What's the point of a new album?

1- It wont sell more than 1 million worldwide, that's about $12-15 million in sales and half of that is for the band so they will get about $7-8 million, the gross of a single stadium show. Ridiculous.

2- Their back catalog is selling very well on this digital era, they have not less than 5 songs on Itunes rock chart right now and Hot Rocks is selling like a current album this year, about 70-80k in 5 months only (right now is around #80 on ITunes)

3- They play a 19 song setlist nowadays, 11-12 warhorses, 2-3 classic deep cuts and 1-2 rarities or covers, there's only room for 1 or 2 new songs each night. That's what happened during the ABB tour after the first US leg, the new stuff got replaced or the setlist got shortened. It happened again after the 2012 shows.

No point, as you point out from that perspective.

People wanting new music are thinking more from a musical point of view, an artistic point of view. But if they have nothing to say, as you point out what's the point?

Mick has said it numerous times. Their fans don't want new music. They gave you 16 new songs in 2005 and you didn't buy the album and didn't want those songs in concerts despite Mick's best efforts.

Of course they could do a new album, but what you really want is a reproduction of an early 70's Stones album. A roots album if you will. You don't want a new 2015 sounding album, or you would have bought Bigger Bang and wanted a concert of all those songs.

From Turner68: "I agree. What about "rock around the clock"? Or maybe "suspicious minds"?"

"Suspicious Minds" would be a great song for the Stones to cover, though, doing the song that KR said turned him on to rock and roll, "Heartbreak Hotel", would be very cool. In this same vein, why not do a song by the Temptations - "Papa Was A Rolling Stone"? How appropriate this would be considering it's the Stones doing it?

Quote
alimente

Quote
drbryant

Quote
Beauforde
Thw whole thing nets out as a downer for me. The stones are energetic enough to do a real tour, but not ambitious enough to get in the studio for 1-2 months and try and come up with a new album. And still no truly bringing mick taylor back into the fold. Bullshit. Nostalgia entrepreneurship... The stones have been the finest stones cover band for 20+ years now. What a waste. They need a producer who shames ALL OF THEM them into getting to a bare studio -- set up mikes and a sound board, no over-dubs or any other embellishments, turn the shit on and just PLAY/RECORD. And see what happens. What they're doing now - derivative to the nth degree - is not even worthy of paying attention to from my perspective.

The problem is it makes little economic sense for groups like the Stones to spend their working hours in the studio if they can spend them on the road. Let's say they spend two months recording a new album. Let's say it sells 300,000 copies (which is probably about what we could expect these days). At $15 per sold copy that would generate about $4.5 million in sales. That's less than the Stones generate in ticket sales for a SINGLE 2 hour show (and that doesn't include merchandising). In fact the show at Stade de France last year generated over $9 million. I want the Stones to make a new album also. But with the state of music sales in the digital age, where many people expect music to be free, I would understand if they never stepped foot in the studio again.

Well, they don't exactly need to. They could rehearse a handful of new songs and cover versions, play them live in front of enthusiastic hardcore fans at a small series of club shows, record the stuff on location and spend not more than a week for small corrections, some minimal overdubs and mixing. Et voila - there's a new Stones album with new material, recorded live at club shows and a bonus track or two recorded at the rehearsals.

After the two or three "new album recording" club shows are done, they can go on tour with their usual greatest hits and, surprise, surprise, maybe even one or two new songs in the set.

Well, that's how I would do it if I was in their position and considering the general circumstances.

That would work. Like Stripped I guess, which was great.

Quote
drbryant

Quote
alimente

Quote
drbryant

Quote
Beauforde
Thw whole thing nets out as a downer for me. The stones are energetic enough to do a real tour, but not ambitious enough to get in the studio for 1-2 months and try and come up with a new album. And still no truly bringing mick taylor back into the fold. Bullshit. Nostalgia entrepreneurship... The stones have been the finest stones cover band for 20+ years now. What a waste. They need a producer who shames ALL OF THEM them into getting to a bare studio -- set up mikes and a sound board, no over-dubs or any other embellishments, turn the shit on and just PLAY/RECORD. And see what happens. What they're doing now - derivative to the nth degree - is not even worthy of paying attention to from my perspective.

The problem is it makes little economic sense for groups like the Stones to spend their working hours in the studio if they can spend them on the road. Let's say they spend two months recording a new album. Let's say it sells 300,000 copies (which is probably about what we could expect these days). At $15 per sold copy that would generate about $4.5 million in sales. That's less than the Stones generate in ticket sales for a SINGLE 2 hour show (and that doesn't include merchandising). In fact the show at Stade de France last year generated over $9 million. I want the Stones to make a new album also. But with the state of music sales in the digital age, where many people expect music to be free, I would understand if they never stepped foot in the studio again.

Well, they don't exactly need to. They could rehearse a handful of new songs and cover versions, play them live in front of enthusiastic hardcore fans at a small series of club shows, record the stuff on location and spend not more than a week for small corrections, some minimal overdubs and mixing. Et voila - there's a new Stones album with new material, recorded live at club shows and a bonus track or two recorded at the rehearsals.

After the two or three "new album recording" club shows are done, they can go on tour with their usual greatest hits and, surprise, surprise, maybe even one or two new songs in the set.

Well, that's how I would do it if I was in their position and considering the general circumstances.

That would work. Like Stripped I guess, which was great.

Yes, like Stripped, but with the emphasis on new material (original songs and cover versions). Stripped had only two "new" songs - cover versions of course - Like A Rolling Stone and Little Baby, and the latter is a true highlight imo.
At this stage in their career, there's simply no need trying to sound "contemporary" or pleasing a "young" audience which gives a shit on the Stones anyways - just focus on people who love Stones music and classic rock music in general.

Yes , setlist are generally disappointing for me but i stopped complaining after their 2012 come back. I am more grateful to them for the emotions they gave me and i consider myself lucky because my favourite band is stil on the road after 53 years. New music? Of course i want! More un unusual songs? Of course! But i surrended. If i wanna listen to unusual songs, i download the Gov't mule or Chris Robinson . The Stones are super connected with the majority of their fans ( who are not here on iorr). The columbus song vote says it all. People could vote for Heartbreaker but paint it Black (that has been played different Times in the last years)won.

Quote
donvis
There will never be a new album. Just the odd song here and there. They lack the will. The only hope is to really open the vaults. And that won't happen as long as they are alive. If a fan/historian had carte blanch, you would see cool stuff like the Elvis FTD label puts out.

Quote
georgelicks
What's the point of a new album?

1- It wont sell more than 1 million worldwide, that's about $12-15 million in sales and half of that is for the band so they will get about $7-8 million, the gross of a single stadium show. Ridiculous.

2- Their back catalog is selling very well on this digital era, they have not less than 5 songs on Itunes rock chart right now and Hot Rocks is selling like a current album this year, about 70-80k in 5 months only (right now is around #80 on ITunes)

3- They play a 19 song setlist nowadays, 11-12 warhorses, 2-3 classic deep cuts and 1-2 rarities or covers, there's only room for 1 or 2 new songs each night. That's what happened during the ABB tour after the first US leg, the new stuff got replaced or the setlist got shortened. It happened again after the 2012 shows.

Don't be so pessimistic about it. Haven't you read what SackofBrokenEggs said?

the stones are no longer interested in relevance or exploration of their unique collective gift. they have settled into a unfathomly profitable and idolized lassitude.

whether neil, or dylan or U2 can ascend back to their previous artistic/commercial/critical zeniths is almost beyond the point... for me, the point is, they're still trying to say something else, something additional. not the same thing again.

and i love the stones and their legacy enough that i still get peeved when i hear they're back on the road to reprise yet again what they've done innumerably before. they have the energy and the chops, but not the will.

a new double album of studio tracks both material and gems from
the vault.

set list- same old stuff tour after tour. I don't think they get
as to what a true, long time fan really is and what we would love
to hear live. just my opinion.

I love them, but like a hot girlfriend, they can get boring over time.

Quote
georgelicks
What's the point of a new album?

1- It wont sell more than 1 million worldwide, that's about $12-15 million in sales and half of that is for the band so they will get about $7-8 million, the gross of a single stadium show. Ridiculous.

Quote
Beauforde
they have settled into a unfathomly profitable and idolized lassitude.

I think the problem here is that the Stones have decided to become businessmen who do rock on the side than rockers who are in business. They've settled into a mid-70s-like decadence for themselves (*cough* IORR, B&B *cough*) and think everyone loves the same old thing still. And unfortunately, based on their tour profits, they are by-and-large correct.
The Stones are not interested in music, they're interested in money. They're no longer a band for the people, they're a band for themselves. They simply don't recognize that their fans might appreciate one last effort from the Glimmer Twins that shows they still give a s***.
And I doubt that will change any time soon.

how dissapointing the pathetic setlists....i know they still sound great,but they have absolutly no desire to do anything creative,whether in the studio or on stage...sad,sad,sad.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-02 05:29 by backstreetboy1.

Agreed !

Can someone put a link with the setlist?


-RS



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-02 06:23 by RS.

Quote
RS
Can someone put a link with the setlist?


-RS

[www.setlist.fm]

peace

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
RS
Can someone put a link with the setlist?


-RS

[www.setlist.fm]

peace

Thanks

-RS

Quote
backstreetboy1
how dissapointing the pathetic setlists....i know they still sound great,but they have absolutly no desire to do anything creative,whether in the studio or on stage...sad,sad,sad.

I have to disagree with you backstreetboy, they have some pretty good songs in there...

Quote
Turner68

Quote
dmay
Whatta you mean, no new music? I just listened to the Stones doing some song called "Hang On Sloopy". Damn, what a beat. Got the audience singing along and movin' their feet. They should've jammed out on this flucker and segued right into "Summertime Blues" or, this would blow everyone's mind, "Come Together". And, if you can't dig the Stones channeling the Beatles, Bo Diddley's "Mona" would be a great segue after a jam on "Sloopy". And, right now, on satellite radio, they're playing Nancy Sinatra's "These Boots Are Made for Walking". What a helluva followup to "Sloopy" this would be.

I agree. What about "rock around the clock"? Or maybe "suspicious minds"?

Howz about Mick and Keith dueting on "I Got You Babe" which is also turning 50 this year.

Quote
Midnight Toker
a new double album of studio tracks both material and gems from
the vault.

set list- same old stuff tour after tour. I don't think they get
as to what a true, long time fan really is and what we would love
to hear live. just my opinion.

I love them, but like a hot girlfriend, they can get boring over time.

I disagree. With the Stones, I'll pay through the nose to see them, and after a few weeks, I am always willing to pay the same high prices to see them again. With hot girlfriends, I'm generally only willing to pay once.

Quote
drbryant

Quote
Midnight Toker
a new double album of studio tracks both material and gems from
the vault.

set list- same old stuff tour after tour. I don't think they get
as to what a true, long time fan really is and what we would love
to hear live. just my opinion.

I love them, but like a hot girlfriend, they can get boring over time.

I disagree. With the Stones, I'll pay through the nose to see them, and after a few weeks, I am always willing to pay the same high prices to see them again. With hot girlfriends, I'm generally only willing to pay once.

...but you pay dearly

Since this is the "other complaints thread" I think it's better to post here and leave the Orlando thread for the concert reports and photos from everybody who was there.

At every concert we have a lot of posters who give their best efforts trying to search pics, periscope feeds and other infos, and this is a hell of a job. It's a hard work but at the same time it's a fun job, mostly because it's the only way to follow a Stones concert when we're not there seeing them live.

When we have a concert going on, everytime a single user posts something like "this setlist is boring", other users can jump in and start a discussion about it, either agreeing or not with that, and leaving beside what's more important on that kind of thread - the live comments. What happens next everybody knows: an endless discussion which ends spoiling the live comments.

Perhaps I'm being too grumpy here (and I'm not that kind of person at all), but I can't understand why there is the need to be complaining about the setlists at every concert, and most important - during the live comments. This is an endless discussion, and in the end we all know that will result in nothing positive. More than that: the Stones will not change their setlists only because some members here doesn't like it.

Speaking only by myself, as being one of the posters who try to be more active on concert days, I feel this as being somehow disrespectful to the people who try to contribute with their infos and opinions, considering all the job everybody is trying to do to at least have a fun thread for everyone.

Quote
Cristiano Radtke

Perhaps I'm being too grumpy here (and I'm not that kind of person at all), but I can't understand why there is the need to be complaining about the setlists at every concert, and most important - during the live comments. This is an endless discussion, and in the end we all know that will result in nothing positive. More than that: the Stones will not change their setlists only because some members here doesn't like it.

I completely agree.
I am just happy they are here

I can't get no satisfaction
'Cause I whine and I whine and whine and I whine
I can't get no..........

-------------------------------------------------------------

Cheers Cristiano!
Stay positive and keep up the great work!

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
eyesoftheworld

Quote
Cristiano Radtke

Perhaps I'm being too grumpy here (and I'm not that kind of person at all), but I can't understand why there is the need to be complaining about the setlists at every concert, and most important - during the live comments. This is an endless discussion, and in the end we all know that will result in nothing positive. More than that: the Stones will not change their setlists only because some members here doesn't like it.

I completely agree.
I am just happy they are here

Cristiano, I love what you bring to the board, but there were two people who barely complained about the songs on that thread during the show and you truly are perpetuating the myth by continuing to post about it.

I respect your freedom to post as you please but do you really think the set list complainers dominated that discussion? I don't.

BTW: I do personally believe set list complaints are futile and redundant at this point. But I also think saying something like "I'd like to hear more SF songs" is pretty harmless and not really a complaint.

peace

Quote
Cristiano Radtke
Since this is the "other complaints thread" I think it's better to post here and leave the Orlando thread for the concert reports and photos from everybody who was there.

At every concert we have a lot of posters who give their best efforts trying to search pics, periscope feeds and other infos, and this is a hell of a job. It's a hard work but at the same time it's a fun job, mostly because it's the only way to follow a Stones concert when we're not there seeing them live.

When we have a concert going on, everytime a single user posts something like "this setlist is boring", other users can jump in and start a discussion about it, either agreeing or not with that, and leaving beside what's more important on that kind of thread - the live comments. What happens next everybody knows: an endless discussion which ends spoiling the live comments.

Perhaps I'm being too grumpy here (and I'm not that kind of person at all), but I can't understand why there is the need to be complaining about the setlists at every concert, and most important - during the live comments. This is an endless discussion, and in the end we all know that will result in nothing positive. More than that: the Stones will not change their setlists only because some members here doesn't like it.

Speaking only by myself, as being one of the posters who try to be more active on concert days, I feel this as being somehow disrespectful to the people who try to contribute with their infos and opinions, considering all the job everybody is trying to do to at least have a fun thread for everyone.

Hear, hear! Thanks for the good work, Cristiano

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
eyesoftheworld

Quote
Cristiano Radtke

Perhaps I'm being too grumpy here (and I'm not that kind of person at all), but I can't understand why there is the need to be complaining about the setlists at every concert, and most important - during the live comments. This is an endless discussion, and in the end we all know that will result in nothing positive. More than that: the Stones will not change their setlists only because some members here doesn't like it.

I completely agree.
I am just happy they are here

Cristiano, I love what you bring to the board, but there were two people who barely complained about the songs on that thread during the show and you truly are perpetuating the myth by continuing to post about it.

I respect your freedom to post as you please but do you really think the set list complainers dominated that discussion? I don't.

BTW: I do personally believe set list complaints are futile and redundant at this point. But I also think saying something like "I'd like to hear more SF songs" is pretty harmless and not really a complaint.

peace

I've only brought my feelings about it to this thread because I think we have to leave that thread for what's important - the concert reviews.

You are correct about the set list complainings not dominating that thread, but actually this wasn't the only complainings last night - so maybe I expressed myself on a wrong way, when I only pointed this as being the problem.

I know that for the people who didn't followed that thread live, by reading it now it perhaps might seem that there's nothing wrong there. But we've had not only the usual setlist complainings but also some people who were whining about the live setlist not being posted (even with all those periscope feeds going on) and even complaining about the people itself who were periscoping the concert last night.

If you read that thread again (I know you did it, and I did that too), you can see that at some point of the concert - during HTW, perhaps - there was at least 3 or 4 posts of people asking for the whiners to just shut up. And if you pay attention, I didn't do that myself, prefering to post my thoughts about it only when the concert has ended, because this is what was important last night.

And this is what I'm talking about: at the heat of the moment, when you're trying to follow what's going on at the concert, it seems to me that the complaints are - in a bad comparison - like when you're trying to watch a movie and there's a lot of people beside you talking about other things that have nothing to do with the movie, spoiling what was supposed to be a fun moment.

Like I said, I'm not a grumpy person, but there's a time when you see the same things happening all the time and at the same time you don't see nothing changing on that, so that's why I posted my thoughts here.

Peace!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-14 02:19 by Cristiano Radtke.

It's a strange strange forum where someone like cocaine eyes can be banned and yet others are allowed to stay who constantly whine about the set list, mick Taylor, Ron wood and Keith Richards; throw around rumor and innuendo about the band and its members cheating and lying; post and re-post probably false information about band members personal lives, etc. it seems like it might be better to let anything go and let people like cocaine eyes stay or have a much heavier moderation where the haters get banned.

Yes I understand that point of view Cristiano, fair enough.

peace

I guess this sums it up:

i think my house might be under surveillance