Quote
dandelion1967
Why should they care about the number "50" when they (or Universal, or both) re-release Exile in the "39th" (???) anniversary?

I, as all of you, am waiting for a new release and a new tour... as Mick once said "you can't always get what you want, but if you try, sometimes you might find that you get what you need", and maybe what we need is to listen to that treasure they gave us...

This probably has more to do with Universal making the most of their five year contract.

I just heard our classic rock station say that "Relations between Jagger and Richards may have softened as Keith has hinted about a 50th Anniversary Tour!".

My new girlfriend turned to me and said "Yeah, but that came from Keith, not Mick? Isn't he the one who holds the cards?"

Smart gal.

><

[thepowergoats.com]

Quote
jamesfdouglas
I just heard our classic rock station say that "Relations between Jagger and Richards may have softened as Keith has hinted about a 50th Anniversary Tour!".

My new girlfriend turned to me and said "Yeah, but that came from Keith, not Mick? Isn't he the one who holds the cards?"

Smart gal.

><

I know I have softened to the idea!

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
KeithDaMan
oh come on, studio end of 2011, beginning of 2012. Tour announcement may 2012. Tour start around 2012 in US with a short break in UK for te olympics, then back US and South America, Europe afterwards.

I'll bet on it.

Yes, Sir!

As the Olympics are at the end of July, I wouldnt bet too much on a US tour only announced in May being interrupted for a UK visit a couple of months later.

Quote
21stcenturystones
You can bet he's hitting on Joss Stone. Bloody englishmen!

At least Keith will be there for L' Wren when she needs a shoulder to cry on!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-25 02:27 by stonescrow.

Quote
Shott
If it does not happen Keith is the one who blew it with the cheap shots in "Life." He could have made the same points a lot more gracefully. If Mick does not need the money, most anyone in his position would tell Keith to stuff it.

I totally agree. Keith tried to make Mick look bad way too much. Real low shots throughout.

A 50th anniversary would also remind them how old they are. That may not be so much fun after having that pounded into your head show after show (but then again, money does make things easier now).

Quote
dougie

Quote
Shott
If it does not happen Keith is the one who blew it with the cheap shots in "Life." He could have made the same points a lot more gracefully. If Mick does not need the money, most anyone in his position would tell Keith to stuff it.

I totally agree. Keith tried to make Mick look bad way too much. Real low shots throughout.

A 50th anniversary would also remind them how old they are. That may not be so much fun after having that pounded into your head show after show (but then again, money does make things easier now).

Just try and look at it as a drama. The cranky old Pirate holds nothing back while the Knight retains his nobility in silence. In the end they come together as Joygivers, the best the world has ever known!

Crow.......get some sleep!

Quote
dandelion1967
Why should they care about the number "50" when they (or Universal, or both) re-release Exile in the "39th" (???) anniversary?
.

The Exile reissue had nothing at all to do with anniversaries despite the reissue date. After all, it was originally supposed to have come out several months before it's eventual release.

It was simply part of a wider reissue programme by UMG as their post-1970 catalogue had been deleted by EMI after they left that label. When it was announced that their albums were being remastered and reissued, it was confirmed that Exile would be released at a later date than the others as part of a 'wider project' relating to that album.

The 'Some Girls' extended reissue is going to be slightly different again because - unlike Exile - UMG have already issued a remastered version of this album a couple of years earlier.

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers
Mick's 'Date with Destiny' was bumping into Keith with a bunch of blues albums under his arm. That date with destiny created an amazing musical history.

Playing a gig 50 years later is just celebrating.

Yes, and what a celebration it is going to be!

If it happens, very probably a big celebration...but it is in no way a date with destiny.

I like to think it was their destiny to achieve 50 years and beyond.

Really? It is their 'destiny' to put out 3 albums in 20 years? Perhaps you haven't read LIFE yet...a poor read for sure, but might help you understand this bands (mal)functioning since the mid-eighties.

rememeber the song: It's all over now???
well, its Now !!!
Sorry.
byeee
jeroen

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers
Mick's 'Date with Destiny' was bumping into Keith with a bunch of blues albums under his arm. That date with destiny created an amazing musical history.

Playing a gig 50 years later is just celebrating.

Yes, and what a celebration it is going to be!

If it happens, very probably a big celebration...but it is in no way a date with destiny.

I like to think it was their destiny to achieve 50 years and beyond.

Really? It is their 'destiny' to put out 3 albums in 20 years? Perhaps you haven't read LIFE yet...a poor read for sure, but might help you understand this bands (mal)functioning since the mid-eighties.

How many wonderful tours have they provided us with in the last 20 years? Life? I have read it twice and loved it both times. To be honest with you all this stuff between Keith and Mick is nothing but a soap opera to me. I have four brothers and we fight like cats and dogs but would give our lives for one another if it came right down to it-same with Mick and Keith. Stop fretting about what they haven't done over the last twenty years and be thankful that they have done anything. For crying out loud we lost the Beatles forty years ago!

Quote
21stcenturystones
Crow.......get some sleep!

I did, and now I am back ready to roll, at least for a little while anyway. I won't be hanging around much longer, as my work here is pretty much completed.

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers
Mick's 'Date with Destiny' was bumping into Keith with a bunch of blues albums under his arm. That date with destiny created an amazing musical history.

Playing a gig 50 years later is just celebrating.

Yes, and what a celebration it is going to be!

If it happens, very probably a big celebration...but it is in no way a date with destiny.

I like to think it was their destiny to achieve 50 years and beyond.

Really? It is their 'destiny' to put out 3 albums in 20 years? Perhaps you haven't read LIFE yet...a poor read for sure, but might help you understand this bands (mal)functioning since the mid-eighties.

How many wonderful tours have they provided us with in the last 20 years? Life? I have read it twice and loved it both times. To be honest with you all this stuff between Keith and Mick is nothing but a soap opera to me. I have four brothers and we fight like cats and dogs but would give our lives for one another if it came right down to it-same with Mick and Keith. Stop fretting about what they haven't done over the last twenty years and be thankful that they have done anything. For crying out loud we lost the Beatles forty years ago!

fretting? i'm happy with the band. i'm just disagreeing with the assertion that it's the bands 'destiny' to do a 50th anniversary show. don't put words in people's mouths you ninny.

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers
Mick's 'Date with Destiny' was bumping into Keith with a bunch of blues albums under his arm. That date with destiny created an amazing musical history.

Playing a gig 50 years later is just celebrating.

Yes, and what a celebration it is going to be!

If it happens, very probably a big celebration...but it is in no way a date with destiny.

I like to think it was their destiny to achieve 50 years and beyond.

Really? It is their 'destiny' to put out 3 albums in 20 years? Perhaps you haven't read LIFE yet...a poor read for sure, but might help you understand this bands (mal)functioning since the mid-eighties.

How many wonderful tours have they provided us with in the last 20 years? Life? I have read it twice and loved it both times. To be honest with you all this stuff between Keith and Mick is nothing but a soap opera to me. I have four brothers and we fight like cats and dogs but would give our lives for one another if it came right down to it-same with Mick and Keith. Stop fretting about what they haven't done over the last twenty years and be thankful that they have done anything. For crying out loud we lost the Beatles forty years ago!

I can understand the 'be thankful they kept touring' logic because when I saw my first show in '82 I was convinced it would be the only chance I'd ever get and in the mid 80s any future touring seemed farther away than ever, so if you'd said to me that the band would last 50 years and that sometime during that tour I'd see my 50th show, I'd have thought you were nuts (well, actually. I DO think you're nuts, but thats another thing entirely...)

However, there's more to being a band than touring. And a band that doesnt do any work at all for 4-5 years at a time isn't really a band at all.

I dont think you have to just look at the argument from a 'glass half full' perspective. They agreed to keep the band going beyond the 80s, so taking that into consideration it's fair enough as a fan to feel a sense of 'what might have been' over the last 25 years. Four albums for the entire second half of a 50-year lifespan of a band is a shit return for an act who have three songwriters, all of whom have produced a sizeable amount of solo material in that time. The entire raison d'etre of the band has changed completely since the mid-80's. You could in fact quite succinctly divide the group's history into two eras - the one when Ian Stewart was alive from 1962-85 and the one from 1989 onwards when they gradually transformed into the corporate behemoth they've become today - 'Stu-era Stones' and 'Cohl-era Stones' if you like. (I'll discount the 1986-88 era because they didnt exist as a band between early '86 and early '89 - in Bill German's book, he actually states that logistically the band split up in all but name during that period)

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers
Mick's 'Date with Destiny' was bumping into Keith with a bunch of blues albums under his arm. That date with destiny created an amazing musical history.

Playing a gig 50 years later is just celebrating.

Yes, and what a celebration it is going to be!

If it happens, very probably a big celebration...but it is in no way a date with destiny.

I like to think it was their destiny to achieve 50 years and beyond.

Really? It is their 'destiny' to put out 3 albums in 20 years? Perhaps you haven't read LIFE yet...a poor read for sure, but might help you understand this bands (mal)functioning since the mid-eighties.

How many wonderful tours have they provided us with in the last 20 years? Life? I have read it twice and loved it both times. To be honest with you all this stuff between Keith and Mick is nothing but a soap opera to me. I have four brothers and we fight like cats and dogs but would give our lives for one another if it came right down to it-same with Mick and Keith. Stop fretting about what they haven't done over the last twenty years and be thankful that they have done anything. For crying out loud we lost the Beatles forty years ago!

fretting? i'm happy with the band. i'm just disagreeing with the assertion that it's the bands 'destiny' to do a 50th anniversary show. don't put words in people's mouths you ninny.

So you are actually happy with a band that you say has been malfunctioning since the mid-eighties? Happy with them only putting out three albums in the last 20 years? So you are not the least bit annoyed or irritated with them? If so, then my apologies.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers
Mick's 'Date with Destiny' was bumping into Keith with a bunch of blues albums under his arm. That date with destiny created an amazing musical history.

Playing a gig 50 years later is just celebrating.

Yes, and what a celebration it is going to be!

If it happens, very probably a big celebration...but it is in no way a date with destiny.

I like to think it was their destiny to achieve 50 years and beyond.

Really? It is their 'destiny' to put out 3 albums in 20 years? Perhaps you haven't read LIFE yet...a poor read for sure, but might help you understand this bands (mal)functioning since the mid-eighties.

How many wonderful tours have they provided us with in the last 20 years? Life? I have read it twice and loved it both times. To be honest with you all this stuff between Keith and Mick is nothing but a soap opera to me. I have four brothers and we fight like cats and dogs but would give our lives for one another if it came right down to it-same with Mick and Keith. Stop fretting about what they haven't done over the last twenty years and be thankful that they have done anything. For crying out loud we lost the Beatles forty years ago!

fretting? i'm happy with the band. i'm just disagreeing with the assertion that it's the bands 'destiny' to do a 50th anniversary show. don't put words in people's mouths you ninny.

Ninny? Sounds a little over the top, but if you are who I suspect you are then it makes perfect sense. Regardless who you are, you really have some serious hostility stirring in your belly. Seek help.

Do you believe in love after love?

Quote
Who's Driving Your Plane?
Do you believe in love after love?

Only in tennis.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers
Mick's 'Date with Destiny' was bumping into Keith with a bunch of blues albums under his arm. That date with destiny created an amazing musical history.

Playing a gig 50 years later is just celebrating.

Yes, and what a celebration it is going to be!

If it happens, very probably a big celebration...but it is in no way a date with destiny.

I like to think it was their destiny to achieve 50 years and beyond.

Really? It is their 'destiny' to put out 3 albums in 20 years? Perhaps you haven't read LIFE yet...a poor read for sure, but might help you understand this bands (mal)functioning since the mid-eighties.

How many wonderful tours have they provided us with in the last 20 years? Life? I have read it twice and loved it both times. To be honest with you all this stuff between Keith and Mick is nothing but a soap opera to me. I have four brothers and we fight like cats and dogs but would give our lives for one another if it came right down to it-same with Mick and Keith. Stop fretting about what they haven't done over the last twenty years and be thankful that they have done anything. For crying out loud we lost the Beatles forty years ago!

I can understand the 'be thankful they kept touring' logic because when I saw my first show in '82 I was convinced it would be the only chance I'd ever get and in the mid 80s any future touring seemed farther away than ever, so if you'd said to me that the band would last 50 years and that sometime during that tour I'd see my 50th show, I'd have thought you were nuts (well, actually. I DO think you're nuts, but thats another thing entirely...)

However, there's more to being a band than touring. And a band that doesnt do any work at all for 4-5 years at a time isn't really a band at all.

I dont think you have to just look at the argument from a 'glass half full' perspective. They agreed to keep the band going beyond the 80s, so taking that into consideration it's fair enough as a fan to feel a sense of 'what might have been' over the last 25 years. Four albums for the entire second half of a 50-year lifespan of a band is a shit return for an act who have three songwriters, all of whom have produced a sizeable amount of solo material in that time. The entire raison d'etre of the band has changed completely since the mid-80's. You could in fact quite succinctly divide the group's history into two eras - the one when Ian Stewart was alive from 1962-85 and the one from 1989 onwards when they gradually transformed into the corporate behemoth they've become today - 'Stu-era Stones' and 'Cohl-era Stones' if you like. (I'll discount the 1986-88 era because they didnt exist as a band between early '86 and early '89 - in Bill German's book, he actually states that logistically the band split up in all but name during that period)

I can understand why some hardcore fans are frustrated with what they perceive to be a lack of production (new music wise) over the last twenty years or so and I myself would have liked to have seen more, but, it is what it is, (or was, what it was,) and we do have the solo stuff to sort of fill in the gaps. I think we also have to consider just how difficult it is as people to maintain relationships with other people for long periods of time. Just look at the divorce rate in America alone. I can't even get along with my own brothers for more than a few days at a time, and have lost numerous friendships down through the years to petty differences, and just look at the hostility that is present on this site, so for them to just make it 50 years is almost miraculous. I still have to pinch myself when I think that they are still around and apparently planning to do more in the next year or so. No doubt, (at least in my mind) when you consider all the factors involved for them to achieve 50 years has a certain ring of Destiny to it, at least that's the way I see it.

Quote
Who's Driving Your Plane?
Do you believe in love after love?

You are a very interesting fellow, however, I don't follow, please explain.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-25 21:24 by stonescrow.

Quote
stonescrow
I can understand why some hardcore fans are frustrated with what they perceive to be a lack of production (new music wise) over the last twenty years or so and I myself would have liked to have seen more, but, it is what it is, (or was, what it was,) and we do have the solo stuff to sort of fill in the gaps. I think we also have to consider just how difficult it is as people to maintain relationships with other people for long periods of time. Just look at the divorce rate in America alone. I can't even get along with my own brothers for more than a few days at a time, and have lost numerous friendships down through the years to petty differences, and just look at the hostility that is present on this site, so for them to just make it 50 years is almost miraculous. I still have to pinch myself when I think that they are still around and apparently planning to do more in the next year or so. No doubt, (at least in my mind) when you consider all the factors involved for them to achieve 50 years has a certain ring of Destiny to it, at least that's the way I see it.

The most frustrating thing for me is that the band ceases to function for years on end outside of the confines of a massive tour.

The 'machine' cant get started unless theyre going to end up playing 100 shows or more.

This is a band who havent made a single full length public performance since 1977. And even then it was in front of 400 people. (The only occasions since then were two 45-minute guest appearances at the CNIB shows in 1979 and the Stu tribute in 1986, which was a private gig).

Seriously - how difficult is something like that to organise if the will is there to do it?

No one's asking them to live in each other's pocket as if it was 1962 all over again, but either they're a band or they're not. If they're going to do more than pay lip service to being a band, then even going out on the road and doing, say, 15 shows at a time, for one month, three times a year is surely an easier alternative logistically (and more conducive for keeping their musical chops going) than ceasing to exist for four years at a time and then having to spend six weeks learning their own songs again so that they go through the same two-year cycle ad nauseam.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-25 21:02 by Gazza.

Quote
jamesfdouglas
I just heard our classic rock station say that "Relations between Jagger and Richards may have softened as Keith has hinted about a 50th Anniversary Tour!".

My new girlfriend turned to me and said "Yeah, but that came from Keith, not Mick? Isn't he the one who holds the cards?"

Smart gal.

><

Hahaha...nice James!

Quote
Gazza

Quote
stonescrow
I can understand why some hardcore fans are frustrated with what they perceive to be a lack of production (new music wise) over the last twenty years or so and I myself would have liked to have seen more, but, it is what it is, (or was, what it was,) and we do have the solo stuff to sort of fill in the gaps. I think we also have to consider just how difficult it is as people to maintain relationships with other people for long periods of time. Just look at the divorce rate in America alone. I can't even get along with my own brothers for more than a few days at a time, and have lost numerous friendships down through the years to petty differences, and just look at the hostility that is present on this site, so for them to just make it 50 years is almost miraculous. I still have to pinch myself when I think that they are still around and apparently planning to do more in the next year or so. No doubt, (at least in my mind) when you consider all the factors involved for them to achieve 50 years has a certain ring of Destiny to it, at least that's the way I see it.

The most frustrating thing for me is that the band ceases to function for years on end outside of the confines of a massive tour.

The 'machine' cant get started unless theyre going to end up playing 100 shows or more.

This is a band who havent made a single full length public performance since 1977. And even then it was in front of 400 people. (The only occasions since then were two 45-minute guest appearances at the CNIB shows in 1979 and the Stu tribute in 1986, which was a private gig).

Seriously - how difficult is something like that to organise if the will is there to do it?

No one's asking them to live in each other's pocket as if it was 1962 all over again, but either they're a band or they're not. If they're going to do more than pay lip service to being a band, then even going out on the road and doing, say, 15 shows at a time, for one month, three times a year is surely an easier alternative logistically (and more conducive for keeping their musical chops going) than ceasing to exist for four years at a time and then having to spend six weeks learning their own songs again so that they go through the same two-year cycle ad nauseam.

Gazza,

I honestly feel your pain, and agree with most of what you say on this subject, however, it's not doing us (all of us hardcores) any good to beat ourselves up over things that went on between Mick and Keith over the years. As Keith said to Mick, "it's all water under the bridge" (or bridges). There is nothing we can do, (or they can do) to undo what has been done. All we can do is look to the future and hope we see more studio production from them in the years to come. I could be wrong but I think Keith's book will ultimately bring them closer together in their latter years which hopefully will see them close out their lives making new sweet music together. The problem is, how much time do they really have left? That is something nobody knows. I went to the last Stones concert in Seattle with three friends in October of 2006. Since then one has died, another is dying, and the third has a very serious degenerative disease. So far I have been lucky but who knows what lurks ahead?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-25 21:30 by stonescrow.

I wouldnt go as far to say its 'pain' ! I consider anything at this stage to be a bonus, to be honest. Going by your last comment, I think thats maybe the best way to look at it - those are some very sobering statistics!

Quote
Gazza
I wouldnt go as far to say its 'pain' ! I consider anything at this stage to be a bonus, to be honest. Going by your last comment, I think thats maybe the best way to look at it - those are some very sobering statistics!

The scary thing is that none of us are/were as old as any of the Stones today. Sobering indeed. Also, a fifth person that should have been with us that night passed away a year later at the age of 59. So when Mickscary says Done Deal, you know how I feel about that!

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
stonescrow

Quote
treaclefingers
Mick's 'Date with Destiny' was bumping into Keith with a bunch of blues albums under his arm. That date with destiny created an amazing musical history.

Playing a gig 50 years later is just celebrating.

Yes, and what a celebration it is going to be!

If it happens, very probably a big celebration...but it is in no way a date with destiny.

I like to think it was their destiny to achieve 50 years and beyond.

Really? It is their 'destiny' to put out 3 albums in 20 years? Perhaps you haven't read LIFE yet...a poor read for sure, but might help you understand this bands (mal)functioning since the mid-eighties.

How many wonderful tours have they provided us with in the last 20 years? Life? I have read it twice and loved it both times. To be honest with you all this stuff between Keith and Mick is nothing but a soap opera to me. I have four brothers and we fight like cats and dogs but would give our lives for one another if it came right down to it-same with Mick and Keith. Stop fretting about what they haven't done over the last twenty years and be thankful that they have done anything. For crying out loud we lost the Beatles forty years ago!

fretting? i'm happy with the band. i'm just disagreeing with the assertion that it's the bands 'destiny' to do a 50th anniversary show. don't put words in people's mouths you ninny.

Ninny? Sounds a little over the top, but if you are who I suspect you are then it makes perfect sense. Regardless who you are, you really have some serious hostility stirring in your belly. Seek help.

That's good advice...I will go seek help for calling you a ninny and you stop putting words in peoples mouths.

Quote
stonescrow
So you are actually happy with a band that you say has been malfunctioning since the mid-eighties? Happy with them only putting out three albums in the last 20 years? So you are not the least bit annoyed or irritated with them? If so, then my apologies.

I've enjoyed the tours, and the occasional albums so I am overall happy with the band. I just think they've underachieved artistically, given what they could have done. I don't think that is too difficult to understand.

Your apology however, is graciously accepted.

Stonescrow, what did you mean by this, a few posts above?

"I won't be hanging around much longer, as my work here is pretty much completed."

Quote
angee
Stonescrow, what did you mean by this, a few posts above?

"I won't be hanging around much longer, as my work here is pretty much completed."

Angee,

Just dropped in to see if I could assist in waking up some sleeping tigers....... rattle a few cages! I think we do a pretty good job of that around here overall, now it's up to the trainers (promoters etc.) to open the gates....let's hope the tigers are good and hungry after their prolonged nap!