Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa
...we LONG for an exciting, new album.

sure we do !
It's been 8 years we didn't have a new album...it's pretty long, too long.
Mick, thanks for going back on the road for a few concerts in USA and London.
You make all fans happy but a new album would be ecstasy.

Quote
BowieStone

Quote
KRiffhard

Dear Mick, people like good songs. A Bigger Bang is a poor album full of fillers. 'Doom and Gloom' seems a Goddess outtake very similar to the awful 'Everybody getting high'. 'One more Shot' it's just a decent X-Pensive Winos outtake. The problem is that you have to get back to work as a real team and not to prepare demo separately, each in their own home.
You are right in saying 'it's not a good excuse'.

I disagree with everything in this post.

..and so ABB it's a good album, DAG and OMS are good songs and they work as a real team?!!

Quote
EddieByword
I don't agree with that anyway, I like hearing new stuff live.

Well, then just like me, you are probably not a fan

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

So (as Doxa says) Mick thinks there's no point to new songs unless they are instant hits on stage? That doesn't seem to fit very well with Doom & Gloom, with its great radio edit that can't quite be reproduced live.

Or maybe it does fit. Release a single, play it to death so that people know it before its live debut, and then perhaps they won't get that blank look Mick dreads so much. Maybe that's the way they'll do new songs from now on, if they do them at all (I hope they do).

Quote
Rolling Hansie

Quote
EddieByword
I don't agree with that anyway, I like hearing new stuff live.

Well, then just like me, you are probably not a fan

No, I'm not a Real Fan either.

Quote
BowieStone

Quote
KRiffhard

Dear Mick,

I disagree with everything in this post.

I thought the beginning was quite good

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

Quote
KRiffhard

Quote
BowieStone

Quote
KRiffhard

Dear Mick, people like good songs. A Bigger Bang is a poor album full of fillers. 'Doom and Gloom' seems a Goddess outtake very similar to the awful 'Everybody getting high'. 'One more Shot' it's just a decent X-Pensive Winos outtake. The problem is that you have to get back to work as a real team and not to prepare demo separately, each in their own home.
You are right in saying 'it's not a good excuse'.

I disagree with everything in this post.

..and so ABB it's a good album, DAG and OMS are good songs and they work as a real team?!!

More or less. ABB is a fantastic album. D&G is a fantastic song. OMS is not decent, but rather poor. Mick and Keith shouldn't work together as a team...those days are long gone. If they would work together again it would sound fake (Voodoo Lounge).

I love DAG and OMS, for me, is a grower. They don't owe anybody anything. Just be happy every now and again they want to make a record and pay the mortgage

I understand with not having played all that many songs from the 3 albums the Rolling Stones have released in the last 20 years, there is no need to write and record new songs with the intention of performing them live because the band has got such a huge backlog of songs they haven't played.

But then, there are also those fans like me who dig their new songs but don't go to the concerts because the Stones wouldn't play the new songs anyway. What about us? This interview with Sir Mick Jagger makes it seem like he doesn't know he has such people amongst his fanbase or that he doesn't feel the need to create a new product (read: new album of new songs) for us. I wonder what the Stones' former financial advisor Rupert Loewenstein would have said about this. It's called alienating a part of the fanbase.

An album of songs like "One More Shot" and "Doom & Gloom" would have been it, especially now that Ronnie's guitar playing is on fire again. Instead, he is content with giving us the same old sameold.

So Sir Mick, maybe the people at your concerts don't want to hear songs they are unfamiliar with but there are people who want to listen to new studio albums of you and your band and immerse themselves in the sound of the new songs on those.

Quote
24FPS
They like to hear a GOOD album, or a few cuts from a GOOD album.

Yeah an I-tunes 4-tracks virtual EP would be swell !



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-13 13:13 by dcba.

Quote
Green Lady
So (as Doxa says) Mick thinks there's no point to new songs unless they are instant hits on stage? That doesn't seem to fit very well with Doom & Gloom, with its great radio edit that can't quite be reproduced live.

Or maybe it does fit. Release a single, play it to death so that people know it before its live debut, and then perhaps they won't get that blank look Mick dreads so much. Maybe that's the way they'll do new songs from now on, if they do them at all (I hope they do).

Let's see what happens to "Doom & Gloom" and "One More Shot" in upcoming shows. Is their function already used? Seemingly, there is only one 'modern' Stones song that Jagger seems to think "works" in concert, and not to be forgotten after their "heyday" is gone. And that's "You Got Me Rocking". "Out of Control" seem to bubbling under. (And then there are Keith's songs, but that's not Mick's concern.)

I agree that "Doom & Gloom" is a kind of (nice) studio effort that is rather hard to reproduce or to make it work in live surroundings, and they don't seem to have creative energy to really make it work. So it is doomed`even though it might be slightly familiar to big masses? (Altogether: I think Jagger seem to have two notions of how the song works live: that of how the crowd reacts and then how the band delivers it, even though he usually seem to emphasize the first one).

Anyway, I think it is not "Doom & Gloom" he especially has in mind, but he speaks in more generally based on his observations along the years.

- Doxa

His perspective might cover longer period than we migh now assume.

If we think of the bulk of the songs that came to be "war horses" are from 1968/69 period. Stuff like "Jumpin' Jack Flash", "Honky Tonk Women", "Gimme Sheleter", "YOu Can't Always Get What You Want", "Midnight Rambler", "Street Fighting Man", "Sympathy For The Devil" are all A-rate material and starting in 1969 these songs would make the strongest and most memorable part in their shows from then on, be them strong opening or closing numbers, or a number needed to build up the atmoshere - highlights per se. Each of them as classical as a rock and roll song ever can be. They were so high profile that they didn't even play "Satisfaction" during the 70's, and no one complained.

There is not many Stones songs since then that made themselves to that rank. Each new album was tested, but only a couole of songs made it: "Brown Sugar", "Wild Horses", "Tumblin Dice", "Happy", "All Down The Line" are the most obvious ones from STICKY and EXILE - and only "Brown Sugar" and "Tumblin' Dice" making themselves concert highlights not plaing in comparison to 1968/69 material, whereas a song like "All Down The Line" was a kind of "You Got Me Rocking" of the 70's.

Then the next new songs to make a huge effect - and a natural place as concert highlights that would some day to be called "warhorses"- were "Angie" and "It's Only Rock'n'Roll"... basically just the "hits" of the day, wheras songs like "Starbucker" and "If You Can't Rock Me" where more like "You Got Me Rocking" again. BLACK AND BLUE was the first Stones album since SATANIC that it didn't offer any big number to be rememebered and expected in a show.

SOME GIRLS was then a return to form again. "Miss You" and "Beast of Burden" were the big crowd pleasers from then on, and some other songs were bubbling under. EMOTIONAL RESCUE was a miss agian, and TATTOO YOU offered the last big Stones number ever "Start Me Up".

Starting from 1981/82 The Stones started to recognize their existence prior "Jumpin Jack Flash", and "Satisfacion" took its place as the biggest Stones song ever. In 1989 "Paint It Black" - another Huge Number, but very little played - made it through as well. Another 60's gem "Ruby Tuesday" hasn't quite managed that, even though it surely is a crowd pleaser every time played.

But outside the realm of these "war horses", there is a load of songs that were played in every tour from their latest album and then kicked out from the upcoming tour. This tendency has continued to this very day, even though the amount of new tracks tried has coming smaller. At the same time - since 1989 and especially in 2002/03 - they have "rediscovered" some albums gems from the past, and started re-cicling songs from them, or presenting them as "rarities", but none of them can't be really took as "war horse", even though making usually a huge impact on their hardcore fan crowd. Aeemingly the status of some songs - usually the 1968/69 material - has risen up, think of "Monkey Man", "Let It Bleed", "No Expectations", "Stray Cat Blues", etc. that once were 'just another' albums tracks. Now they all are 'classics' (and to an exetent that holds all to their material from their golden era plus SOME GIRLS). And Jagger knows that. The se lists in 50 YEARS AND COUNTING TOUR is a triumph of the "nostagic turn" we have wittnessed along the years.

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-13 14:34 by Doxa.

Quote
KRiffhard

Quote
BowieStone

Quote
KRiffhard

Dear Mick, people like good songs. A Bigger Bang is a poor album full of fillers. 'Doom and Gloom' seems a Goddess outtake very similar to the awful 'Everybody getting high'. 'One more Shot' it's just a decent X-Pensive Winos outtake. The problem is that you have to get back to work as a real team and not to prepare demo separately, each in their own home.
You are right in saying 'it's not a good excuse'.

I disagree with everything in this post.

..and so ABB it's a good album, DAG and OMS are good songs and they work as a real team?!!

A Bigger Bang is a very nice album with some fillers. I like to listen to it pretty often. D&G is as a matter of fact a great song.
Its annoying to read some of the bullshit posted hete on this board.

Quote
Doxa
Well well well... Seemingly Jagger has no a mirror. That the "fans" are not be challanged by new material, and are expecting the Stones show to consist of classic and familar-to-anyone hits, I guess Sir Mick has had quite instrumental role in that. (According to Leavell, if Jagger would decide we would only hear the war horses...)

Jagger himself picked up that "easy" nostalgia card in 1989 and have played with it without expection ever since, and is damn wealthy man thanks to that.

It is also rather obvious that for Jagger "fan" means anyone bothers to buy or get a ticket to a Stones show. The term "customer" should be more apt. It is his buying audience he like to keep satisfied. The so called hardcore fans - like IORR people - is little minority in there. They are next to nothing compared to "rock and roll tourists" - it's them who bring most of the money, and it is their needs to be taken care of by provinding a satisfying show.

It is only noteworthy that for Jagger the function of new Stones music is just to serve a tour. Seemingly he has dropped the old PR idea of a new album "justifying" a tour, and giving a glimpse of a "living and breathing band". They can survived without that these days. And also the idea that the point of new music is just to see how it "works" played live, sounds like seeing making new music not very valuable of its won. A record - for him - is not an artistic statement of its own. It is good that there was a time in Stones history they didn't treat making music in that way, but saw that an aim of its own, and new record was an artistic staement of its own. (Then we get "road versions" of the songs and things like that, but that's another story).

It is no wonder that with attitude like that the Rolling Stones have not (a) released much new music since the 90's, (b) when they rarely do that, it is not inspired-sounding at all. And the most inspired sounding and original have been the stuff Jagger did for pure recording purposes only and not having any idea of seeing the stuff as a thing to please "rock and roll tourists" in their shows: EXILE and SOME GIRLS bonus material. A co-incidence?

- Doxa

Yeah, all this is pretty accurate. They get together when they absolutely have to for the bare minimum amount of time. Any inspiration Jagger has for writing new songs does not involve the Stones. The idea of them getting together after the tour to record is pretty much the most laughable thing I have heard in awhile. Typically they don't see each other for years after a tour. Besides, they have nothing more to say. Holding it together for this brief mini greatest hits tour will be enough of an accomplishment.

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
EddieByword
I don't agree with that anyway, I like hearing new stuff live. The lyrics of Rough Justice could have probably done with a bit more work but it was a great song.........Doom and Gloom was pretty weighty too............

The only suggestion I have about a new album is to forget this 15 or 16 song malarky and go back to the 10/12 song per album format.............

As usual, I agree with Eddie, Thank you for typing it, I made an attempt at a reply, but it came out way too nasty... so I backed off.

If it was me...if I had enough decent songs of course - I'd release two versions of an album, Vers 1 a 10/12 track old vinyl LP format single CD and a second 2CD version with remixes of the album tracks (which I know Mick likes having done) and lob on 3-5 outtakes from those sessions as well on the second CD.....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-13 15:31 by EddieByword.

"Doom and Gloom" is a good song which is encouraging to me and means that the rolling stones can still write songs built on cool riffs & beats with relevant lyrics. I wish they would write and release more songs.
Rock and roll,
Mops

Quote
GravityBoy
Why don't they do an EP?

Rubbish, If they want they still can write some good song, D&Gloom is a good sample and some songs on Bigger Bang are OK.
If they just record 20 new songs and let me decide which 4 songs are OK for an EP..............everthing will work out fine

__________________________

Good one Mick, but...

I'm a fan and I want a new album.

You don't have to play any new songs live.

Just announce and promote it between old songs.

Consider giving us an album after the tour.

(for those of us that could not afford a concert ticket)

Some Girls album was the last great album.

I changed my mind from my last post.

A new album would not be advisable.

I forgot that lately ya'll try too hard.

It should be easy but it's not anymore.

The Stones have not been dangerous since

the Some Girls record.

Quote
71Tele
The fans don't want another mediocre Rolling Stones album. Record some stuff with the six actual Rolling Stones. Do it in a few days, live in the studio. Crap, let Mick Taylor, Bill Wyman and Ron Wood contribute a song each. Do a couple of tasty covers and then we would only need five or so from the inspirationally-challenged Glimmer Twins. Don't do too many overdubs or overthink it. Leave Don Was at home. Could be the best Stones album in decades. Will they do this? Of course not!

Well said Tele - this would work and would sell. It will certainly be better than anything which appeared on ABB, that was just awful in every way. Why not let Bernard and Lisa do a song? There are a multitutde of options which would work well. The only thing to avoid is a new album of new Stones songs.

I think it's time to do an album with songs written by other people for a change.

Freshen up a bit all round with writing, arrrangements. ideas and production. Plenty of good material out there the Stones don't get or won't do.

Churning out royalty chasing albums omly ever produces the odd worthwhile song now amd then - nothing memorable.

Bland Elvis albums now ready to play....

I always look forward to new material

Crash Landed In A Louisiana Swamp

Quote
Doxa
Well well well... Seemingly Jagger has no a mirror. That the "fans" are not be challanged by new material, and are expecting the Stones show to consist of classic and familar-to-anyone hits, I guess Sir Mick has had quite instrumental role in that. (According to Leavell, if Jagger would decide we would only hear the war horses...)

Jagger himself picked up that "easy" nostalgia card in 1989 and have played with it without expection ever since, and is damn wealthy man thanks to that.

It is also rather obvious that for Jagger "fan" means anyone bothers to buy or get a ticket to a Stones show. The term "customer" should be more apt. It is his buying audience he like to keep satisfied. The so called hardcore fans - like IORR people - is little minority in there. They are next to nothing compared to "rock and roll tourists" - it's them who bring most of the money, and it is their needs to be taken care of by provinding a satisfying show.

It is only noteworthy that for Jagger the function of new Stones music is just to serve a tour. Seemingly he has dropped the old PR idea of a new album "justifying" a tour, and giving a glimpse of a "living and breathing band". They can survived without that these days. And also the idea that the point of new music is just to see how it "works" played live, sounds like seeing making new music not very valuable of its won. A record - for him - is not an artistic statement of its own. It is good that there was a time in Stones history they didn't treat making music in that way, but saw that an aim of its own, and new record was an artistic staement of its own. (Then we get "road versions" of the songs and things like that, but that's another story).

It is no wonder that with attitude like that the Rolling Stones have not (a) released much new music since the 90's, (b) when they rarely do that, it is not inspired-sounding at all. And the most inspired sounding and original have been the stuff Jagger did for pure recording purposes only and not having any idea of seeing the stuff as a thing to please "rock and roll tourists" in their shows: EXILE and SOME GIRLS bonus material. A co-incidence?

- Doxa

Well put. And I'm with what 24FPS said as well

What Mick really means is that the money the Stones would earn from a new album is not worth the time and effort required to make one. They can make more doing one two-hour concert than they would spending six months writing and recording a new Stones album. They also have absolutely no desire to spend that much time in each other's company.

Quote
tatters
What Mick really means is that the money the Stones would earn from a new album is not worth the time and effort required to make one. They can make more doing one two-hour concert than they would spending six months writing and recording a new Stones album. They also have absolutely no desire to spend that much time in each other's company.

That does sound about right.......having said that they could always just do their own parts in their own houses and send them to some producer by 'Filefactory' or 'wetransfer' to put them all together...........



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-04-13 18:33 by EddieByword.

Not too much time to do albums anymore ...

The old times are over - they not want to hang around together for weeks anymore to do sessions after sessions.

But why not play some great Blues-Covers in one or two takes with no overdubs?
Only two or three great songs like DOOM, some guests - Voila!

Like they did in the early days.
The circle will be closed.

A little risky, too - songs arranged only
- with guitars and vocals
- Harp, drums and vocals
- ...

This could be done in a very short time, I'm sure!

...that s a BS comment from Mick...if they played the outtakes from Some Girls the crowd would go nuts...if they put work out that's worthy of attention...they'll get it.

Quote
sanQ
I would love to have a new album. But one that's recorded in a retro style. The Some Girls bonus disc was awesome. They should sit down with an accoustic guitar that is mic'd and make a record like that. Use technology from the 60's. They sounded best like that.

I would like to see a mix. If you can successfully translate the Stones sound with modern technology, fine. That doesn't mean you have to use Skrillex as a producer. I thought Doom & Gloom sounded fine. I was disappointed there wasn't a nice guitar solo, and the bass was non-existent, but overall a good sound. Retro RECORDING techniques could work for some cuts, just not retro SONGS. The last thing we need is more, "Hey, doesn't that vaguely sound like so and so from the so and so album?"

Mick seems to be looking at this from an entirely practical, capitalistic eye. If he's interested in the artistic reputation of the band, then he should consider trying to pull together the elements to make a classic album. He'll put his body through hell to do a stage run at age 69/70, but he can't seem to get up for the recording studio. If he was capable of approaching it as a sincere effort for the legacy of the band, it might work. I'm just not sure he cares anymore. He's become the Mike Love of the Stones.

This doesn't stop Macca from recording. It's surprising that Jagger is only acknowledging this now, because the classic hits only mentality has been there at least since Voodoo Lounge--the first album that failed to produce new hits of any note, at least in terms of national singles charts.

Besides, albums no longer make any real money, so there would be no payoff for putting the work and time into it, and also with no new album it means that he wouldn't have to hang with Keith for the length of time it would take to record it.

Even when they release some good songs they give up on them so fast on stage. OH they crowd didn't go crazy so lets drop it. They don't go crazy Mick because they don't know it yey