A lot of crying over some damn album cover. Besides thanks to CD format the cover art means next nothing these days, and thanks to digital format, the whole concept of cover does mean not even that these days. Better to have simple, provocative picture than try anything more detailed a'la BRIDGES TO BABYLON or A BIGGER BANG. It stands out better in the record shell. It will be seen and it will be remebered. What else needed these days?

Of the content. It is a compilation covering their whole career plus two new bonus songs. Yeah, basically the concept of FORTY LICKS. Contrary to the majority here I see nothing wrong there. FORTY LICKS was a product of its time, and I still remeber how great it was to have a greatest hits album covering their whole career. But it is dated now, and I think it didn't work very well as an album. There was no balance, the order of songs sucked, and many great songs were somehow lost there, re-produced strangly, and especially the four new ones making it rather uneven.

So what I hope is that GRRR! is done better and with better taste. This band deserves a great product in one sleeves to cover their whole career. It is good that the new songs - the trick to get us hardcore fans excited and buying the album - is kept to minimum, and the fate of FORTY LICKS will not rehappen so easily. Hearding of "Come On" being included is promising. So maybe the song selection will be more 'definitive' and ambitious than it was in FL, so the album will stand better than FORTY LICKS in a long run.

It is what it is: a compilation album, and most probably the biggest individual seller their recent record company can have from them (and they hype as much as they can for that) I can understand the disappointent here, even though I don't see that justified. What did you expect? A brandnew studio album? Unrealistic. Anyone following their actions (and sayings) during the last years, and within this year (jams, rehearsals, Paris studio week), should have known this kind of item to come. Like the book earlier and the documentary soon as well. But nothing else.

Maybe the unrealistic expectations derive from the fact that people are not ready to accept the nature of the band these days. People love to see the old miracle happen again. But The Rolling Stones are not any longer a real functioning musical unit, but a bunch of semi-retired folks trying somehow benefit of their 50th Anniversary momentum. if there is no spark (or ability), there is not. It takes damn much from them to just to get together and do something. In a way it has been interesting to follow their jams and gettings together during the last nine months or so, but honestly: it really seems VERY hard to get the old engine working again this time. The results so far has been two new tracks and rumoured four gigs. I suppose the all extra material - for example, opening the vaults we have enjoyed a lot lately - is partly done to cover the cruel fact that they are not like they used to be - they cannot not really do the victory lap just by by their recent doings - for example, to release a new studio album or announce just another mammouth tour.

So thanks to my rather low expectations - but what I would claim to be realistic - I am not disappointed one bit by now. Anything 'new' they do now is extra, and I am grateful for whatever happens. It all will be over soon..

I don't know if I will buy GRRR! or not - it depends a lot how the content turns out to be. But I'm glad that that kind of item will be available for 'newbies', casual fans, or for whoever. A band of that caliber really deserves their career to be presented in one package.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-05 11:16 by Doxa.

Dead right !

Doxa,

I agree with some of your points. Still, casual fans do not necessarily need a new best of, and the youngest ones who may discover the Stones nowadays or very recently probably won't dig into a 50 or 80 song compilation. I hope I'm wrong because the band has way more great songs, but still...

My disappointment comes from the artwork. I was hoping for something more classy, more in the spirit of what Queen did for onstance. But even if Mick is a Sir, the Stones always have been rebels, so I can (in a way) find the provocative behavior of the Stones behind the choice of artwork. Still the 1st vision was a disappointment, i have to confess...

On my blog's homepage (CLICK HERE), you can express your opinion about the artwork (on the right)
Here are the options, feel free to go there and make express your choice :
Tres reussie = A great achievement
Drole et decalee = Funny and offbeat
Franchement moyenne = Average at best
Indigne du groupe = Unworthy of the band

[doctorstonesblog.blogspot.com]

Quote
Denny
Amazing news - above and beyond all expectations. Would love to pay top dollar for this unique new compilation, after all it's been ten years already since the last one covering the exact same ground. (Two new songs to download illegally or via itunes, that's all)

LOL Well said

Grrr is a rather angry and threatening utterance, but that animal looks like a happy moron. Peculiar...

Quote
Doc
My disappointment comes from the artwork. I was hoping for something more classy, more in the spirit of what Queen did for onstance.

I'm repeatimg myself... but I ask WHY???

The cover is vulgar, artistically offensive, tacky and distasteful.

The title is memorable.

Perfect Stones cover.

Did you ever wonder if you have become your own parents? You want "nice" and "class"?

I really like it and it's wasted on a Greatest Hits package.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-05 11:46 by GravityBoy.

I haven't bothered to read the entire thread. Does anyone know the track list?

Sorry, just discovered the tracks thread.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-05 11:47 by The Worst..

Too much monkey business.

Quote
GravityBoy

Quote
Doc
My disappointment comes from the artwork. I was hoping for something more classy, more in the spirit of what Queen did for onstance.

I'm repeatimg myself... but I ask WHY???

The cover is vulgar, artistically offensive, tacky and distasteful.

The title is memorable.

Perfect Stones cover.

Did you ever wonder if you have become your own parents? You want "nice" and "class"?

I really like it and it's wasted on a Greatest Hits package.

Really? What's so vulgar, offensive, tacky and distasteful about a goofy looking reptilian cartoon ape? If the title seems memorable, it ought to, because it's only been used at least a half dozen times over the last 10 years--and yes, once even eponymously by a group called Grrr!. The most artistically offensive part is the total lack of originality and creativity about the title. As for the ape, not Stoneslike at all. The perfect Stones cover would have been a monkey--for the monkey men who recorded Monkey Man.

Quote

What's so vulgar, offensive, tacky and distasteful about a goofy looking reptilian cartoon ape?

Did you notice the reaction around here?

Job done.

As I said, I was disappointed at first, and now, I just don't know.
In a way, I think it's funny, in another way, if there was ONE event to be celebrated in a classy way, it should've been their 50th anniversary.

But the Stones have found a way to stay rebels, and that's fine for me too !

Let's focus on the record's content...
2 new tracks isn't much, and hopefully they will pour some alternates or real rarities in the 80-track version.

[doctorstonesblog.blogspot.com]

Just a banana.



Some of you guys really have become your Mom and Dad.

You really want a nice tasteful "Queen" type cover?

The only thing they could have done to upset people more is put an erect peanut (sp?) on the front.

Quote
GravityBoy

Quote

What's so vulgar, offensive, tacky and distasteful about a goofy looking reptilian cartoon ape?

Did you notice the reaction around here?

Job done.

"Around here" doesn't necessarily speak to the main demographics of the Stones' fan base, just to the few dozen of us who happen to obsess on a daily basis on all things Stoneslike. If anything, the title is cliched and the cover art is just plain goofy. It's Monkey Man, not Planet Of The Apes or King Kong.

Lots more great Stones art from Walton Ford...

Beggars banquet:



Tie you up the pain of love:



Gunface:



beast of burden:





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-05 12:06 by superrevvy.

One way to lok at the proceedings here is that since they seemingly are not able to function as a real band or like they used to do (a new album, a mammouth tour), they borrow their old well-worked concepts from the past and put them all together to compensate the lack of new productivity: so we have 25 BY 5 vol. 2, IN ACCORDING TO THE ROLLING STONES Vol. 2, and FORTY LICKS`Vol. 2. That high-profile and much advertised output actually speaks volumes of the nature of their productivity these days. The die-hard section of fans is kept satisfied - a task impossible though... - by lower profile archive releases.

Lots of "lovely things" as Jagger promised...


- Doxa

at the moment i am not excited at all, but i am waiting for more news to come.
but at the end, numbers will tell. when the cd will be out and it will be ok in the charts (as i believe), Stones will be right, like most of the times..
i repeat: this anthology is not for us (like old fans ), but for a larger audience.
hope something more for us will be ready soon

Quote
stonesnow
"Around here" doesn't necessarily speak to the main demographics of the Stones' fan base, just to the few dozen of us who happen to obsess on a daily basis on all things Stoneslike. If anything, the title is cliched and the cover art is just plain goofy. It's Monkey Man, not Planet Of The Apes or King Kong.

How many times in your life have you said "that's sh*t.." and changed your mind later.... (be honest)

I prefer that cover to the last 4 or 5 album covers.

If the cover contained a great Stones album you would love it too.

It's all subjective. Even a simple picture of a banana can be come iconic.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-05 12:18 by GravityBoy.

"Walton Ford appropriates the crisp, descriptive style of 19th-century naturalists
and artists—John James Audubon, Karl Bodmer, George Catlin—but he puts their
conventions to work in an investigation of natural history itself.

Repurposing a field-guide aesthetic, Ford composes dense allegories that make
sometimes pointed, sometimes sidelong allusions to everything from conservationism
and consumption to war, politics and imperialism.

While staying uncannily faithful to the natural history mode, Ford paints on a much
larger scale, producing outsize watercolors with epic compositions. He renders his
scenes with operatic drama, capturing moments when the natural order changes,
such as the last members of a species struggling just before extinction.”

Do IORR-type fans count as a species?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-05 12:25 by superrevvy.

It's actually quite a funny picture on the cover.A lot of folk seem to be getting rather annoyed about things.We need to be realistic,the guys are pushing 70 and we have got 2 new tracks and 4 shows to look forward to.Hopefully more shows next year,and maybe a new album.So keep positive,lighten up,after all its only rock n 'roll.....

Quote
GravityBoy

Quote
stonesnow
"Around here" doesn't necessarily speak to the main demographics of the Stones' fan base, just to the few dozen of us who happen to obsess on a daily basis on all things Stoneslike. If anything, the title is cliched and the cover art is just plain goofy. It's Monkey Man, not Planet Of The Apes or King Kong.

How many times in your life have you said "that's sh*t.." and changed your mind later.... (be honest)

I prefer that cover to the last 4 or 5 album covers.

If the cover contained a great Stones album you would love it too.

It's all subjective. Even a simple picture of a banana can be come iconic.

Not that I'll be purchasing this new release--the new songs will be posted on Youtube almost immediately, then here immediately thereafter. So that's $200+ saved right there. So it doesn't bother you that the title has been used at least 6 or 7 times? Go to Amazon and type Grrr into the music search engine and see all the results that come up. Originality and cleverness have always been hallmarks of Stones album titles, even with the compilations--Hot Rocks and Rolled Gold are 2 nice examples, whereas Made In The Shade, on the other hand, is a cliched title that we tend to forget about. But of course if I change my mind and do decide to spend $200+ on 2 new songs and like it--goofy reptilian ape and all--I'll let you know... I wonder how many here would actually buy this comp just for the supplemental booklet that comes with the deluxe edition...

I'm not buying it either.

But if it was the cover of a great Stones album I would and I would love it.

And you would too.

That's what happens.

Even to a banana.

...eye-catching cover ... can't ya already see the T-shirts on all dem gals



ROCKMAN

Quote
71Tele

Quote
ChefGuevara
I'm not sure what is worst, this gorilla cover
or the London Olympic logo.

Both will be taught for years in graphic design classes as examples of what not to do.

Agreed - the London Olympic logo was horrible (and not even memorable) - but the actual event was pretty good. I'm still hopeful that what's inside the package will make the GRRR cover tolerable, or even looked at with affection, in times to come. What are the extra 30 tracks, and what's on this bonus disc, for instance, that makes it worthwhile spending £150 or so on the full package? I'm looking forward to finding out - though if it's the kind of completists-only extras they usually come up with, I'll give it a miss. Why oh why can they not allow you to buy the extra MUSIC without all these postcards and signed whatsits and souvenir thingummybobs?

I probably will buy at least the basic version of this, since I don't own 40 Licks or any other Greatest Hits package.

Quote
GravityBoy
I'm not buying it either.

But if it was the cover of a great Stones album I would and I would love it.

And you would too.

That's what happens.

Even to a banana.

Ah, but there you see, a great Stones album would inspire them to come up with an original title, not one that's been used (even as a band name) several times in the last decade--hence, there would be no dumb ape to go GRRR! What if every Stones album were titled by some insipid overused cliche? What if Exile On Main Street had simply been titled BALLS or BALLS-ON? Would you enjoy referencing it as much?

As for the simple banana, that had nothing to do with that album, which was eponymously titled (and therefore original). It only became iconic because of the
famous artist who designed it. To me, that banana bit on the cover is pointless and is about as iconic as a Campbell's soup label.

Woke up this morning and thought the item of this thread a nightmare, but when I went to my computer it's all the same shit on there. The Stones are the greatest joke on earth meanwhile ...

All those famous albums called Grrr!

Right.

Quote
stonesnow
To me, that banana bit on the cover is pointless and is about as iconic as a Campbell's soup label.

You're treading on hallowed ground (not mine but some people's)

It's all subjective.

Andy Warhol was unknown once and people said "that's sh*t".

You can learn to love crap...

I'm just waiting for them to reveal that all was just a joke, to scare us, and drop a stunning creative artwork. Is it for real? A gorilla and GRRR!? Why would they do that to themselves?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-05 13:16 by DiscoVolante.

Quote
DiscoVolante
I'm just waiting for them to reveal that all was just a joke, to scare us, and drop a stunning creative artwork. Is it for real? A gorilla and GRRR!? Why would they do that to themselves?

Nothing was worst than the cherry picker and the dancing women from 1981. Why would they do that to themselves? Why did they record ER? and Undercover? No that's some sad times. What if they came out with a cover like SW again?

Hello, together

I left this text and I hope I understands this.

Some are disappointed announced which this only Best of all of. We everybody had made a slip more.

But one Best of all Of to the jubilee comes, nevertheless, was clear. I think if the choice of the songs is right, I am even for it....

What I find funny, when there have been sometimes concerts where the sold takes place 2-3 months only before.

Unfortunately, they become not younger and if you published only live concerts or material which there are not yet, I am not angry the volume.