|
|
| ianbillen |
You Know I am sick of everyone getting so darn excited about bootleg MP3's or whatever. The reason they are so
excited about these is because of lack of new material.
I mean, OK big deal Keith has a bootleg MP3 of "Nearness to You", which is fine I guess but how about a new studio album? I am anxious to hear about a new studio effort maybe in the late fall like November. Instead all I keep hearing about is these bootleg MP3's. It has been the longest in The Rolling Stones history...(which spans into 5...that's right 5 decades)...with no release of a full studio effort. It has been 6 years already. I mean I know you could say we'll if you don't like the MP3's then don't listen to em. We'll truth is I do like em. But I just don't feel satisfied until I hear of a new release possible date for a new studio effort. Tired of hearing Micks doin this movie or going to this party and Keith is doing a song on this country album or that benefit....What I want is the Stones to concentrate on new Rolling Stones material when it is time.....and the Time is past due. I realize they are touring and have been for 10 months and all not counting rehearsals. They should be writing new songs to take advantage of the time spent together. I hope they have. And lets face it they are not getting any younger so geeze put in a good effort with planning and don't rush it this time and give us some dates here. I don't want this to be another Guns n Roses Type deal is all I'm saying....at least tell us they are working on a new album officially and give us a tentative release month or months is all I want right now.
Just my thoughts,
Ian
|
|
|
| steel driving hammer |
quote:
ianbillen wrote:
but how about a new studio album?
Last I checked, the Stones have been on a World Tour going on 2 years now.
How can they record a full/worthy studio album when thier touring most every night? |
|
|
| fmk438j |
MP3's never excite me |
|
|
| ianbillen |
[quote]steel driving hammer wrote:
Last I checked, the Stones have been on a World Tour going on 2 years now.
How can they record a full/worthy studio album when thier touring most every night?
They have had breaks, 2 or three days to cut a song here or there would work. All I want is a plan man. I'm just sick of Mick or Keith not coming out and saying what their plans are recording wise....you know they have a good idea. Also I am sick of questions from reporters and journalists in interviews with the Stones asking questions that are so dam run in the mill for a Rolling stones interview-
1."When you started did you ever envision the group would be around for so long?"
2. "How do the Stones keep doin it after all these years,
What's the secret?"
3. "How long do you think you can keep this up?"
4. "What do you do in your off time?"
5. "Is part of the reason your doing it for the money?"
6. "How have things changed in the music Industry over the years"
ETC. ETC. ETC.
I mean everyone who interviews these guys has that same damn set of questions.
How about a question that is this damn direct?
"Have you been recording? and if so or if not when do you see the Next Stones album coming out?"
It is hard to skip around this one.
I realise they have been on tour but geez as long as it takes them to put out an album sometimes I think this time they should of been writing alot and doing recording here and again on the road....bands have done it this way many of times. And they are so damn hot right now I think the energy would carry over into the song writing and the recording. These are reasons it makes alot of sense.
Ian
|
|
|
| corgi37 |
yeah, its a bit of a joke alright. Pretty fucking ordinary. Surely there must be something in the can they can release since 97, apart from a weak live album and 4 so-so songs. i really thought something would be out by the start of the Euro tour. i guess there is very little gas left in the can, as far as recording goes. I have said it before a zillion times, but why they havent released some sneaky hidden gems from the past is beyond my comprehension. The Who had a great album with Odds and Sods in '74, so much so, that the great song Long Live rock became a live staple! How many potential classic ball-breakers are there hidden in the musty, coke/dope dusted archives of Rolling Stones Manor? Maniacs like us could probably think of at least a dozen unrealeased songs that could make the grade. I guess jagger has never been keen on that sort of shit, but SOMETHING after 6 years would be nice. And i dont mean the 4 crappy songs from 40 licks. Any hidden gem album must NOT have a Keith ballad on it. The guy rocks live, why not in the studio? |
|
|
| telecaster |
Obviously their heart isn't in a new album and I rather not have them release one half-ass so just enjoy the boots and be glad you are getting them for free |
|
|
| Lazy Bones |
I think you're fishing in a domain that's unrealistic and selfish. It's nice to hope, but think realistically before you bash them with your impatience. It's probably safe to say that we all appreciate new music, but give them, and us, a break! When they're not touring, we want them to tour. They tour, and people still aren't satisfied. Listen, you're not a member of the Stones so you have no idea how exhausting it is to tour - even before you factor in the length of the tour and their ages.
If you're tired of the bootlegs and the live recordings, don't bother with them. Sit and optomistically wait for new studio material.
Be fair.
[Edited by Lazy Bones] |
|
|
| gimmekeef |
The Stones have given me 40 years of thrills and some of the best music ever recorded.They don't owe me anything as far as I'm concerned and I realize their great creative days are over.Hell, so are mine!!! |
|
|
| Dan |
As lame as the new songs on 40 Licks are, I'm happy to just keep waiting... |
|
|
| MRD8 |
The Stones have been on tour for less than two years, they opened in Boston on September 3rd of last year...their next project is a live CD/DVD being filmed at this weeks shows in Paris...they may start work next year on a new studio album... |
|
|
| Sir Stonesalot |
>Maniacs like us could probably think of at least a dozen unrealeased songs that could make the grade. <
But the problem is that there are relatively few of us maniacs. At least not enough to get the Stones Machine to release an outtakes CD.
Look, there is a reason why those songs have never seen the light of day. We weren't there when the songs were recorded, so we aren't privvy to why those songs were cut. Suffice to say that obviously THE STONES don't think those songs worthy of release for whatever reason. Since we are not actually IN the band, we have no say in the matter. And quite honestly, I would think the Stones would know better than any of us if something was good enough for official release.
The Stones do things on their own timetable. If that doesn't suit you...piss off. |
|
|
| Nasty Habits |
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
And quite honestly, I would think the Stones would know better than any of us if something was good enough for official release.
This is an extremely interesting point, but one that I don't necessarily agree with. I think that it's a mistake to think that an artist is necessarily in tune enough with how their work will be perceived by an audience to be entirely objective on the relative quality of one tune over another. This is in fact the listener's job.
By most accounts, Bob Dylan's song "Blind Willie McTell" is one of his finest ever, but due to reasons baffling to mortal men it was left off of Infidels, as were a number of songs (Foot of Pride, Someone's Got Ahold of My Heart, Lord Protect My Child) that were obviously, objectively superior to, say, Neighborhood Bully or Union Sundown.
The Stones themselves have made baffling second guesses and strange choices, have continued to record songs past their peak performance stage (see, for example, Glyn Johns' discussion of the original version of "Fool to Cry", which I sure as shit would love to hear one day) and as you know have resurrected canned songs to great acclaim (Tattoo You). Commercial perceptions and high gloss production have sacrificed strange wonderment in recent years (why in the world did they not realize they had something LOVELY happening with "Zip Mouth Angel", I wonders, and then I decides, you know, if they did work on it some more it would probably have the life and glory produced right out of it). And I don't think there is one of us who would have handled the promotion of Bridges to Babylon like the Stones chose to do it -- I know I wouldn't have.
If I thought that Stones releases in the 90s were made, arranged, and promoted from a deeply personal and artistic perspective I would probably have different thoughts about this issue, but I sincerly doubt that Steel Wheels, Voodoo Lounge, and close-but-not-quite Bridges to Babylon were released as record "statements" so much as they were calculated "products" to hang a world tour on.
Isn't it possible that fans like you and me might have an equally vital perspective on what it is that makes the Rolling Stones so magical to the ear of the listener as they do? Lord knows that 40 years at the absolute summit of rock and roll aristocracy is going to skew your notions of what is good and what is not. |
|
|
| Maxlugar |
Hi Nasty!
Did you get the Boston '75 Live and Dangerous Peter Tosh album????
Friggin' hell that is the last CD I bought about three months ago and I'm still taking it all in. Genius.
Then the new Jeff beck in a few weeks.
I wish the boys would give us something new.
E-me over the weekend. |
|
|
| Nasty Habits |
quote:
Maxlugar wrote:
Hi Nasty!
Did you get the Boston '75 Live and Dangerous Peter Tosh album????
Friggin' hell that is the last CD I bought about three months ago and I'm still taking it all in. Genius.
Then the new Jeff beck in a few weeks.
I wish the boys would give us something new.
E-me over the weekend.
Wooga wooga!
I have it -- it's awesome -- much better than that other live one from '78, or whenever, and that one was pretty good!
Have you heard U-Roy?
Oh, my, can that man talk!
Version Galore!
|
|
|
| Maxlugar |
Thank allah you got it, Nasty!
That album is so Allah Damned good I'm ready to say it should be a national Holiday to play it and smoke some pot and drink a little (a lot) of alkey-hol on a nice warm (or cold) July (or August, September, October, November, December, January, February, March, April, May, June) afternoon (or morning, or evening).
MARKY! |
|
|
| ianbillen |
quote:
Lazy Bones wrote:
I think you're fishing in a domain that's unrealistic and selfish. It's nice to hope, but think realistically before you bash them with your impatience. It's probably safe to say that we all appreciate new music, but give them, and us, a break! When they're not touring, we want them to tour. They tour, and people still aren't satisfied. Listen, you're not a member of the Stones so you have no idea how exhausting it is to tour - even before you factor in the length of the tour and their ages.
If you're tired of the bootlegs and the live recordings, don't bother with them. Sit and optomistically wait for new studio material.
We'll Like I say I am realistically not tired of the bootlegs....I am just tired of bootlegs with no studio album. It is kidof like throwing me a bone or something...
But you know I surely don't knock anyone for listening to them....gee I listen to em myself many a many a time.
Sure Tours are exhausting....but it is not like they lay around and sleep the other 22 hours they are not on stage for the day. They go out, Party and everything eles.
Also they don't play every single night. I realise they need time to themselves and it would be sillily selfish of me to want The Rolling stones to spend every living, breathing moment of their touring lives specifically on the public. they need their time to themselves like anyone. They are human too. However, I am saying give us an indication on if, and when, a New studio album will be released generally and it would not be selfish of me to want them to spend a few days in the studio here and there and writing songs while everyone is together. I don't mean constantly while touring. That would be too time consuming and it could burn a band out. I just working on some new songs with some studio work to record the songs here and there. If it hadn't been so long in between albums(the longest in Rolling Stones history)I wouldn't be bitching a bit. It is just not that easy to get All the Rolling Stones together. I don't think Charlie will be up for 6 months studio work after the tour is over and if he is I think he may be dulled by it all at that point. So why not work on it here and there. A good song album worthy a month to cut would already give em 10 songs. They could spit out a few more, Pick the best songs, mix it later and by late fall an album would be spread over a year and a half since May 2002 to November 2003. This is plenty of Time for on and off worrk to complete a new album. It is and was posssible they just don't want to. And it makes me mad because it is like they are just saying....we'll we are raking it in from this tour and 40 licks sold real we'll so why bother...
Ian
Ian
[Edited by Lazy Bones]
|
|
|
| Sir Stonesalot |
Point taken Nasty, but I don't completely agree.
We are simply fans. And even though you and I might do many things differently...we don't have that stroke with the Stones. So I suppose this is a moot point entirely.
My point is, and I think it's valid, is that THE STONES ultimately decide on what works and doesn't work, what gets released and what hits the cutting room floor. And after 40+ years in the game, I'm willing to concede that they know a little more about it than I do. And although I may disagree with some of the things that they have done, I would never have the presumtion of telling the Stones what and how to do things. They are rock legends...and I am only a legend on a message board.
Personally, I think the Stones priorities for recording and releasing albums has changed over the past 2 decades. Instead of making rock & roll albums, they are paying more attention to the commercial side of it. Zip Mouth Angel is fantastic, but it is also completely non-commercial. Aside from Continental Drift(which I love), any, and every song released from Steel Wheels on, could be played on commercial radio...and fit right in.
So, I, being the uber-fan that I am, am willing to give the boys in the band the benefit of the doubt on this subject. |
|
|
| ianbillen |
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
Point taken Nasty, but I don't completely agree.
We are simply fans. And even though you and I might do many things differently...we don't have that stroke with the Stones. So I suppose this is a moot point entirely.
My point is, and I think it's valid, is that THE STONES ultimately decide on what works and doesn't work, what gets released and what hits the cutting room floor. And after 40+ years in the game, I'm willing to concede that they know a little more about it than I do. And although I may disagree with some of the things that they have done, I would never have the presumtion of telling the Stones what and how to do things. They are rock legends...and I am only a legend on a message board.
Personally, I think the Stones priorities for recording and releasing albums has changed over the past 2 decades. Instead of making rock & roll albums, they are paying more attention to the commercial side of it. Zip Mouth Angel is fantastic, but it is also completely non-commercial. Aside from Continental Drift(which I love), any, and every song released from Steel Wheels on, could be played on commercial radio...and fit right in.
So, I, being the uber-fan that I am, am willing to give the boys in the band the benefit of the doubt on this subject.
Sir Stones Alot,
Yes, The Stones know more about the music Industry than
I do a million times over. The thing is I think they have plenty of new stuff, Ronnie said it and so did Mick.
But I think one thing is for sure...I hope The Stones do a real studio album that is not so commercial and more from the heart. Of coarse you gotta have some commercial stuff in there to sell it properly and give it to the masses.
By the Way, Cool name....it seems of legendary status indeed!
Ian |
|
|
| Nasty Habits |
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
Point taken Nasty, but I don't completely agree.
Personally, I think the Stones priorities for recording and releasing albums has changed over the past 2 decades. Instead of making rock & roll albums, they are paying more attention to the commercial side of it. Zip Mouth Angel is fantastic, but it is also completely non-commercial. Aside from Continental Drift(which I love), any, and every song released from Steel Wheels on, could be played on commercial radio...and fit right in.
So, I, being the uber-fan that I am, am willing to give the boys in the band the benefit of the doubt on this subject.
Fair enough. You are right in that what gets released and what doesn't is their ultimate decision, but that doesn't mean that they couldn't stand a little advice on occasion from someone who's purely interested in the music -- not in commercial pressure, or status, or power trips, or whatever, but with what ends up in the ears of the public.
Your uber-fannishness inspires you to wave the Stones flag and support the troops. I respect that. Me, my own fannish instincts inspire me to measure what I hear in relation to everything they've ever taught me about rock and roll. Number one of which, is do what your instincts say regardless of the public reaction and if people get in line for it, well damn right they did, because we're the best. I think that their worries over commercial success and their concern over marketplace perception has done a number not only on their artistic instincts but also on their once infallible commercial savvy as well. Why is it that people say that the Stones have not recorded anything relevant since Tattoo You? It's not just because they're not listening, although there is something to that, it's also because with exceptions, the Stones rarely sound like they mean what they're singing/saying/playing anymore. They sound like the greatest rock musicians ever constructing and writing songs for purely commercial purposes, not because they were driven to make a song about this or a song about that. And of course that can yeild a lot of pleasure, because they're the best band ever, and can write one motherfucker of a song. But it doesn't necessarily yield lasting catalog LPs that people are going to be buying even unto eternity.
|
|
|
| Sir Stonesalot |
Ian...I'm glad you like my handle. Good to have you aboard. I kind of agree with you, I want a new album as well....I'm just willing to wait for it. Anticipation makes the heart grow fonder.
Nasty...again, I agree almost completely with what you say. But the thing is....after 40+ years....if the Stones have decided to go commercial, well, that is their decision, and we have to accept it. Or not, it's up to the individual listener.
I came to the conclusion long ago that our gripes are irrelevant. Stones is Stones, and they do their own thing. It's obvious that they, or someone who has sway with them, has convinced them that commercial is the way to go. Not much that we can do about it, IMO. And after 40+ years, they can do whatever the fuck they want. |
|
|
| Nasty Habits |
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
Nasty...again, I agree almost completely with what you say. But the thing is....after 40+ years....if the Stones have decided to go commercial, well, that is their decision, and we have to accept it. Or not, it's up to the individual listener.
Yep. My point. Both sides have a right to express themselves.
It is a shame though, that they shoot for the sweet smell of success instead of the sweet, sweet voice of the porkchop.
So, Hampton '81, "Let's Spend the Night Together".
Great.
And you?
Drinking tonight, are we? Me, somewhere in the general vicinity of a kite.
|
|
|
| Moonisup |
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
Ian...I'm glad you like my handle. Good to have you aboard. I kind of agree with you, I want a new album as well....I'm just willing to wait for it. Anticipation makes the heart grow fonder.
when they take the time for it, mostly it will be a good album, I'd rather have a long wait and a good album then a new one within 2 months, with matt clifford all over it... |
|
|
| padre |
Why are The Stones not making a new studio album?
Because they make more money from touring and playing the greatest hits live than spending 6 months in the studio and release an album that peaks at #67 in the charts. That's why.
I think that's the case with all the older guys still around BUT why is someone like David Bowie still doing new studio albums and touring the same time?
If the new Led Zep DVD sells as well as it should, I think that's the next logical direction they'll take. They can't do another greatest hits album for a while, so they'll release the hits on DVD and sell them once again in a different format. And we'll buy 'em.
I know I will. |
|
|
| Sir Stonesalot |
I agree padre...the Stones are a money making machine. There is not a doubt in my mind that they have gone completely commercial.
HOWEVER!!!
It is also my opinion that after 40+ years in the game, they have EARNED the right sell out commercially. I'm fine with that. For me, ANY Stones is better than no Stones at all.... |
|
|
| Joey |
" Why are The Stones not making a new studio album? "
Because , unlike The Who , they never figured out when to take a break from recording until just now .
The Eagles took a twenty four year break , Steely Dan a twenty year break , and The Who a twenty two year break ( new disc out next year -- Mongo ! )
JACKY ! JACKY ! JACKY !
Skittles |
|
|
| Mr T |
I'd rather they took 3 months to record a totally new album & had time to get a little creative, than put together an album in scattered seesions & wind up with uninspired stuff like Don't Stop. Sure it worked in the 70's, but after the 40 Licks tracks (and I do think they are alright overall) I don't think I can expect to see their creative highpoint when they've clearly got their mind on other things. The last thing I want is the Stones next album to be shitty - because there's always a damn good chance this next one coulod be their last. If a good album means taking their sweet time on the next album - good, do it, try to get it out by Christmas '04, just gimme some DVD's in the meantime |
|
|
| Sir Stonesalot |
Will wonders never cease....Mr T & Sir Stonesalot actually agree on something.
I suppose tomorrow I'll be seeing pigs fly, and snowballs in hell.
LOL. |
|
|
| ianbillen |
quote:
Joey wrote:
" Why are The Stones not making a new studio album? "
Because , unlike The Who , they never figured out when to take a break from recording until just now .
The Eagles took a twenty four year break , Steely Dan a twenty year break , and The Who a twenty two year break ( new disc out next year -- Mongo ! )
JACKY ! JACKY ! JACKY !
Skittles
Taking too long of a break will only do one of two things.
1. It will make your next album that much more expected to be a success rather than a let-down of any caliber.
2. It will make people stop caring at all.
Either way, the breaks you spoke of..The Eagle/24 year break. The Who/22 year break...only hurt those bands.
Any more than three or four years in between an album is too long. 5 years is too long in betweeen albums.
Any more than 6 years in between albums for any working band is simply rediculous. Bands need breaks from the studio to do other things and to regroup themselves.
A band doesn't need half a decade though. Any more than that for any working band is simply lazyness. I can deal with 3, maybey 4 years but 5 is too much.
Ian
Ian |
|
|
| gypsymofo60 |
Just another opinion but, I don't think there will be another NEW Stones studio album ever. I think 40 Licks the album, and the tour,(wherever, and whenever it winds up), will bring down the curtain on what has been THE most wonderfull, and at times controversial rock band there will ever be, Amen. As fans of the band we have been trully priveleged. For years we got singles, albums, tours, videos, and the best fucking music in The known universe. I'll be as sad as anyone to see 'em chuck it in, but I'd rather that than Jagger prancing about doing the same old manafactured moves & gyrations to the same old renditions of the same so formatted songs as is becoming the norm'. When they do call it, as I'm thinking they will early next year, just watch & listen as all the hackneyed critics of the last 25 years come crawling out from under their little shitholes in the earth to tell us Oh so profoundly, what a trully great band they were. They'll be none of this "Oh! they shoulda chucked it in after 'Exile' crap. And mark my words, then- every record company with any past or present links to the bands history will be bombarding us with all kinds of CDs, DVDs, and whatever Stoneys have been hankering for for years......And yes! SS is correct. They are far more inclined,(The band that is), to know what they should or should not be releasing than we mere mortals. I think we sometimes forget that although we may love certain outtakes, and live material; alot of the record buying public, people who may have bought some of the great Stones albums would probably listen to say; 'Hillside Blues' and wince in agony. I think The Stones,(the canny musos they are), are well aware of that fact. End or not, I just grab my copies of Beggars to Some Girls, down a few drinks, and get a warm knowlege that comes over me that this is what Rock n' Roll was always gonna be about. What will be, be. |
|
|
| Soul Survivor |
I certainly can wait for a new album. This could very well be the last studio record, so they should go out with a bang. Mick, this one doesn't have to appeal to the masses....just make it appeal to the fans. The Stones still know how to write a rockin' tune.....Keith still has some riffs in him.... Charlies ALWAYS on the mark....Though matured, Mick can still write some ranchy lyrics....and we've got a sober Ronnie. Mix the ingrediants together, we've got a fine stew.....er....record. So for those of you bitching about a new album.....do you want another "Dirty Work" or another album among the ranks of "Let It Bleed" and "Sticky Fingers". Though the last two records mentioned could never be passes in terms of overall instrumentation and songwriting, thats not saying the Stones couldnt produce another classic. My guess? Actually what would be smart is April/May 2004. That way the album is released, and they could release a single. It could gain momentum and get airplay during the summmer. Then if it's successful, release another single in August. Then let the record take a life of it's own. Until then, lets all raise a glass and enjoy the music we've got |
|
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]