| February 12th, 2006 04:37 PM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
IzzyStradlin wrote:
I never really understood why people give a flying fuck about album sales.
I care about good music.
likewise, I cant understand why people give a flying fuck about concert grosses...as if its some kind of badge of honour or victory to prove you can get away with charging higher prices than everyone else. |
| February 12th, 2006 04:40 PM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
likewise, I cant understand why people give a flying fuck about concert grosses
I think it's a kind of pride.
Pride..wait..isn't it a U2 song?? |
| February 12th, 2006 05:04 PM |
|
|
| jostorm |
Very eloquent and articulate, Dart, I liked your post, but, as others are trying to point out without saying so, the fact is simply that the Stones have become exclusive, very successful, professional prostitutes, they know exactly how much they can ask for the little they give us....and I think the "hunger" gets lessened when arthritis kicks in, and you find it hard work to visit the six houses you have scattered over the globe's most exclusive locations even once each in one year, and your mate gets cancer, you must stop and think "shit, do I really want to do this for another twenty years???" I think the only driving forces nowadays are force of habit and money.I still love them, in a sort of immature toddler way, but internally something has broken. Still, I look forward to the 3 european dates on my calendar ....
PS: And I wish that at least they were trying to sell us four nicely designed and special t-shirts for 100 US$, what ghastly colours!......Get the chappie who designed the ipod to work on the t's...I mean, screw us further, by all means, but give us a classy product in return, at least ! |
| February 12th, 2006 05:21 PM |
|
|
| IzzyStradlin |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
likewise, I cant understand why people give a flying fuck about concert grosses...as if its some kind of badge of honour or victory to prove you can get away with charging higher prices than everyone else.
Agreed. Numbers mean shit. Quality is all that counts. |
| February 12th, 2006 06:09 PM |
|
|
| Poison Dart |
Thanks Gazza
I for one would like to see what Rubin would have done with ONNYA. A really good song that could have been great. Same for Rough Justice and Back of my Hand.
I can assure you that filler like Look What the Cat Dragged, Driving too Fast,Streets of Love (some of the worst lyrics in the history of music) and Sweet Neo-Con (I'm not talking politics I'm just talking music) would not have even made the record.
Rubin would demand that they keep trying until they got at least 10 great songs. End of story.
I know Mick might not like that because he is too busy designing $45 T-shirts or getting cozy with some suit from Ameriquest or Microsoft. But the bottom line is Rick Rubin would demand Jagger leave that shit to someone else and make a GREAT (not good) Rolling Stones record in the year 2006.
I don't know if Jagger's ego could handle that.
[Edited by Poison Dart] |
| February 12th, 2006 06:17 PM |
|
|
| Poison Dart |
Jostorm:
I hear what your saying. But if the Stones are going to continue to put the effort in why not go the extra mile and really concentrate on making great studio records? They have a chance that no one else has ever had. They are in a position to truly grow rock music up. Nobody not The Beatles not Elvis not Led Zep could do it. This should be the Stones goal. Not to write crap like Streets of Love in hopes opf getting on MTV at 65 years old. The Stones are bigger than that.
I know what they have done of late. I think some of my/our suggestions could push them back into making truly great studio records.
Being "musical prostitutes" should not be acceptable from the Rolling Stones.
This is exactly why U2 gets more respect from the media and public of late.
I want the swagger of the Stones to return. While at the same time lose the corporate image.
[Edited by Poison Dart]
[Edited by Poison Dart] |
| February 12th, 2006 07:43 PM |
|
|
| Nellcote |
I want the swagger of the Stones to return. While at the same time lose the corporate image.
[Edited by Poison Dart]
"You can't always git what you want..."
Or, as another rock band sang in the 70's
"Dream on, dream until your dreams come true"
As the Fools once sang...
"Life Sucks, then you die. Play some more of that yee-hah!"
BTW, no disrespect taken.
You have your dream, I have my opinion. |
| February 12th, 2006 08:15 PM |
|
|
| texile |
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
>How is it that the Stones wrote more mature songs "Salt of the Earth" and "Moonlight Mile" in their 20's and 30's. But in their 60's they are writting about their cocks?<
This kinda goes to them not BEING the Stones anymore, but ACTING like they are the Stones. It's like they are trying to be what they think the public expects them to be, instead of just being themselves. It's like Mick is acting the ROLE of Mick Jagger, instead of just letting go and being himself. Same with Keith and Ronnie. The only one I can't accuse that of is Charlie. Chaz is always the same. I just don't think he can be bothered about it. He just plays drums like always.
>Don Was did them great. Rick Rubin is a hit-maker. Rick Rubin would try to make them into a hit where as Don Was takes what they want and does the best job possible with it.<
Bullshit. Don Was does what he is told. He is in the producer chair because he follows directions and doesn't cause waves. The only reason the Stones even HAVE a producer is so that the Glimmers have a fall guy. Rick Rubin can work wonders in a studio, but in the end, Rick Rubin is the guy in charge. That would NEVER fly with Jagger. And besides, what fucking song was Rubin going to turn into a hit off of ABB? It's an album of filler...you can't make gold outta lead...I don't care who the alchemist is.
>What's wrong with SOL???<
Well, it's boring. The lyrics look to have been written by a 14 year old for his 8th grade "rock band" as the powewr ballad for the Jr High talent show. It's dumb and cheesey. It's already been done by every dumbass lame hair band that ruled the mid to late 80's. The melody is weak and forced. There is no natural flow to the "song". And I compliment it by considering it a song.
Actually, I think the better question to ask is...what ISN'T wrong with SOL?
>I agree that today they couldn't make Silvertrain. But they can make Rough Justice, which they never would have dreamed up in '73.<
Yeah, no shit. That's because they were coming up with far superior stuff like Silvertrain! You contradicted yerself dude!
>And it's not a lack of songwriting ability. It's good that they try something else.<
OK, then I hope that the something else that they try next time is not the same lame, boring, adult contemporary crap that they tried this time. See, I think that they CAN write much better songs...but they actually have to put some time & effort into it. They have to WANT to write better songs. At this point I think that they are content to put out an album of fart noises if they think that they can make another half billion dollars touring behind it. That is still the same Mick & Keith that wrote Midnight Rambler, you don't forget how to write great songs. But they do have to do what it takes to write those great songs. And if they are not that committed, then we are just going to get more of the same lame garbage that we got with ABB.
>Stones didn't build up the brand name by accident, but by the application of a pretty consistent corporate design philosophy.<
Ding ding ding...winner! It's all about the next quarter billion in the bank.
i tip my symbolic hat to you sir,
every point is dead on.
belli had me rolling with that don was comment....
|
| February 12th, 2006 08:18 PM |
|
|
| texile |
rubin is still the perfect choice -
he absolutely understands where artists roots come from and knows how to get it back...
what about jack white?
all i know is don was is useless.... |
| February 12th, 2006 08:22 PM |
|
|
| texile |
then again, the stones have to realize they are lacking -
they're like pepe lepew -
who close to them is going to tell them they stink...that's thier problem -
|
| February 12th, 2006 08:42 PM |
|
|
| ExileInLA |
quote:
voodoopug wrote:
ABB is a fine album...a different producer doesnt change this....also, the ticket prices should be higher to keep the tickets more available to the general public! you make interesting points, but, sadly, I disagree with nearly all of them.
you are mental. prices should be higher? are you high? why should we pay even more than what we are already paying? a fucking concert should be no more than 40 per person. |
| February 12th, 2006 09:29 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
quote:
Poison Dart wrote:
I can assure you that filler like Look What the Cat Dragged, Driving too Fast,Streets of Love (some of the worst lyrics in the history of music) and Sweet Neo-Con (I'm not talking politics I'm just talking music) would not have even made the record.
I don't think that LWTCDI and DTF are fillers, to me SSMC and BM are more filler than the other 2.
And for Mick, he loves the dance rhythms and the "fun" (his favorite word), so I can't imagine a complete serious record. |
| February 12th, 2006 09:41 PM |
|
|
| CraigP |
I'm happy with ONNYA. I wouldn't want to hear it any differently. ABB, on the other hand, could have used a little grit. |
| February 12th, 2006 10:43 PM |
|
|
| Ihavelotsajam |
quote:
IzzyStradlin wrote:
Quality is all that counts.
Which is about as subjective as anything gets. |
| February 13th, 2006 01:26 AM |
|
|
| Highwire Rob |
If corporate keeps them alive and Rocking then don't change a thing! I'm just happy the lads are still healthy & sane (relatively).
I mean, so far they've dodged the loonie bin for our sake...
The name of this song - you ready up there? The name of this song is "Merry-Go-Round" . . .
C'mon let's merry go, merry go, merry go round! Boop boop boop!
------------
When I kiss my girl at night I don't kiss her - I don't kiss h-- I kiss her blood cells, I kiss her heart - It's not what's outside that counts, it's what's inside a person!! DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?!?!!
She's my ugly beautiful girl! Hoo hoo!
-----------
Jumacfly, please pass the pipe, brother. |
| February 13th, 2006 02:50 AM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
LOL Rob,here it comes |
| February 13th, 2006 04:26 AM |
|
|
| jostorm |
Being musical prostitutes shouldn't be tolerated from the Stones????
It's just what very large amounts of money do to most humans,if you give it enough time.
I wish they had the "musical integrity" of (let's say for argument's sake) Bob Dylan, but perhaps that is a lot easier when it's just one of you and you can just follow your musical calling without three others constantly quibbling in, plus you can just pay the best session musicians to strut their stuff immaculately, without your music suffering from the drugs or arthritis or whatever problems of your bandmates....
My personal problem with them is the way they are screwing us fans, the concerts to me are still the best party in town, but the price has become very unpalatable, I find myself standing at a White Stripes concert and thiking "this is what it ought to be like...", that's the sad bit.... But the things I yearn for: A Jagger actually singing and fluidly dancing like he used to, totally oblivious of his surroundings, and the musicians in tight tune with one another, and, and,...are all firmly in the past. Some people have labelled them a "Vegas act", I believe they are not that wrong! They have become a spectacle for rich people, and rich people only! (And don't even mention Rio, they will have calculated a 12.72% increase on tour turnover through the sale of their DVD...) |
| February 13th, 2006 04:45 AM |
|
|
| MrPleasant |
quote:
ExileInLA wrote:
are you high?
Just wondering. Is that an insult? |
| February 13th, 2006 04:52 AM |
|
|
| MrPleasant |
quote:
jostorm wrote:
Being musical prostitutes shouldn't be tolerated from the Stones????
It's just what very large amounts of money do to most humans,if you give it enough time.
I wish they had the "musical integrity" of (let's say for argument's sake) Bob Dylan, but perhaps that is a lot easier when it's just one of you and you can just follow your musical calling without three others constantly quibbling in, plus you can just pay the best session musicians to strut their stuff immaculately, without your music suffering from the drugs or arthritis or whatever problems of your bandmates....
My personal problem with them is the way they are screwing us fans, the concerts to me are still the best party in town, but the price has become very unpalatable, I find myself standing at a White Stripes concert and thiking "this is what it ought to be like...", that's the sad bit.... But the things I yearn for: A Jagger actually singing and fluidly dancing like he used to, totally oblivious of his surroundings, and the musicians in tight tune with one another, and, and,...are all firmly in the past. Some people have labelled them a "Vegas act", I believe they are not that wrong! They have become a spectacle for rich people, and rich people only! (And don't even mention Rio, they will have calculated a 12.72% increase on tour turnover through the sale of their DVD...)
Shut up, Chuck, AND PLAY. |
| February 13th, 2006 06:10 AM |
|
|
| corgi37 |
good thread, if a trifle boring. This has been discussed before so many times. Poison Dart - I agree and disagree. You say the Stones should stick to 1 style for a cd as Macca had done with great success.
Mate, Macca's album has sold way less that the Stones! Plus, he plays up to 5-7 songs more a night than the Stones, so can fit them in. And, also, i think maybe they would have played up to 4-5 new songs, but after the terrible sales, thought "Stuff it, people dont wanna here the new stuff. Ok, its a greatest hits show again".
I thought it bizarre right from the tours start it is not called "The Bigger Bang tour". But, Stones: On stage
And, i have heard stuff all about the onstage seating. Is this still happening? |
| February 13th, 2006 07:08 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
corgi37 wrote:
I thought it bizarre right from the tours start it is not called "The Bigger Bang tour". But, Stones: On stage
And, i have heard stuff all about the onstage seating. Is this still happening?
When they announced the tour in May, the album wasnt completed and didnt have a title - hence the (temporary or alternate) "On Stage" title
Good question re: the onstage 'seating' (well, 'above stage standing' to be accurate). There hasnt been a stadium show for 4 months but there will be when they get to Argentina (the Rio show wont be using the standard outdoor stage for this tour). To the best of my knowledge they havent put any onstage tickets on sale yet, have they? That said, they waited until a few days before the US tour to sell them for THAT tour
The logic of putting these tickets on sale weeks or months after the tickets for the rest of the stadiums escapes me. |
| February 13th, 2006 07:27 AM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
Sadly Gazza the only logic in marketing is money...
what?? rock n roll you said?? what is that?? 
|
| February 13th, 2006 08:06 AM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
those who bitch about the official ticket price apparently fail to comprehend that the secondary ticket market already sets those prices and, indeed, even higher ones
the Stones are just cutting down the scalping margin
why are so many here protective of the scalpers?
if you can't afford it, work harder.....
|
| February 13th, 2006 08:31 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
lotsajizz wrote:
those who bitch about the official ticket price apparently fail to comprehend that the secondary ticket market already sets those prices and, indeed, even higher ones
the Stones are just cutting down the scalping margin
why are so many here protective of the scalpers?
if you can't afford it, work harder.....
oh I can "comprehend" the argument - I just dont agree that its accurate
The notion that the Stones are actually doing us a favour by minimizing scalping due to extortionate ticket prices is hilarious. Theres obviously no market for, say, U2 or Springsteen tickets, otherwise they'd do the same. If the Stones gave a shit about scalping, they wouldnt be ciphoning off huge percentages of their tickets to brokers -scalping in all but name (but with a nice percentage for the band at the same time), and would also make it easier (and fairer) for their fanbase to buy decent tickets at the same time - minimising the scalper 'problem' in the process.
Given the choice between paying (say) $100 for a concert ticket via a properly arranged presale (or even a public sale) and then,as a last resort, taking a risk with a scalper if you happen to get shut out is much more preferable than being asked to pay $450 through 'legitimate' channels for the same ticket. Supply and demand what it is, there will always be less people falling into that first category than are currently in the second one
and 'working harder' doesnt come into the equation (maybe you can arrange for overtime for me? LOL). I could 'afford' it if I was desperate enough. Fortunately, I'm not, but its great to know rock n roll has become elevated to such an exclusive form of entertainment like opera. No wonder the audiences are shit.
No one is being protective of scalpers. They're scum. All the more reason for the Stones not to swim in the same cesspool as them.
[Edited by Gazza] |
| February 13th, 2006 08:43 AM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
Well said Gazza ,100% agree.
the $tone$ became a Vegas act for sure.
I bet they will replace Celine Dion next year. |
| February 13th, 2006 08:46 AM |
|
|
| jostorm |
Gazza: the logic of selling you an upgrade in form of an "on stage" seat weeks before the show is very simple: most people will have forgotten that they already paid scalper prices for the original ticket months before....it's generally known as making good use of everyone's "Visa-statement-amnesia" in the marketing business.
Lotzajizz(you WISH!): your scalper theory is failed, as Gazza already pointed out. Let me put it in other terms: at the LICKS tour you had a lot of "genuine fans" impersonating a scalper for the evening, they were sitting next to their "scalpee", to whom they had sold a 35£ club-ticket for up to 2000£.
Swallow that! And that profit you don't even make on your investment if you are a Colombian drugdealer!!!!
How do the Stones work against scalping? They don't! And I
would venture to say that they use the scalpers as a wonderful source of information as to how much they get away with charging US. And what is selling blocks of really good seats to companies specialising in corporate/luxury experiences than condoning scalping????
|
| February 13th, 2006 12:54 PM |
|
|
| JumpingKentFlash |
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
>How is it that the Stones wrote more mature songs "Salt of the Earth" and "Moonlight Mile" in their 20's and 30's. But in their 60's they are writting about their cocks?<
This kinda goes to them not BEING the Stones anymore, but ACTING like they are the Stones. It's like they are trying to be what they think the public expects them to be, instead of just being themselves. It's like Mick is acting the ROLE of Mick Jagger, instead of just letting go and being himself. Same with Keith and Ronnie. The only one I can't accuse that of is Charlie. Chaz is always the same. I just don't think he can be bothered about it. He just plays drums like always.
-----
Well if they do that, isn't that what they are then? I would argue that you are what you do. Maybe in Crazy World it's differen't, or what do you think Balky?
-----
>Don Was did them great. Rick Rubin is a hit-maker. Rick Rubin would try to make them into a hit where as Don Was takes what they want and does the best job possible with it.<
Bullshit. Don Was does what he is told. He is in the producer chair because he follows directions and doesn't cause waves. The only reason the Stones even HAVE a producer is so that the Glimmers have a fall guy. Rick Rubin can work wonders in a studio, but in the end, Rick Rubin is the guy in charge. That would NEVER fly with Jagger. And besides, what fucking song was Rubin going to turn into a hit off of ABB? It's an album of filler...you can't make gold outta lead...I don't care who the alchemist is.
----
It flew on Wandering Spirit didn't it??? And ABB is an album of filler? HA!!! Waste of skin you are.
----
>What's wrong with SOL???<
Well, it's boring. The lyrics look to have been written by a 14 year old for his 8th grade "rock band" as the powewr ballad for the Jr High talent show.
----
I agree that the text is a bit lame, but it has some cool moments like "A couple watch me from above" and all that verse.
----
It's dumb and cheesy.
----
Remind you of anyone???
----
It's already been done by every dumbass lame hair band that ruled the mid to late 80's.
----
I guess you're weren't in any of them huh???
----
The melody is weak and forced. There is no natural flow to the "song". And I compliment it by considering it a song.
----
I disagree my man.
----
Actually, I think the better question to ask is...what ISN'T wrong with SOL?
----
OK. Ask that. I guess no reply will come to you.
----
>I agree that today they couldn't make Silvertrain. But they can make Rough Justice, which they never would have dreamed up in '73.<
Yeah, no shit. That's because they were coming up with far superior stuff like Silvertrain! You contradicted yerself dude!
----
No I didn't. You misunderstood me I guess. The meaning of this is that they can't make Silvertrain today (Great song), but they can make Rough Justice (Equally great, if not better, but in a differen't way). Did you really want them never to evolve after Some Girls? Stuck in the past are we?
----
>And it's not a lack of songwriting ability. It's good that they try something else.<
OK, then I hope that the something else that they try next time is not the same lame, boring, adult contemporary crap that they tried this time. See, I think that they CAN write much better songs...but they actually have to put some time & effort into it. They have to WANT to write better songs. At this point I think that they are content to put out an album of fart noises if they think that they can make another half billion dollars touring behind it. That is still the same Mick & Keith that wrote Midnight Rambler, you don't forget how to write great songs. But they do have to do what it takes to write those great songs. And if they are not that committed, then we are just going to get more of the same lame garbage that we got with ABB.
----
OK you don't like ABB I guess. Well, that's your loss. Who cares. Quote Mick Jagger: "I can't be bothered with what you want to hear" (2005). Eat it.
----
>Stones didn't build up the brand name by accident, but by the application of a pretty consistent corporate design philosophy.<
Ding ding ding...winner! It's all about the next quarter billion in the bank.
----
Yeah. That or some dude still living in 1972. I guess heroin is hard on the brain for ya'.
---- |
| February 13th, 2006 06:43 PM |
|
|
| Poison Dart |
Great point about the Stones acting like the Stones and not being the Stones. People age and evolve. They should be proud of their growth and not try and run from it. |
| February 13th, 2006 06:55 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
quote:
Poison Dart wrote:
Great point about the Stones acting like the Stones and not being the Stones. People age and evolve. They should be proud of their growth and not try and run from it.
Totally agreed. |
| February 13th, 2006 07:00 PM |
|
|
| nanatod |
"Don Was does what he is told. He is in the producer chair because he follows directions and doesn't cause waves. The only reason the Stones even HAVE a producer is so that the Glimmers have a fall guy. Rick Rubin can work wonders in a studio, but in the end, Rick Rubin is the guy in charge. That would NEVER fly with Jagger."
Don Was did a great job with Willie Nelson. Rick Rubin did a great job with Johnny Cash's career.
But what the Stones need in a producer is one like the acerbic Steve Albini, who would take no guff from the Stones, and who would not be afraid to tell the Stones what to do, because he is antisocial and unconcerned with artists's feelings. |
|
