ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
A Bigger Bang World Tour 2005 - 2006
thanks Throbby
Hershey Park Stadium, Hershey, PA - October 1st, 2005
© 2005 Throbby!
[ ROCKSOFF.ORG ] [ IORR NEWS ] [ SETLISTS 1962-2005 ] [ FORO EN ESPAÑOL ] [ BIT TORRENT TRACKER ] [ BIRTHDAY'S LIST ] [ MICK JAGGER ] [ KEITHFUCIUS ] [ CHARLIE WATTS ] [ RONNIE WOOD ] [ BRIAN JONES ] [ MICK TAYLOR ] [ BILL WYMAN ] [ IAN "STU" STEWART ] [ NICKY HOPKINS ] [ MERRY CLAYTON ] [ IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN ] [ LINKS ] [ PHOTOS ] [ JIMI HENDRIX ] [ TEMPLE ] [ GUESTBOOK ] [ ADMIN ]
CHAT ROOM aka The Fun HOUSE Rest rooms last days
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: Will the Stones record a new album again? Return to archive
September 29th, 2005 08:39 PM
Poison Dart With sales of A Bigger Bang being mediocre in the United States (although they have been #1 in the world for two weeks) will the Stones continue to make new albums?

September 29th, 2005 08:42 PM
deuce I predict one more studio album
September 29th, 2005 09:12 PM
the good
quote:
Poison Dart wrote:
With sales of A Bigger Bang being mediocre in the United States (although they have been #1 in the world for two weeks) will the Stones continue to make new albums?





Poison Dart:
You Sir have have engaged in the lowest form of Rocks Off treachery. You are guilty of either:
1) NOT reading my recent post (which posed the very question you now ask us to consider)- this would clearly be unacceptable

2) Or, even more disturbing, you DID read my post and have decided to simply restate the question, with the clear intent of passing it off as your own intellectual property.

In either case, such an outrage must be punished, and rather than speculate on your possible motivation, I will instead simply pose the following question: Would you prefer daggers or pistols? (Poison darts are out of the question)
September 29th, 2005 09:47 PM
Soldatti Yes, they have a lot of stuff from the previous sessions in Paris too.
September 29th, 2005 09:54 PM
pdog Two more studio albums a boxed set and about 5 live albums...
September 29th, 2005 10:03 PM
jb No..8 years for this mediocre album of Mick songs and not a hit out of 16.....poor sales, and no desire....this is it as far as studio albums...it was a weak effort and disappointment given the glowing reviews....It was better worse, imo, than the insideous B2B.............they are artiscally shot, but still a great live nostalgia act(sans Keith's lame , buzz-killing set).
September 29th, 2005 10:55 PM
Bloozehound
quote:
jb wrote:
I have a hidden penis.




dude jb, you got an "innie" ?
September 30th, 2005 02:31 AM
corgi37 I wish Keith would get over his Tom Waits fetish, and get back into his KEEF fetish. He should be rocking out in his little segment.
September 30th, 2005 02:56 AM
The_Worst
quote:
Poison Dart wrote:
With sales of A Bigger Bang being mediocre in the United States (although they have been #1 in the world for two weeks) will the Stones continue to make new albums?





If Mick & Keith are still alive in 2008 a new album will be released...Take it to the bank!!!
September 30th, 2005 03:25 AM
Voodoo Scrounge I think the Rolling Stones will record another album. And I also think that it will come a lot sooner than later. I think that all that has happened to Charlie has certainly made Keith, at least, realise how soon it could all be over. I think the cancer scare has made both Keith and Charlie realise that they have to be as productive as they can while they are still here. I dont think Jagger is as bothered about the music anymore. I think he thrives on the live performance.
September 30th, 2005 04:59 AM
pdog
quote:
Voodoo Scrounge wrote:
I think the Rolling Stones will record another album. And I also think that it will come a lot sooner than later. I think that all that has happened to Charlie has certainly made Keith, at least, realise how soon it could all be over. I think the cancer scare has made both Keith and Charlie realise that they have to be as productive as they can while they are still here. I dont think Jagger is as bothered about the music anymore. I think he thrives on the live performance.



This album is like 80% Jagger... It's Keith who needs to focus on the studio work... I'm worried he's going all Ozzy on us and just losing it!
September 30th, 2005 05:50 AM
Gazza
quote:
Soldatti wrote:
Yes, they have a lot of stuff from the previous sessions in Paris too.



...which they decided not to use for ABB even though they were clearly pushed for time for getting the new album ready

What they recorded in Paris in 2002 was basically sketches of songs. The fact that they managed to finish 4 songs in a 2 week session with about 25 others unused hardly suggests that much time was spent on the material they discarded.

I doubt that material will ever be used.

To answer the question in a roundabout way. The Stones will make another record if they choose to tour again on this scale. If they do another big tour, I would doubt that it would be behind a compilation as the last tour was.

the alternative would be to do mini-tours on a more regular basis which wouldnt really necessitate having a 'product' to promote it. Unfortunately they dont seem to do that, because every tour has to be this grand event.

Theres no question that the raision d'etre of the Stones in the 21st century is as a touring band that occasionally makes records as opposed to a recording band that tours.

They're at a pretty unique crossroads in their career. They're now out of contract with Virgin/EMI. They've pretty much exhausted exploiting ways of repackaging their back catalogue in a way that they can tour behind it and their live albums are a commercial disaster. At their age, its not good business for anyone to give them a long term record contract for new material.

Two possible alternatives are to pack it up after this tour is over or to re-invent the way they operate for future tours by doing so for shorter spells, but more frequently (a bit like Dylan's 'never ending' tour only with less shows) - with a show that is relying more on the music than on promotion.
September 30th, 2005 05:54 AM
egon what happenend with virgin/emi?
September 30th, 2005 06:22 AM
Voodoo Scrounge
quote:
pdog wrote:


This album is like 80% Jagger... It's Keith who needs to focus on the studio work... I'm worried he's going all Ozzy on us and just losing it!



I understand what your saying mate. However I dont think that Jagger was too bothered about putting out an album, so Keith had to coax him into doing it by letting him write say 80 percent of it! A stones album with 80percent Jagger is still a stones album, which is better than him recording stuff with Dave Stewert
September 30th, 2005 06:40 AM
Gazza
quote:
egon wrote:
what happenend with virgin/emi?



nothing did. But the new album is the final one in their contract
September 30th, 2005 06:53 AM
Nellcote The Stones will keep recording, to release new product.
They will be satisfied with the sales of ABB despite all of the factors against it, that this will crystalize their resolve to not stop.
I do not think there's ever been a question from them about stopping, it's the legend that the world creates around
them about it, which has it's roots in the mid 60's.
Towards Virgin/EMI, it would be suicide for them to release the Stones.
The accountants would never allow for it.
No new contract?
Send in the the legal team, re-up for another decade.
Would Capitol dump Macca?
Would Columbia dump Bruce?
RCA dump Elvis?
Virgn/EMI does not dump the Stones.
September 30th, 2005 07:34 AM
Gazza Not saying they'd necessarily "dump" them but considering the fact that its taken them 14 years to fulfil a 3 album contract, I doubt that considering the band's age, they'd give them a long term contract again.

The bargaining tool for Richard Branson when he signed the band in the early 90s was the rights to reissue their post-1970 back catalogue. The ink was barely dry on the contract when he sold Virgin records to EMI. Having the Stones on his roster was a huge bargaining tool for him. Effectively, the Stones never recorded an album for Virgin, because the label was bought over by EMI before the band made Voodoo Lounge. So, EMI would understandably have a different view on the merits of having the Stones on their label in 2006 than Virgin would have had in 1992.

Look at it from EMI's perspective. They've basically milked the back catalogue dry. Their studio albums sell healthily but not spectacularly. The likelihood of the band being around for many years to come is not that good. The Stones' last contract with Virgin saw them trouser a world record advance of, what, $100 million for 3 albums and the rights to repackage their back catalogue? There's no way they're going to get a deal anywhere near that again from anyone.

Whilst no label has ever dropped the Stones, the reason why theyve changed distributors in the past so many times (WEA, EMI, CBS, Virgin) is because theyve had huge negotiating power and have been able to secure massive advances for long term contracts (their last two contracts, with CBS and Virgin, were, at the time, world records). At this advanced stage in their career, they dont really have that bargaining power to the same extent. They may go elsewhere ofr a more modest advance or get EMI to extend their contract for one record at a time.

However, when you look at the way EMI have scraped the barrel with recent reissues ("Jump Back", etc) , it looks to me like they're tying up a few loose ends and cashing in before the Stones leave the label.
[Edited by Gazza]
September 30th, 2005 09:05 AM
Jair Well, I wouldnt hire them.


But YEAS, they will do, not exactly a new album, but ABB will be reprinted without Sweet Neocon. Next December, 14.


About new material, I'm really not interested. After B2B and ABB, do you think can we expect some decent stuff?





September 30th, 2005 09:30 AM
exile
quote:
Voodoo Scrounge wrote:
I understand what your saying mate. However I dont think that Jagger was too bothered about putting out an album, so Keith had to coax him into doing it by letting him write say 80 percent of it! A stones album with 80percent Jagger is still a stones album, which is better than him recording stuff with Dave Stewert




Watch the early interviews with Keith after the press conference etc. Keith says it was Mick who rang him and got the ball rolling. "Time to go to work again"

I think Mick had to do the coaxing. To get Keiths lazy ass outta bed.
September 30th, 2005 09:49 AM
jb
quote:
Bloozehound wrote:



dude jb, you got an "innie" ?


Sadly, just 3 yrs ago, I weighed 190....due to medication I am now 23o and the extra weight on my abdomen has pushed the fat to cover the penis
September 30th, 2005 09:56 AM
Moonisup they have to release rarities, that would be a smart move, so EMI has to keep the rights then, right?
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
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!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED)