It's a 10

>>69426198
I'm actually surprised by how good Mick Jagger sounds, he's not as washed up as I expected him to sound.

>>69426198
is this a NEW album by the rolling stones? those guys can't possibly STILL be making music can they?

>>69426918
He traded his looks for vocals

>>69426944
It's a blues covers album, and a surprisingly good one.
At this point if they insist on recording new material sticking to covers is probably their best bet, especially since they were so good at it at the beginning of their career.

>>69426944
>>69426955
This is now a digits thread.

>>69426982
no it isnt

>>69427014
Yes.

>>69426982
check these

>>69427014
ur just mad that I can get dubs

>>69426944
Well I'll just try again!

File: Jags_guy.jpg (55KB, 341x500px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 341x500px

>>69426198
>has a baby with a 20 year old
>lonesome
>blues

>>69427077
Check these, dude!

File: dubs-face.jpg (237KB, 1100x1380px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1100x1380px

>>69427077

>>69427077
Haha, can i BE STOPPED?

>>69427118
Because they are all covers, so the original artists have loaned the Stones their blues, therefore Lonesome Blues = Loan Some Blues

>>69427014
Told you.

>>69427176
Holy shit.

>>69427176
damn...

Really couldn't be happier as a Stones fan... Best thing they made since Tattoo You, and probably a new second-tier classic for the band

File: 1467007212343.jpg (49KB, 899x674px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 899x674px

>>69427176
>((((only newfags will undesrstand))))))))))))

>>69426198
pathetic shit to throw in the toilet

>>69428724
>>69428747
you guys should fight

>>69428766
Why should I entertain the thoughts of an underage poster?

>>69426918
Jagger is a genetic freak as far as his voice goes. He's barely changed at all in half a century.

>>69428834
Maybe his voice has gotten a tad more raspy, but it's definitely amazing that he could keep it up for all these decades.

>>69428766
Why should I entertain the thoughts of a human waste?

>>69428833
>>69428874
r-rude

I liked it.

There's not too many frontmen who've retained their vocals as well as MJ, unless maybe Steven Tyler (also genetic freak).

Jagger was old when I was transitioning from pre-teen in the 80s, and he popped up with my favourite artists: Dancing in the Streets with Bowie (deal with it), State of Shock with the Jacksons. Jagger's no Bowie, but he will always be relevant.

>>69426198
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Rm-Iq7kHE0

I'm listening it right now for the first time and I'm enjoying in it.
I know the fact that is an album of cover but the quality is great, every song is good and probably this is one of the best Rolling Stones album. The only downside is that we are in 2016 and not 1966. But I don't really care.

>>69426198
Link?

>>69426198
Love in Vain is one of my favorite Stones tracks, should I listen to this or just relisten to that?

>>69429333
This album is more like "LITTLE RED ROOSTER". So don't listen to it if you don't like "THE LITTLE RED ROOSTER".

Too bad they didn't do this years ago because people were always saying they should do a blues covers album like Aerosmith did before they die.

File: stones.jpg (45KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 500x500px

>>69429435
They already did

>>69429090
Jagger seemed like Methusela in the 80s when he was like 43, but today the average age of big-name rock stars is 48 or something.

Could be worse. Blues covers are tasteful, age-appropriate, and it's also material they love and are really passionate about.

WASH YOUR HANDS THREE TIMES A DAY. ALWAYS DO WHAT YOUR MOM AND DAD SAY. BRUSH YOUR TEETH IN THE FOLLOWING WAY. WASH YOUR HANDS THREE TIMES A DAY.

>>69426944
I'm BACK!

>>69431944
AHHHAH YEAH I AM THE GREATEST TO EVER LIVE

>>69431944
I'm BACK AGAIN

>>69426198
Not honkin on bobo/10