| 5th October 2006 02:42 PM |
|
|
| glencar |
LOL |
| 6th October 2006 02:58 AM |
|
|
| FotiniD |
Regarding jb's posts on the "hatred" between Keith and Mick, I stand by my position that you just can't spend all your life with someone by your side on this level (they're not ex lovers or anything, they're friends) and not love them. They're practically family. Yes, they piss each other off, and I'm sure there are times they would enjoy killing each other, but there is the love. PeerQueer is right, you do get moments on stage when you see it, and it's not the wrist thing jb 
I've had close friends and family treating me like shit for the past few years and I still love them - family's family and it doesn't get any closer for these two people. Not to mention that when you spend nine months out of twelve together day in and day out, it's no biggie if you decide to do something else with the rest of your time.
Anyway, I know you just can't live without the high of the negative posts jb, so I'll just pretend I don't notice 
On the other hand, the whole "new record out in 2007" will just go down in history as another of Keith's on-the-moment big talk. You got to hand it at him though, the guy's an optimist Big time! |
| 6th October 2006 04:20 AM |
|
|
| Ronnie Richards |
quote:
PeerQueer wrote:
______--
I would grant that all albums since Dirty Work are more influenced by Mick than Keith...thus the reason why they don't hold up as well to the era when Keith was the dominant artistic contributor.
That's the word...
Yep. |
| 6th October 2006 09:48 AM |
|
|
| jb |
One has to be in deep denial if they don't recognize the animosity b/t MJ and KR. Yes, at one time, they were like family and had a love/hate r/s. However, that r/s eneded long ago and while my stating they "hate" each other is a bit over the top, it is patently clear that there is virtually no r/s between them anymore other than the business aspect of the band. |
| 6th October 2006 09:50 AM |
|
|
| FotiniD |
quote:
jb wrote:
One has to be in deep denial if they don't recognize the animosity b/t MJ and KR. Yes, at one time, they were like family and had a love/hate r/s. However, that r/s eneded long ago and while my stating they "hate" each other is a bit over the top, it is patently clear that there is virtually no r/s between them anymore other than the business aspect of the band.
Well, I thought of quite a few things to say but... nevermind 
|
| 6th October 2006 09:59 AM |
|
|
| Mel Belli |
quote:
jb wrote:
One has to be in deep denial if they don't recognize the animosity b/t MJ and KR. Yes, at one time, they were like family and had a love/hate r/s. However, that r/s eneded long ago and while my stating they "hate" each other is a bit over the top, it is patently clear that there is virtually no r/s between them anymore other than the business aspect of the band.
I'm leaning JB's way on this one (with a crick in the neck!). M and K pretty much admitted to this in the pretour interview with Matt Lauer. They said they don't communicate much in the offseason, and Mick specified that they do occasionally fax each other!
That ain't love. That's business. |
| 6th October 2006 10:13 AM |
|
|
| FotiniD |
quote:
Mel Belli wrote:
I'm leaning JB's way on this one (with a crick in the neck!). M and K pretty much admitted to this in the pretour interview with Matt Lauer. They said they don't communicate much in the offseason, and Mick specified that they do occasionally fax each other!
That ain't love. That's business.
Which (whole story) brings me back to the same conclusion: we need a bold, descent interview with the Glimmers. ASAP. Someone who when posed with the answer "we do fax each other" will take it one step further and ask "why". Whatever happened to the chemistry? How do you expect to make a descent album if the only communication you have with each other is that? That sort of stuff.
Now, regarding their relationship status. None of us can tell for sure, but Mick and Keith themselves and those who know them. But I do see and feel there's more to it than business. A pretty much distorted and changed version of their seventies and sixties relationship, but still here, nevertheless.
[Edited by FotiniD] |
| 6th October 2006 10:24 AM |
|
|
| Mel Belli |
quote:
FotiniD wrote:
Which (whole story) brings me back to the same conclusion: we need a bold, descent interview with the Glimmers. ASAP. Someone who when posed with the answer "we do fax each other" will take it one step further and ask "why". Whatever happened to the chemistry? How do you expect to make a descent album if the only communication you have with each other is that? That sort of stuff.
Now, regarding their relationship status. None of us can tell for sure, but Mick and Keith themselves and those who know them. But I do see and feel there's more to it than business. A pretty much distorted and changed version of their seventies and sixties relationship, but still here, nevertheless.
[Edited by FotiniD]
Good idea. Mick gave maybe the closest thing to a grand summing-up he'll ever give in '95 - the Jann Wenner marathon interview. As far as anyone can tell here in the cheap seats, M and K have a found a decent way to co-oexist for about 24 months at a time. I'm sure there's still affection there; if they did truly hate each other, we wouldn't get anything - not even for the big money. Others have made the same comparison, and it's probably true: They're like old ex-spouses. They stay together for the babies' sakes. |
| 6th October 2006 12:26 PM |
|
|
| marko |
the real chemistry,what we all get to knew 1965 forwards,
ended when Ian Stewart died,thats also,when the bluesier
stones ended.Thats when the REAL stones died.
2nd time was,when Bill Wyman left.its been downhill since. |
| 6th October 2006 12:28 PM |
|
|
| jb |
quote:
marko wrote:
the real chemistry,what we all get to knew 1965 forwards,
ended when Ian Stewart died,thats also,when the bluesier
stones ended.Thats when the REAL stones died.
2nd time was,when Bill Wyman left.its been downhill since.
100% correct Marko. |
| 6th October 2006 03:25 PM |
|
|
| FotiniD |
No offence you guys, but if you do consider all the magic is gone, the band is dead and so on I wonder why you bother even reading news about the band, going to gigs or buying new material. If that was the way I saw it, I'd stick to the bootlegs and re-runs. It'd make me feel less dissapointed. |
| 6th October 2006 04:19 PM |
|
|
| danielharris627 |
Hmm, im not sure if there will be a new album. But time is really getting short so thye might just rush something.
But these are keiths words we're talking about... |
| 6th October 2006 06:00 PM |
|
|
| polytoxic |
quote:
jb wrote:
One has to be in deep denial if they don't recognize the animosity b/t MJ and KR. Yes, at one time, they were like family and had a love/hate r/s. However, that r/s eneded long ago and while my stating they "hate" each other is a bit over the top, it is patently clear that there is virtually no r/s between them anymore other than the business aspect of the band.
Quite true. The closest they'll ever get to hanging out is when they're on stage, and even then sometimes... |
| 7th October 2006 06:50 AM |
|
|
| corgi37 |
Maybe Keith fell out of another tree? Some reality checks.
1. Isnt there contract over?
2. It took them 8 years to write 1 ok record. They've toured for over a year. Nothing is written. Nothing in the tank. Remember all the crap, going back to 89, that they had about 7 albums worth of stuff? Well, where is it? Why did we wait 8 years between records? If they even had 10 so-so songs, they surely could have been better than the 4 shitty things they added to LICKS. Nup, there aint nothing lying around - except when they put out a "ANTHOLOGY".
3. Who wants another record? Around half a mill Yanks is not enough!
4. Just give us the stuff we really want. The full Ya's Ya's era concert and the 72-73 stuff. |
| 7th October 2006 02:00 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
quote:
corgi37 wrote:
Maybe Keith fell out of another tree? Some reality checks.
1. Isnt there contract over?
2. It took them 8 years to write 1 ok record. They've toured for over a year. Nothing is written. Nothing in the tank. Remember all the crap, going back to 89, that they had about 7 albums worth of stuff? Well, where is it? Why did we wait 8 years between records? If they even had 10 so-so songs, they surely could have been better than the 4 shitty things they added to LICKS. Nup, there aint nothing lying around - except when they put out a "ANTHOLOGY".
3. Who wants another record? Around half a mill Yanks is not enough!
4. Just give us the stuff we really want. The full Ya's Ya's era concert and the 72-73 stuff.
1. Their contract is over, but they can sign (let's hope no with Virgin again) for a new album again, just like Mick did with GITD.
2. They lost 5 damn years (1999-2003), the right time for a box set or an outtakes album was back then.
3. Well, 2.6 million copies sold worldwide is a decent number for a 44 years old band. About 80% of the current acts never reached that mark with any album, only 5 acts in EMI got better sales last year.
4. Agreed |
| 7th October 2006 02:06 PM |
|
|
| Lethargy |
quote:
Mel Belli wrote:
I'm leaning JB's way on this one (with a crick in the neck!). M and K pretty much admitted to this in the pretour interview with Matt Lauer. They said they don't communicate much in the offseason, and Mick specified that they do occasionally fax each other!
That ain't love. That's business.
Amazing how much it shows in the quality of the music. If you think about all their greatest albums and eras, it was during times where these two were getting on together. Hell, they were shacked up together (and wasted) in France together for months while recording their masterpiece. Even the warm fuzzies represented by the Waiting On A Friend video corresponded to a great album, Tattoo You (although admittedly that was mostly reconstituted older tunes, and their longest fallout was about to begin).
The only time that their animosity actually helped the music were 2 or 3 tunes on Dirty Work, but that's only a few tunes. In general, the eras of animosity yielded horrible results.
I'm thinking about what JB said, which is that things went downhill post-Stu. His death might have indeed been an underacknowledge (at least by me) catalyst. The next album, Steel Wheels, was nice but way too slick, poppy, unbluesy, etc. If Stu lived, I wonder what that album would have been like.
Oh, man, what could have been... |
| 7th October 2006 02:13 PM |
|
|
| PeerQueer |
quote:
Soldatti wrote:
1. Their contract is over, but they can sign (let's hope no with Virgin again) for a new album again, just like Mick did with GITD.
2. They lost 5 damn years (1999-2003), the right time for a box set or an outtakes album was back then.
3. Well, 2.6 million copies sold worldwide is a decent number for a 44 years old band. About 80% of the current acts never reached that mark with any album, only 5 acts in EMI got better sales last year.
4. Agreed
___________
SERIOUS negotiations with Virgin are in fact underway, and have been so for nearly 3 years, though the intensity of said negotiations has been amped up significantly in the last 6 months or so.
Stones are promising Virgin there is material in the bin waiting for a quick release. Stones Inc. looking for serious $$$ to sign off on the deal. Virgin uncertain as to the price, and Stones' ability to deliver reasonable record sales profit given.
AND, word is Stones Inc. have been shopping as well in earnest with other labels for the last couple years. They got Virgin by the balls and are squeezing just a bit to see if more $$$$$ will be offered up.
If deal is worked out, be it Virgin or other, NEW ALBUM WILL BE COMING IN NOT TOO DISTANT FUTURE. (2007'ish)
That's the word. |
