New reissue of Exile on Main Street

just read the cover story of rolling stone, which was about the making of exile---very good read. the article spends a good bit of focus on the actual recording and mixing processes, both of which were unusual to say the least and which likely accounts for the strange, unique sounding mix.

i do recall that the original release was generally regarded as a botched production job--murky and muddy--which may account for the mixed reactions above. i always thought the sound quality was part of its allure; query whether they've chosen to clean things up in the remastering.
thanks for your responses.

actually, according to the same rolling stone article, keith stated that exile was the first grunge record. according to wikipedia "grunge is generally characterized by heavily distorted electric guitars, contrasting song dynamics, and apathetic or angst-filled lyrics. The grunge aesthetic is stripped-down compared to other forms of rock music, and many grunge musicians were noted for their unkempt appearances and rejection of theatrics." now, the stones were rarely stripped down, and never eschewed theatrics, so i wouldn't think of 'em as grungey, but it's interesting to read how they regard themselves.

genre lines are always blurry, but loving cup, sweet virginia and torn and frayed are as country as it gets. gram parsons was hanging around the studio during the recording (and reportedly 86ed for misconduct), and his influence was obvious

FWIW, allmusic lumps "alt-country", "americana" and "neo-traditional folk" within the same subgenre, "alternative country", and generally defines these styles as country stripped to its basics and subverted; the unifying factor being that they're simple, traditional forms made outside the nashville system and, in the case of alt-country and americana, infused with rock and roll aesthetics. allmusic doesn't classify either the stones or neil young as alternative country.

i finally succumbed and bought the new exile reissue. to my ears, it does sound better than the original cd and vinyl releases--more detailed and less murky, without the overly-digital brightness of most such exercises--drums and piano, in particular, are better articulated. the new, bonus material sounds mainly like works-in-progress--no real lost classics--but an interesting listen nonetheless. i just heard that the reissue is top of the charts in the uk, which is either a tribute to its timelessness or a sad commentary on the state of modern rock.

I've had Disc 2 of the reissue in constant rotation of late, and, like everyone else I may have unfairly dismissed it earlier as merely pleasant filler. It's actually pretty great in its own right--loose, swaggering, free of a lot of the studio sheen that sucks some of the enrgy of their regular releases. Plus there's a lot of that inimitable, jagged guitar. I think the songs are there, too--perhaps a little tossed-off in the lyrics, but they stick in your head. As a standalone record, I'd place it near the top of their canon. Wonder what other old stuff they have buried away.