quote:mac_daddy wrote:
i bet if stu were alive, he would be on top of all this sh*t.
No doubt mac, Stu was the Stones’ musical conscience and he remained their key stabilising force over the years.
...Stu would be kicking their ass over (most of) the bull shit since '85
"He's the daddy of us all. He made the band." Keith Richards
[Edited by charlotte]
11th April 2007 08:02 AM
corgi37
I think there are 3 main reasons.
1. They are still (?) a recording band. Well, we'll see about that!
2. The older stuff would have all the critics saying "Why cant the Stones be like this anymore?"
3. It would remind Jagger he was young.
I think reason 2 is the main one. You just know critics who have always hated them will rave about a unreleased collection. Say how sad they've become. Say how terrible Ronnie is. Say how they can never regain what they lost.
It may very well be true to, but i think the band, and Jagger in particular, dont want to hear it.
11th April 2007 08:18 AM
Gazza
A good point, Corgi although my own argument against that is that the Stones play a live show these days which almost exclusively consists of songs from a certain "golden era" - and that by choosing to do so, they would surely invite similar comparisons along the lines of "they dont make records like that anymore"
..and as we all know, there are more people are going to concerts to hear these old songs than there will be buying recordings and DVDs of old concerts from over 30 years ago. The whole thing has limited appeal commercially.
Additionally, as far as their studio vaults are concerned, I dont think theres anything there (certainly not from what we've been exposed to) that bears comparison with their greatest released work. It's not like they have stuff in the vaults to compare to 'Gimme Shelter'....
Of your three arguments, I genuinely think the first one is the main reason. They probably reckon there'll be time enough to release all this stuff when they're done.
The main problem is that by the time they do put it out, there might not be enough hardcore fans left who care enough. The time to do it was around their 40th anniversary when they had that long gap between studio albums and there was a suitable excuse to do it.
[Edited by Gazza]
11th April 2007 08:53 AM
corgi37
I doubt too that they have anything killer locked away. We should have heard something from 97-05, apart from 4 mediocre tracks - that were not left over, but new!
I think the best we'll get is a dozen or so "well known" rarities, and about 225 "alternate" takes of famous songs. I mean, Brown Sugar with Clapton and the reggae Start me Up are the sort of things i'm thinking of.
But, yeah, none of that while they are a going concern. I mean, Lord forbid, a rarity turns out to be like the Who's "Naked Eye"
Then, they'll have to perform it live.
And we couldnt say goodbye to Night time just yet, surely.
11th April 2007 08:56 AM
Mel Belli
quote:corgi37 wrote:
I doubt too that they have anything killer locked away. songs.
I'm not so sure about this. It may be true that everything that's been leaked is, well, everything, but it's speculation at best...
11th April 2007 10:06 AM
Maxlugar
quote:Mel Belli wrote:
I'm not so sure about this. It may be true that everything that's been leaked is, well, everything, but it's speculation at best...
11th April 2007 10:21 AM
jb
I doubt as well that we will ever be privy to the great wealth of unreleased material. Look how they disregard their own members like Brian, Mick Taylor, and Bill Wyman. They want to appear current, but no one, not even most here, are interested in their current work because quite frankly, it is not all that good.
[Edited by jb]
11th April 2007 10:35 AM
BILL PERKS
quote:jb wrote:
I doubt as well that we will ever be privy to the great wealth of unreleased material. Look how they disregard their own members like Brian, Mick Taylor, and Bill Wyman. They want to appear current, but no one, not even most here, are interested in their current work because quite frankly, it is not all that good.
[Edited by jb]
I AM
[EDITED BY SIMON WEISENTHAL]
11th April 2007 12:08 PM
Gazza
quote:Mel Belli wrote:
I'm not so sure about this. It may be true that everything that's been leaked is, well, everything, but it's speculation at best...
Most stuff hasnt been leaked, but the list of songs recorded has been pretty well documented - and most of those songs have circulated in one form or another, so we do have some idea of what they're like.
The Stones - unlike, say, Dylan, Springsteen, Young and the like - have tended to use good judgement in terms of releasing the best material they have available. Using those three artists as an example, before the release of anything from their archives there was enough quality unreleased studio material which a) was just screaming to be released and b) was making fans scratch their heads as to what the artist in question was possibly thinking of by not releasing it at the time it was recorded (especially when material of lesser quality DID make it onto albums).
I don't see that depth of unreleased gems in the Stones' archives. There's plenty of unreleased songs that are certainly interesting or are curios - and no doubt there are plenty of excellent alternate versions of songs we already know and love, but I'm personally unaware of the existence of anything remotely close to the standard of a "Blind Willie McTell", "This Hard Land" or "Ordinary People"
11th April 2007 12:29 PM
jb
quote:Gazza wrote:
Most stuff hasnt been leaked, but the list of songs recorded has been pretty well documented - and most of those songs have circulated in one form or another, so we do have some idea of what they're like.
The Stones - unlike, say, Dylan, Springsteen, Young and the like - have tended to use good judgement in terms of releasing the best material they have available. Using those three artists as an example, before the release of anything from their archives there was enough quality unreleased studio material which a) was just screaming to be released and b) was making fans scratch their heads as to what the artist in question was possibly thinking of by not releasing it at the time it was recorded (especially when material of lesser quality DID make it onto albums).
I don't see that depth of unreleased gems in the Stones' archives. There's plenty of unreleased songs that are certainly interesting or are curios - and no doubt there are plenty of excellent alternate versions of songs we already know and love, but I'm personally unaware of the existence of anything remotely close to the standard of a "Blind Willie McTell", "This Hard Land" or "Ordinary People"
Then at least release it in commercial quality. They could offer L&G on DVD and probably sell 100-200k copies if promoted like that crap Led-Zeppelin shit.
11th April 2007 12:44 PM
Saint Sway
this year, Neil Young has started "NYAPS" - Neil Young Archive Performance Series - in which, he has and will continue to release vintage performances. Including a box set. He's put out 2 excellent concerts from the early 70s so far.
the Stones could rake in a fortune doing this
a fortune
11th April 2007 12:45 PM
jb
I hope Mick Taylor returns to South Florida again....he is sorely missed.
11th April 2007 01:02 PM
Gazza
quote:jb wrote:
Then at least release it in commercial quality. They could offer L&G on DVD and probably sell 100-200k copies if promoted like that crap Led-Zeppelin shit.
Theres plenty of unreleased live performances on audio and video. I'm just not so convinced about the depth of quality of unreleased studio songs, but you and Sway are absolutely right in that putting out this kind of stuff - while it wont sell in the millions - it will do quite nicely for them. It's a bottomless pit of material - and they could learn a lot from the way other veteran acts have dealt with their own archives while still maintaining a high standard of present day creativity
There is absolutely no point in letting this stuff gather dust in the vaults for eternity.
11th April 2007 01:30 PM
jb
Unfortunately, it appears that this will happen only when they are deceased, and most of us will be as well. It will be left to the heirs...
[Edited by jb]
11th April 2007 02:30 PM
texile
all good points -
gazza, you may be right about the quality of unreleased material...
even the best of them - spare parts, think i'm going mad etc and a number of some girls outtakes...are half-completed or unpolished and would have to be refurbished somehow....
the live material is my biggest hope, however, and like others have pointed out -
dylan, zeppelin have done it and recieved revisionist accolades.
too many people judge the stones ONLY on their recent material - which is what jagger wants.
the stones, keith included, live in a bubble where it's 1975 and they're on top of the world...
where everyone is waiting breathlessly for their next move...
and those days have been long gone for a good 25 years.
11th April 2007 02:34 PM
jb
quote:texile wrote:
all good points -
gazza, you may be right about the quality of unreleased material...
even the best of them - spare parts, think i'm going mad etc and a number of some girls outtakes...are half-completed or unpolished and would have to be refurbished somehow....
the live material is my biggest hope, however, and like others have pointed out -
dylan, zeppelin have done it and recieved revisionist accolades.
too many people judge the stones ONLY on their recent material - which is what jagger wants.
the stones, keith included, live in a bubble where it's 1975 and they're on top of the world...
where everyone is waiting breathlessly for their next move...
and those days have been long gone for a good 25 years.
1110% correct...they absolutely are blinded at how the public views them...they think they are stillrelevant, when only we few hardcores post on a Stones message board
11th April 2007 03:17 PM
mojoman
quote:jb wrote:
1110% correct...they absolutely are blinded at how the public views them...they think they are stillrelevant, when only we few hardcores post on a Stones message board
i dont believe they have any illusions about where they stand in todays world. they see their records havent sold well in a generation. their status is similar to that of old hollywood A-listers. loved and adorned by a certain generational cohort, worshiped like gods by the enraptured, celebrity curiuosities to the masses who are sold stories and pabulum of aboriginal, abberational and unbourgeois conduct by the media.......
[Edited by mojoman]
11th April 2007 03:19 PM
jb
quote:mojoman wrote:
i dont believe they have any illusions about where they stand in todays world. they see their records havent sold well in a generation. their status is similar to that of old hollywood A-listers. loved and adorned by a certain generational cohort, worshiped like gods by the enraptured, celebrity curiuosities to the masses who are sold stories of aboriginal, abberational and unbourgeois conduct by the pabulum spewing media.......
I like the way you summed that up...very true. Still, when jagger says no one has ever told him the new material sucks, you gotta wonder who is there to tell them what is and isn't good...
11th April 2007 10:21 PM
Mel Belli
quote:texile wrote:
too many people judge the stones ONLY on their recent material - which is what jagger wants.
the stones, keith included, live in a bubble where it's 1975 and they're on top of the world...
where everyone is waiting breathlessly for their next move...
and those days have been long gone for a good 25 years.
True!
11th April 2007 10:22 PM
Mel Belli
Actually, I think that's true only of Keith.
11th April 2007 10:23 PM
Mel Belli
It might as well be 1807 for all Charlie cares
12th April 2007 10:03 AM
Gazza
quote:texile wrote:
all good points -
gazza, you may be right about the quality of unreleased material...
even the best of them - spare parts, think i'm going mad etc and a number of some girls outtakes...are half-completed or unpolished and would have to be refurbished somehow....
well..my disclaimer with that is that we've only heard what has been leaked. It could well be that there are 'finished' takes of those songs that are actually releasable. My own personal impression though is that as the proportion of circulating outtakes that actually sound like completed and final 'takes' is relatively low, that this is unlikely and that at a relatively early stage of the recording process the Stones tend to have a pretty good idea of what songs will be on the shortlist for making the final cut for an album - resulting in most of the outtakes being jettisoned before they're properly finished.
12th April 2007 10:05 AM
Gazza
quote:jb wrote:
I like the way you summed that up...very true. Still, when jagger says no one has ever told him the new material sucks, you gotta wonder who is there to tell them what is and isn't good...
Rick Rubin tried it with Mick and it went down about as well as a fart in a space suit!
12th April 2007 10:16 AM
pdog
quote:texile wrote:
all good points -
gazza, you may be right about the quality of unreleased material...
even the best of them - spare parts, think i'm going mad etc and a number of some girls outtakes...are half-completed or unpolished and would have to be refurbished somehow....
the live material is my biggest hope, however, and like others have pointed out -
dylan, zeppelin have done it and recieved revisionist accolades.
too many people judge the stones ONLY on their recent material - which is what jagger wants.
the stones, keith included, live in a bubble where it's 1975 and they're on top of the world...
where everyone is waiting breathlessly for their next move...
and those days have been long gone for a good 25 years.
32 years to be exact...
I've said it before, it really sucks my favorite band is the biggest and longest lasting rock bad ever... That's why we get massive tours, big stadiums and locked vaults!
12th April 2007 09:59 PM
Soldatti
quote:Saint Sway wrote:
this year, Neil Young has started "NYAPS" - Neil Young Archive Performance Series - in which, he has and will continue to release vintage performances. Including a box set. He's put out 2 excellent concerts from the early 70s so far.
the Stones could rake in a fortune doing this
a fortune
And it sells, the last album of the series made the US Top 10 a couple of weeks ago.
12th April 2007 11:00 PM
mmdog
I get a kick out of everybody blaming Jagger for what they don't like about the Stones. I'm sure Richards is just as involved in releasing archive material. Wasn't he the one who killed the rumored Memory Hotel project in '99?
13th April 2007 12:41 PM
Gimme Shelter
What was the Memory Motel Project back in '99?
13th April 2007 02:49 PM
Gazza
quote:Gimme Shelter wrote:
What was the Memory Motel Project back in '99?
an album (or mini album) of unreleased songs (supposedly leftovers from various sessions over the previous 5-10 years) which was shortlisted for release to coincide with that summer's European tour ("Memory Hotel" WAS the title. not "Motel")
Even as late as May 21st, IORR were talking about this coming out in ten days time. See here : http://iorr.org/news9905.htm
However, it surely must have been pulled by THAT stage, because not only did no copies leak (as you would have expected at such a late stage), but no track listing was ever confirmed (there were a few song titles mentioned around the time, but they were bogus) and no one appears to have ever seen the cover art.
[Edited by Gazza]
13th April 2007 02:51 PM
texile
quote:mmdog wrote:
I get a kick out of everybody blaming Jagger for what they don't like about the Stones. I'm sure Richards is just as involved in releasing archive material. Wasn't he the one who killed the rumored Memory Hotel project in '99?
jagger tends to handle the business aspect of the stones...
i'm always ready to defend mick - because he DOES get most of the shit from fans and the public.
but in this case, i think he's very instrumental in what does and doesn't get released...
i don't think keith gives a shit.
13th April 2007 03:03 PM
mmdog
Texile,
I understand what your saying, but I think when it comes to Music decisions, Richards is front and center. If Keith wanted a bunch of Archival releases, I think he could push it through. Remember that link a couple of months back about the '95 Microsoft deal. Jagger was very lukewarm about the whole thing, it was Richards who wanted to do it. I bet none of us were guessing that at the time. Richards may not give a shit about merchandise and stage design ,but on stuff like this I disagree.
[Edited by mmdog]
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:
The Rolling Stones World Tour 2005 Rolling Stones Bigger Bang Tour 2005 2006 Rolling Stones Forum - Rolling Stones Message Board - Mick Jagger - Keith Richards - Brian Jones - Charlie Watts - Ian Stewart - Stu - Bill Wyman - Mick Taylor - Ronnie Wood - Ron Wood - Rolling Stones 2005 Tour - Farewell Tour - Rolling Stones: Onstage World Tour A Bigger Bang US Tour
NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
