so much commentary, blah blah, about the mercenary streak the Stones have shown.

(they've never not wanted to make a lot of money)...

but could it be that the main reason they're going out again is they really do like playing together?

Yes I believe it has a lot to do with it. The sceptics who are going to laugh at question/ statement are probably not musicians. If you play music with a group of people and the magic happens you get hooked. And you just want to do it again and again and again....
Rock and roll,
Mops

Yep, I reckon this time it is largely because they want to simply be the Rolling Stones on stage again. The Stones is a huge world wide phenomena, to be a part of that must be addictive, it always drives them back!

the Glory baby, the Glory........ and ofcourse Lots of Money.

Jeroen

Quote
duke richardson
so much commentary, blah blah, about the mercenary streak the Stones have shown.

(they've never not wanted to make a lot of money)...

but could it be that the main reason they're going out again is they really do like playing together?

Yes.

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
duke richardson
so much commentary, blah blah, about the mercenary streak the Stones have shown.

(they've never not wanted to make a lot of money)...

but could it be that the main reason they're going out again is they really do like playing together?

Yes.

it could be...but it's not.

Great topic Duke.

Music is what the Stones know how to do. And the roar of the crowd is addictive after a musician has had enough time off.

Quote
GRNRBITW

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
duke richardson
so much commentary, blah blah, about the mercenary streak the Stones have shown.

(they've never not wanted to make a lot of money)...

but could it be that the main reason they're going out again is they really do like playing together?

Yes.

it could be...but it's not.

Yes it is.

No one is denying that they each get a buzz from what they do together onstage, and they've been playing together for so long that it must be like going home each time they regroup. Plus the fact that The Rolling Stones are a virtually microcosm unto themselves, and loyalty is the key to holding it together. For instance, Charlie wouldn't have minded if they did nothing in 2012, and wouldn't be sad if The Stones packed it in and called it a life, and he doesn't want to play Glastonbury--but he will, because he is loyal to Mick and Keith, and especially Keith. Charlie is Keith's favorite drummer, and Keith never would have developed the way he did as a guitar player had he played in another band without Charlie. And Charlie likes playing with Keith because to him Keith embodies the freewheeling bohemian jazz spirit that he so admires in musicians. And certainly Mick enjoys the iconic status he holds as The Stones front man, as well as all the kudos he receives for being a virtual fountain of youth onstage, which is the main reason he works so hard to stay in shape--because do you really need to be in near superhuman physical shape just to sing? And Woodie, well, he just loves to play guitar in the band that he always wanted to be in from day one anyway....

It just so happens that their "vintage" iconic status--as well as the evolution of the concert/ticket industry--now entitles them to heaping sums of cash, and they do each have multiple homes in various countries to maintain.

Only Bill Wyman has to work on a regular, frequent basis, because he cannot live off of his royalty payments from The Stones, and neither can Mick Taylor, which is why he has to gig constantly. If you leave The Rolling Stones and their insular virtual society, you may suffer financially, and, as Bill has recently discovered, be treated as less than an equal should you decide to return, even if only for a brief visit for old time's sake.

But, yes, they do love to play together. Their professional interaction represents a familiar sense of security, and they would still be playing music in one form or another even without the super big money, even if they only were to earn what they did on, say, the Steel Wheels or Tattoo You tours. As mentioned above, Charlie makes Keith a better musician.




From the Mike Douglas show 1964. Note how Keith [first at 0:22] plays not off of Mick, but turns to play off of Charlie, which he does frequently.

Quote
stonehearted
No one is denying that they each get a buzz from what they do together onstage, and they've been playing together for so long that it must be like going home each time they regroup. Plus the fact that The Rolling Stones are a virtually microcosm unto themselves, and loyalty is the key to holding it together. For instance, Charlie wouldn't have minded if they did nothing in 2012, and wouldn't be sad if The Stones packed it in and called it a life, and he doesn't want to play Glastonbury--but he will, because he is loyal to Mick and Keith, and especially Keith. Charlie is Keith's favorite drummer, and Keith never would have developed the way he did as a guitar player had he played in another band without Charlie. And Charlie likes playing with Keith because to him Keith embodies the freewheeling bohemian jazz spirit that he so admires in musicians. And certainly Mick enjoys the iconic status he holds as The Stones front man, as well as all the kudos he receives for being a virtual fountain of youth onstage, which is the main reason he works so hard to stay in shape--because do you really need to be in near superhuman physical shape just to sing? And Woodie, well, he just loves to play guitar in the band that he always wanted to be in from day one anyway....

It just so happens that their "vintage" iconic status--as well as the evolution of the concert/ticket industry--now entitles them to heaping sums of cash, and they do each have multiple homes in various countries to maintain.

Only Bill Wyman has to work on a regular, frequent basis, because he cannot live off of his royalty payments from The Stones, and neither can Mick Taylor, which is why he has to gig constantly. If you leave The Rolling Stones and their insular virtual society, you may suffer financially, and, as Bill has recently discovered, be treated as less than an equal should you decide to return, even if only for a brief visit for old time's sake.

But, yes, they do love to play together. Their professional interaction represents a familiar sense of security, and they would still be playing music in one form or another even without the super big money, even if they only were to earn what they did on, say, the Steel Wheels or Tattoo You tours. As mentioned above, Charlie makes Keith a better musician.




From the Mike Douglas show 1964. Note how Keith [first at 0:22] plays not off of Mick, but turns to play off of Charlie, which he does frequently.

Agree with this totally

Don't believe Bill "has to work."

No, that's not it. If they did they would spend more time in the studio making new music. It's more like a high school reunion you don't really want to go to but feel obliged to.
And if someone pays you millions of dollars for it, it will go down easier.

Stonehearted, if you were a close friend of the Stones and had inside knowledge of how they think it would be easier for me to agree with your words.

Stoneage,I don't agree with you either. Touring is not a "high school reunion." Playing for an audience is what they like to do.

Quote
duke richardson
so much commentary, blah blah, about the mercenary streak the Stones have shown.

(they've never not wanted to make a lot of money)...

but could it be that the main reason they're going out again is they really do like playing together?

With a slight addition, yes indeed: I think it has to do first with the communication with and the feedback from the audiences. Then the playing together as the condition for obtaining that.

In the next instance, a playing together that is capable to obtain all that, makes it a satisfaction for just this unity of persons to play together also as a good in itself.

Quote
stonesrule
Don't believe Bill "has to work."

But he said so himself, as recently as 2008, that Stones royalties are not enough.

www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/3670387/Bill-Wyman-I-cant-live-off-the-Stones-royalties.html

Former Rolling Stones bassist Bill Wyman talks to Robert Sandall about the new tour by his band the Rhythm Kings - and why, at 71, he has to keep working

Sure, they love playing together for the sheer joy of playing. Which is why they played together so often between 2007 and 2011. I think when all is said and done and they actually are on stage together they DO enjoy it immensely, but one wonders what was keeping them from experiencing this joy for such a long period of time.

Quote
stonesrule
Stonehearted, if you were a close friend of the Stones and had inside knowledge of how they think it would be easier for me to agree with your words.

That's OK stonesrule, you don't have to agree with me at all. I'm only speculating, just throwing ideas about. This is a fan forum after all, rather than a forum for insiders, though I realize there are several here who are, or who have been, and would know far better than I what motivates their thinking.

But rather than merely saying that you disagree with my views, perhaps you could point out specifically where and why I am wrong, set the record straight so to speak.

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
stonesrule
Don't believe Bill "has to work."

But he said so himself, as recently as 2008, that Stones royalties are not enough.

www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/3670387/Bill-Wyman-I-cant-live-off-the-Stones-royalties.html

Former Rolling Stones bassist Bill Wyman talks to Robert Sandall about the new tour by his band the Rhythm Kings - and why, at 71, he has to keep working

I take it to mean he needs to work in order to maintain his current lifestyle, little castle, future for his children etc.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
stonesrule
Don't believe Bill "has to work."

But he said so himself, as recently as 2008, that Stones royalties are not enough.

www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/3670387/Bill-Wyman-I-cant-live-off-the-Stones-royalties.html

Former Rolling Stones bassist Bill Wyman talks to Robert Sandall about the new tour by his band the Rhythm Kings - and why, at 71, he has to keep working

I take it to mean he needs to work in order to maintain his current lifestyle, little castle, future for his children etc.

Well sure, he's not about to take the old day job he had before The Stones, go back to his modest flat in Penge, and become Bill Perks again.

One would have to know them deeply now in order to know what motivates them now.

Quote
71Tele
Sure, they love playing together for the sheer joy of playing. Which is why they played together so often between 2007 and 2011. I think when all is said and done and they actually are on stage together they DO enjoy it immensely, but one wonders what was keeping them from experiencing this joy for such a long period of time.

My suggestion:
Because the audiences have not valued new songs that much during the latest decades , the band has been trapped into letting warhorses being such a dominant part of their setlists for a long time. That fact may have led to so long breaks of their live performing.

With greater accept for new material, the Stones might have been more active touring and making albums.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-01 01:36 by Witness.

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
stonesrule
Don't believe Bill "has to work."

But he said so himself, as recently as 2008, that Stones royalties are not enough.

www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/3670387/Bill-Wyman-I-cant-live-off-the-Stones-royalties.html

Former Rolling Stones bassist Bill Wyman talks to Robert Sandall about the new tour by his band the Rhythm Kings - and why, at 71, he has to keep working

I take it to mean he needs to work in order to maintain his current lifestyle, little castle, future for his children etc.

Well sure, he's not about to take the old day job he had before The Stones, go back to his modest flat in Penge, and become Bill Perks again.

Well, there we go, he doesn't have to work, but seems to need to in order to remain as he is.

Quote
Witness

Quote
71Tele
Sure, they love playing together for the sheer joy of playing. Which is why they played together so often between 2007 and 2011. I think when all is said and done and they actually are on stage together they DO enjoy it immensely, but one wonders what was keeping them from experiencing this joy for such a long period of time.

My suggestion:
Because the audiences have not valued new songs that much during the latest decades , the band has been trapped into letting warhorses being such a dominant part of their setlists for a long time. That fact may have led to so long breaks of their live performing.

With greater accept for new material, the Stones might have been more active touring and making albums.

Hmm...but if they really loved playing together so much then the audience's response would not matter. Is it the audience's response to their newer material that's the problem, or the band's own lack of belief in it?

Quote
stonehearted
No one is denying that they each get a buzz from what they do together onstage, and they've been playing together for so long that it must be like going home each time they regroup. Plus the fact that The Rolling Stones are a virtually microcosm unto themselves, and loyalty is the key to holding it together. For instance, Charlie wouldn't have minded if they did nothing in 2012, and wouldn't be sad if The Stones packed it in and called it a life, and he doesn't want to play Glastonbury--but he will, because he is loyal to Mick and Keith, and especially Keith. Charlie is Keith's favorite drummer, and Keith never would have developed the way he did as a guitar player had he played in another band without Charlie. And Charlie likes playing with Keith because to him Keith embodies the freewheeling bohemian jazz spirit that he so admires in musicians. And certainly Mick enjoys the iconic status he holds as The Stones front man, as well as all the kudos he receives for being a virtual fountain of youth onstage, which is the main reason he works so hard to stay in shape--because do you really need to be in near superhuman physical shape just to sing? And Woodie, well, he just loves to play guitar in the band that he always wanted to be in from day one anyway....

It just so happens that their "vintage" iconic status--as well as the evolution of the concert/ticket industry--now entitles them to heaping sums of cash, and they do each have multiple homes in various countries to maintain.

Only Bill Wyman has to work on a regular, frequent basis, because he cannot live off of his royalty payments from The Stones, and neither can Mick Taylor, which is why he has to gig constantly. If you leave The Rolling Stones and their insular virtual society, you may suffer financially, and, as Bill has recently discovered, be treated as less than an equal should you decide to return, even if only for a brief visit for old time's sake.

But, yes, they do love to play together. Their professional interaction represents a familiar sense of security, and they would still be playing music in one form or another even without the super big money, even if they only were to earn what they did on, say, the Steel Wheels or Tattoo You tours. As mentioned above, Charlie makes Keith a better musician.




From the Mike Douglas show 1964. Note how Keith [first at 0:22] plays not off of Mick, but turns to play off of Charlie, which he does frequently.

Very eloquent. Sums up the romantic view nicely.

The Master Plan is to make the largest amount of money possible while doing the smallest possible amount of actual work. If they could do what the Beatles did in 1995, and get paid $250,000,000 in exchange for recording two new songs, and featuring them in a TV documentary and CD collection of outtakes, they would. But they're not the Beatles. If they want to make millions, they will actually have to go out and play some gigs .... and so they are .... but not too many.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-01 03:41 by tatters.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Witness

Quote
71Tele
Sure, they love playing together for the sheer joy of playing. Which is why they played together so often between 2007 and 2011. I think when all is said and done and they actually are on stage together they DO enjoy it immensely, but one wonders what was keeping them from experiencing this joy for such a long period of time.

My suggestion:
Because the audiences have not valued new songs that much during the latest decades , the band has been trapped into letting warhorses being such a dominant part of their setlists for a long time. That fact may have led to so long breaks of their live performing.

With greater accept for new material, the Stones might have been more active touring and making albums.

Hmm...but if they really loved playing together so much then the audience's response would not matter. Is it the audience's response to their newer material that's the problem, or the band's own lack of belief in it?

I made a slight modification of the view in the opening post;

Quote
Witness

Quote
duke richardson
so much commentary, blah blah, about the mercenary streak the Stones have shown.

(they've never not wanted to make a lot of money)...

but could it be that the main reason they're going out again is they really do like playing together?

With a slight addition, yes indeed: I think it has to do first with the communication with and the feedback from the audiences. Then the playing together as the condition for obtaining that.

In the next instance, a playing together that is capable to obtain all that, makes it a satisfaction for just this unity of persons to play together also as a good in itself.

The aging audiences are not interested in the comparatively newer material. The majority wants to be exposed to the songs of their own younger years.

No.

- Doxa

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
stonesrule
Don't believe Bill "has to work."

But he said so himself, as recently as 2008, that Stones royalties are not enough.

www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/3670387/Bill-Wyman-I-cant-live-off-the-Stones-royalties.html

Former Rolling Stones bassist Bill Wyman talks to Robert Sandall about the new tour by his band the Rhythm Kings - and why, at 71, he has to keep working

I take it to mean he needs to work in order to maintain his current lifestyle, little castle, future for his children etc.

Well sure, he's not about to take the old day job he had before The Stones, go back to his modest flat in Penge, and become Bill Perks again.

Well, there we go, he doesn't have to work, but seems to need to in order to remain as he is.

Well, yes, he does actually have to work, because after 30 years in the band and having grown accustomed to a certain style of living, you wouldn't want to just go back to being Bill Perks again if you were in his position, would you? As it is, he doesn't seem to live as extravagantly or travel as extensively as the others, and with only 1 published song as a Rolling Stone [which only charted as high as #87 U.S. and has never been included on compilations] and album royalties as their former bass player, we might be surprised to find that he is likely only earning a pittance in terms of royalties. He does mention in the 1990 interview below, on the issue of bands and money [beginning at 30:53], that even as a Rolling Stone he went nearly broke in the 80s during those years when the band was not touring [33:43], explaining that he, Charlie, and Ronnie had no money at all before the 89-90 tours. "....28 years in the business, no money."

Also, because you're such a big Brian fan, I should point you toward the moments when he discusses Brian in this interview. At 23:51, when questioned by the interviewer, he mentions how much Brian Jones fans liked his book Stone Alone: "Well they know a little bit more about him now. He wasn't an angel,... but he wasn't a devil either. [Laughs] He was something in the middle. He was alright." At 25:15, after discussing his friendship with Brian in the early days, he tackles the question of whether he thinks Mick and Keith killed Brian, and at 26:30 he talks of Brian's medical issues after having met an illegitimate daughter of Brian's who had epileptic fits, which are said to be hereditary.

I beleive that once they are on the stage they enjoy it. Why dod they do so little from 2007-2012?? Probably because of the following:
1) After the tour of 2005-07 they were tired and needed a break.
2) Keith and Ronnie needed to dry out.
3) Patti's health.
4) Old age
5) Keith's head neede to heal
6) Life created hard feelings

I'm sure that is some of it but who really knows???

Yeah, stonehearted, that's a good interview!