Read in an interview with Jack white in May 2012 'Rock & Folk' (French magazine). When asked if there are other artists he would like to work with, he replied : (translated by me~)

Quote

The Stones, of course. We're talking of working together for years. With Mick and Keith, we often talk about production. But who knows if it would click. Because I don't want to just 'do' the Stones. For example I love Michael Jackson and I've been offered to work on some of his unfinished songs ; they wanted me to play some guitar on a couple of tracks. But even if I love him like no one else, I couldn't do it, I wasn't feeling it. I wouldn't have done it just to see my name on a Michael Jackson album.

By the way Jack White's yesterday concert in New York is still streaming here : [www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-04-28 13:48 by kowalski.

I got up at 3 this morning to watch his concert, but "this video contains contain that is unavailable in your country".

...

You got the Sun, You got the Moon,
and you've got
The Rolling Stones

@Yorkey
I ha the same issue. But link above works for me.

...i'd jump at that Mick and Keith.

Could be a bit like the Stones' Rick Rubin. Would be interesting at least.

Maybe I'm a little late to the Jack White Fan Club, but this guy is a genius.

This concert is still streaming and it is quite fabulous.

'Produced by The Glimmer Twins and Jack White' has a hell of a ring to it, don't ya think?

The Stones aren't working with themselves at this point, so moving on......

well that's what Mick wants you to think in case they have garbage and nothing better than what was on ABB....but I don't think so....wouldn't count anything out at this point.

Re: Jack White says he would like to work with the Stones

Well, who wouldn't.

Quote
billwebster
Re: Jack White says he would like to work with the Stones

Well, who wouldn't.

Well I'd rather have Jack White producing Stones new record than someone like will.i.am ("remember the hardest ever" ?)

Well I guess Jack White, would get some great sound out of the Stones.................

__________________________

I heard Jack White at a Stones concert once, and he and his wife/sister (whoever she is) were terrible. I got up and wandered the lobby to get away from all the noise. Jack may be a nice guy, but what I heard that night, several years ago, was pure crap.

Jack White would be a shot in the arm for the Stones. Some new blood in the studio would be great and I think Jack gets what they are (were) about.

Quote
flilflam
I heard Jack White at a Stones concert once, and he and his wife/sister (whoever she is) were terrible. I got up and wandered the lobby to get away from all the noise. Jack may be a nice guy, but what I heard that night, several years ago, was pure crap.

Columbus (lick tour) they were terrible.....one of the worst opening acts ever

As long as White wasn't awed by the fandom and let them turn out another Mick Jagger solo album under the Stones moniker. They need someone to push them. Jettison the need to be hip and current and crank out some heavy blues based rock. Would be a nice book end to their career.

Quote
Stones62
Jack White would be a shot in the arm for the Stones. Some new blood in the studio would be great and I think Jack gets what they are (were) about.

I mostly agree. But I'm not sure Keith would. I think it would be the end of
Keith if Jack White were to join them, in the way Jack makes clear he would want
to---i.e., not just as a sideman, but someone truly working with them. If that
happened, he would usurp Keith's place, I believe.

-swiss

Jack White would be to the Stones what Dan Auerbach was to Dr. John: The only possibility to stay relevant.

Not a fan of everything Jack White does, but I'd love to see them work together.

At this stage of events, it doesn't matter be there be any jackwhites or not in the studio. There is no hope that anyone could say anything to these 95% pensioners if they 'suddenly' decide to bring their asses to the studio together, and do there something. Maybe some 10-15 yaers ago that kind of 'outsider producer' would have made some kind of difference. But now it is naive romanticism and idealism to even think that The Stones would actually bother to make such an artistic driven effort, and listen someone guiding them - the biggest egos in the whole business - in their own game (regads to that I think swiss makes a good point about Keith Richards).

Of course, ideally that would make sense (good music?), but in practice it sounds impossible. The band haven't been for years a "living and breathing band" to make such artistic choices. They don't need to, and they seemingly are not interested.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-04-29 12:56 by Doxa.

This poor work ethics through the last decades is really down to Sir Michael. In some way I can understand why Keith was pissed off. The vagabonding billionaire Sir Michael seems to have time for everything but working with the Stones. How productive can a band be that spends two weeks in a studio every sixth years?

Just thinking further this (im)possible scenario... just think of Keith Richards strumming guitar in the studio, trying to make some kind of sensible sounds out of his instrument with his broken hands, having some kind of sketch of a song in his mind. Charlie, Ronnie, Chuck Leavell, and D. Jones (Wyman in this fantasy) following his instincts and backing him up.... who is the damn person in the whole world saying anything there - "no no Keith, that's not good. Why don't you give more push to riff there there... hmm we need some more structure in the chorus...." Only probably Mick Jagger. If he bothers to be present.

And I don't think the case is being afraid of the blade. It is simply respecting the guy so much that no one has heart to really intervent. By now Keith and his pals are beyond the normal discourses. To say it more harshly (sorry): there are moments when you don't teach your old man how to screw, especially when he can't have his 'rocks off' any longer...

I mean, these guys are about 70 years old - you don't teach for old dogs like them any new tricks, and even trying to teach them their own old tricks is a mark of hybris... Just let them be what they are and hope for the best...

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa
Just thinking further this (im)possible scenario... just think of Keith Richards strumming guitar in the studio, trying to make some kind of sensible sounds out of his instrument with his broken hands, having some kind of sketch of a song in his mind. Charlie, Ronnie, Chuck Leavell, and D. Jones (Wyman in this fantasy) following his instincts and backing him up.... who is the damn person in the whole world saying anything there - "no no Keith, that's not good. Why don't you give more push to riff there there... hmm we need some more structure in the chorus...." Only probably Mick Jagger. If he bothers to be present.

And I don't think the case is being afraid of the blade. It is simply respecting the guy so much that no one has heart to really intervent. By now Keith and his pals are beyond the normal discourses. To say it more harshly (sorry): there are moments when you don't teach your old man how to screw, especially when he can't have his 'rocks off' any longer...

I mean, these guys are about 70 years old - you don't teach for old dogs like them any new tricks, and even trying to teach them their own old tricks is a mark of hybris... Just let them be what they are and hope for the best...

- Doxa

Well, it worked with Dr. John, Johnny Cash, Solomon Burke, etc... it just needs the Stones to accept help

Quote
Stoneage
This poor work ethics through the last decades is really down to Sir Michael. In some way I can understand why Keith was pissed off. The vagabonding billionaire Sir Michael seems to have time for everything but working with the Stones. How productive can a band be that spends two weeks in a studio every sixth years?

The fate was sealed in 1989. Jagger simply refused to work with the old method any longer - the method that marked almost living in the studio, endless jamming and to find the right groove, etc. - and replaced with his economical deadline -driven receipt. "Do it as quickly as possible, no wasted moment in the studio". This killed Keith's muse, or his particular ways of contributing to the music of tehy band, and thereeby, any serious effort to reinvent their music. By A BIGGER BANG Richards was so worn off that he didn't even care - just wanted to get it done Jaggerian way as quick as possible (according to LIFE he refused to go to 'proper' studio after the sessions in Jagger's garage...) . Each album since STEEL WHEELS sounds remarkably thin and 'through the motions', done simply to make the tour deadline. "Each" - four of them... not much; that is, not many weeks actually have spend in making new Rolling Stones music since the the 'reunion', and it doesn't look any better now...

Of course, I don't have concrete evidence of the 1989 deal. I just interpret the circumstancial evidence... Literally or metaphorically Jagger made the conditions clear by which the saga of The Stones will go on, and Keith accepted them, Cohl's numbers I believe having a crucial role there.

And if here is no actual artistic drive - will to reinvent oneself - no any outsider help (producer) can do anything. The will needs to come from the artist himself, but for some reason Jagger & co were not any longer inspired.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-04-29 14:13 by Doxa.

Quote
Lorenz

Well, it worked with Dr. John, Johnny Cash, Solomon Burke, etc... it just needs the Stones to accept help

Exactly, and that is the problem. The drive needs to come from the artist, and nothing indicates that it would happen with the Stones. Besides, those mentioned are individual artists; with the Stones the issue if of two extremily strong egos and a history of certain ways to do things (including the habits of other members). Always it is more diffult to handle a group or a 'gang' of strong individuals than one individual person. The result is that I think they never would 'accept' terms for that kind of deals.. It will ask too much from them; a possible "one more good record" is not enough to motivate them.

- Doxa

Quote
Stones62
Jack White would be a shot in the arm for the Stones. Some new blood in the studio would be great and I think Jack gets what they are (were) about.

I agree - I have nothing against Don Was - I think he has done great job, restoring credibility of The Stones - after disastorous Undercover and Dirty Work and somewhat mediocre Steel Wheelchairs...But they really need more energy and I think Jack White might be good choice to push them little further.

Yeah, you are right, Doxa. I just hope that somehow they can get over their egos.

T^oo band Tom Dowd isn't aroung anyone.

Quote
Doxa
At this stage of events, it doesn't matter be there be any jackwhites or not in the studio. There is no hope that anyone could say anything to these 95% pensioners if they 'suddenly' decide to bring their asses to the studio together, and do there something. Maybe some 10-15 yaers ago that kind of 'outsider producer' would have made some kind of difference. But now it is naive romanticism and idealism to even think that The Stones would actually bother to make such an artistic driven effort, and listen someone guiding them - the biggest egos in the whole business - in their own game (regads to that I think swiss makes a good point about Keith Richards).

Of course, ideally that would make sense (good music?), but in practice it sounds impossible. The band haven't been for years a "living and breathing band" to make such artistic choices. They don't need to, and they seemingly are not interested.

- Doxa

ridiculous. Is there a more competitive person in the industry than Jagger?...maybe?...probably not...but you miscalculate both these guys...