I'm with you. I LOVE this record! I think we've hit a GREAT Stones album. The hooks work. The band sounds great. Charlie is missed, of course. But this seems to be a record made for the actual love of it- something they haven't done in a long long time. I'm so happy with this!

also, fuck the Pitchfork review!

Sal Nunziato said...

"also, fuck the Pitchfork review!"

Grayson Currin probably hates the Stones. No other explanation.

Anonymous said...

Well, it doesn't make me happy or sad to weigh in on it, since I don't give much thought to the Stones one way or t'other. But I just listened thru, and it is a dang good listen. I wasn't bowled over by Angry when it was featured here, and I had the opposite take as you on the coda to Sweet Sound, so I was prepared to be underwhelmed. But it is GOOD. I'm still listening with laptop speakers, so I can't explain why Angry now sounds as good to me as it did to so many others. Maybe it's hearing it as part of a set, like us ol' folks used to do back in the days of vinylsaurs?
C in California

hpunch said...

I got my copy yesterday and only listened once. I would agree with your 9/10 right off the bat. It feels like the songs harken back to their classic eras , ( "let's try one that might've been on Exile, let's try one that could've been on Some Girls, how about a Sticky Fingers one?, don't forget Let It Bleed" ) while still sounding inspired and fresh.

wardo said...

This is very encouraging, Sal. I've been wary of having high expectations with this. I liked Voodoo and Bridges (both of which I heard a lot because I was managing a CD store in the '90s) and have been less familiar with Bang (because I haven't listened to it anywhere near as much having not managed a CD store in this century) so I'm hoping I don't hate this. My copy is supposedly arriving today.

cmealha said...

I got my vinyl copy and listened with a bit of trepidation because of all the glowing reviews I’ve been reading. I thought my hopes had been raised too high and it would never live up to my expectations. Well, much like the new Scorsese movie, it lives up to the hype and then some. listening to the whole thing reinforced my initial reaction, after the first 2 songs were released, that Mick is the MVP of this project. Not only is his singing as good as it’s ever been, but the clear attention to melody, which I’m assuming is coming mostly from the singer, makes this the best stones record in 4 decades. If this is the last we hear from them, it’s a great way to finish up, but I’m hoping for more.

cmealha said...

P.S. Second in the MVP voting had to be Andrew Watt. He’s updated the sound but he managed to make the Stibes sound like the Stones again.

M_Sharp said...

Excellent review, Sal! I've only had time for one listen straight through, and "Dreamy Skies" is the only track I didn't much care for. I'm thinking maybe it should been more country-ish, a little pedal steel?

I'm definitley looking forward to future spins!