I disagree with you. Many fans of the Stones want a new album with new material. Only listen to the old stuff is boaring!

Quote
bv
I would say that a "fan" that says he/she does not need any new albums is a "has been" fan. Sucking in the seventies may be.

Personally I would say that if Mick & Keith and the rest of the band want to enjoy a few months in a studio with the world's best engineers and including Mick Taylor guest playing, I can't see any harm in that. If you don't like it then go buy another Beatles record or something, or keep listening to Exile...

Well, I'm not a has been fan. I just have an opinion that differs from your own. But for the record I personally would buy whatever they put out. I just question whether the wider audience (non-Stones obsessives) are interested in the band now as anything other than a nostalgia act.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-03 15:03 by BlackHat.

Of course they are, if it's good music! There seems to be an assumption in some quarters that any new album would be crap, and that only bought by "obsessives" (it's possible to be a fan without being obsessed, y'know ), whereas I think if they do decide to put out new material at this stage, it will be because that they've got some solid new songs.

yeah sure , that's just your feelings .i would welcome a new studio album by the stones as i have done in the past .

Quote
TimeIs
I need a new Rolling Stones album more than anything else from them.

...hear, hear!!

i think, that a "actual", not only a "former", Stones-fan has to want a new studio album. i wait for it since 2005))) if this means automatically "that the world actually needs" it, is another, philosophical question)))

Quote
wupperstein
I disagree with you. Many fans of the Stones want a new album with new material. Only listen to the old stuff is boaring!

it is, but I'd question the 'what the fans want' issue if the last tour is any yardstick.

In addition to what I mentioned above, five months into the last tour, the band played the Superbowl before a live TV audience of several hundred million people. The biggest tv audience of their entire career. They did a 3-song set with two warhorses and a song off their latest album. Despite the general consensus that they'd put on a pretty good performance and were in the middle of a tour, the increase in catalogue sales in the immediate aftermath was insignificant and the jump in sales for Bigger Bang bordered on negligible. Unheard of for an act who had been given that amount of exposure. (I seem to recall georgelicks posting the sales figures a week or two later and the general consensus was that the band needn't have bothered playing the show for all the good it did).

The Stones really do appear to have a unique audience demographic in the music industry as they appear to be pretty much the only band in the world whose concert audience have to a large extent next to no interest in their music. Despite the fact that to be a part of that concert audience requiers more financial sacrifice than is the case for any other live act on the planet. I suppose you could argue that this is a consequence of a ticket pricing policy which excludes so many of what could be or used to be their fanbase.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-03 15:38 by Gazza.

Quote
Gazza

The Stones really do appear to have a unique audience demographic in the music industry as they appear to be pretty much the only band in the world whose concert audience have to a large extent next to no interest in their music. Despite the fact that to be a part of that concert audience requiers more financial sacrifice than is the case for any other live act on the planet. I suppose you could argue that this is a consequence of a ticket pricing policy which excludes so many of what could be or used to be their fanbase.

This all seems dubious logic to me. But more to the point, what really is unique about their audience demographic is that on a forum of their own fans, threads are being made and supported that dissuade the band that people allegedly love from putting out new music. Then there are the people who want them to retire and never play again at all. Based on other music forums I've belonged or still belong to, this is a jaw-dropping phenomenon.

Good point Gazza. For many years I've felt most people at Stones concerts are there to check off a block seeing living legends. Hell, that even happened at a Sex Pistols concert in 2008, talked to a young kid that didn't know anybody in the band. I wouldn't waste my time and money on someone I didn't care about, of course that doesn't mean everyone thinks this way. Sometimes I wonder if all the "tourist" weren't at a Stones concert just how empty would the stadium be. Anyhow, I really hope The Stones make a new album. Would be great if they approach it with the idea of making a solid masterpiece, I believe this is within their reach. Forget about impressing the non-fans. If we love it they would probably follow anyway.

We can always question if the world will need ANY album - but surely a good number of people, among millions of Stones fans need a studio album now after a painful 8 year wait...

Gazza: a reason why the Stones fans behave like you say may have to do with the musical variety between different eras of this band. The "Congratulations-fan" might not be that interested in When The Whip Comes Down.

The result is that the Stones gather people who wanna hear completely different things

Just a thought...

Quote
bv
I would say that a "fan" that says he/she does not need any new albums is a "has been" fan. Sucking in the seventies may be.

Personally I would say that if Mick & Keith and the rest of the band want to enjoy a few months in a studio with the world's best engineers and including Mick Taylor guest playing, I can't see any harm in that. If you don't like it then go buy another Beatles record or something, or keep listening to Exile...

Bjornul, try sometimes to exit from the rolling stones bubble, we know that late sixties and seventies were their best years. But if it makes you happy to say that we are has-beens, we are has-beens but only your has-been. To celebrate that, I will put the white album on the turn-table, yes turn-table because HAS-BEEN living in the last centurym listen vinyls.

<we know that late sixties and seventies were their best years.>

For many people, the early 60s or the late 70s were their best years...

If we get a new album it won't be "new" songs on it. It will be old almost finished songs delivered to the studio by Sir Michael and Keith for a final touch. Just like OMS and D&G were made.
Sir Michael and Keith can't write songs together since anno dazumal. In fact, they probably can't stand each other...

Quote
BlackHat

Quote
bv
I would say that a "fan" that says he/she does not need any new albums is a "has been" fan. Sucking in the seventies may be.

Personally I would say that if Mick & Keith and the rest of the band want to enjoy a few months in a studio with the world's best engineers and including Mick Taylor guest playing, I can't see any harm in that. If you don't like it then go buy another Beatles record or something, or keep listening to Exile...

Well, I'm not a has been fan. I just have an opinion that differs from your own. But for the record I personally would buy whatever they put out. I just question whether the wider audience (non-Stones obsessives) are interested in the band now as anything other than a nostalgia act.

Who cares about the wider audience? It's their loss and our extreme fortune!!

Watch out people ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the stones Police is on board, right at this moment.

So, Syria, also take precautions............... Once the Stones detectives have awakened, you better watch what you are communicating.

Jeroen



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-03 16:40 by corriecas.

Quote
Stoneage
If we get a new album it won't be "new" songs on it. It will be old almost finished songs delivered to the studio by Sir Michael and Keith for a final touch. Just like OMS and D&G were made.
Sir Michael and Keith can't write songs together since anno dazumal. In fact, they probably can't stand each other...

D&G was a new song. OMS may have been too, probably from the recent sessions Keith had with Steve Jordan.

Quote
stonesrule
Selling a million won't be that easy no matter how good the album is.
Gazza has the right idea -- free CD with concert ticket. Big appeal to "old" fans as well as all the young ones that got hooked on the Stones from the 2012-2013 gigs.

Ha ha ha ha! The 'free' part is hilarious. Of course the cost of the record is in the ticket price! People love to (think they) get things for free! That way the LP can chart even - imagine that. 6 million people buy tickets... the new LP sold 6 million copies! Hell, they'd know about how many copies to print!

THAT is the way to do it. That is genius.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
stonesrule
Selling a million won't be that easy no matter how good the album is.
Gazza has the right idea -- free CD with concert ticket. Big appeal to "old" fans as well as all the young ones that got hooked on the Stones from the 2012-2013 gigs.

Ha ha ha ha! The 'free' part is hilarious. Of course the cost of the record is in the ticket price! People love to (think they) get things for free! That way the LP can chart even - imagine that. 6 million people buy tickets... the new LP sold 6 million copies! Hell, they'd know about how many copies to print!

THAT is the way to do it. That is genius.

Mick doesn't know what free means!

my question is 'why not'...they just got done playing a bunch of great shows..Mick Taylor is playing and they all apparently enjoyed themselves..

there's no rush..I'd think its likely they could go and record at least an albums' worth of tracks in a couple of weeks..

they don't mess around anymore. its likely the Glimmers have got songs from at least five years back, waiting to be finished..

the wind is at their backs. or something.. (StonesTod, you're missed)

Quote
Aquamarine

Quote
Gazza

The Stones really do appear to have a unique audience demographic in the music industry as they appear to be pretty much the only band in the world whose concert audience have to a large extent next to no interest in their music. Despite the fact that to be a part of that concert audience requiers more financial sacrifice than is the case for any other live act on the planet. I suppose you could argue that this is a consequence of a ticket pricing policy which excludes so many of what could be or used to be their fanbase.

This all seems dubious logic to me. But more to the point, what really is unique about their audience demographic is that on a forum of their own fans, threads are being made and supported that dissuade the band that people allegedly love from putting out new music. Then there are the people who want them to retire and never play again at all. Based on other music forums I've belonged or still belong to, this is a jaw-dropping phenomenon.

Not necessarily jaw-dropping although for me a bit of a head scratcher.

There has been an unevenness to the releases Dirty Work on and there are those that just don't want to see 'their band' go out on a bad note...concern for 'the legacy', as though they have some sort of personal stake in it.

Even if all the material in the last 30 years hasn't been stellar, there have been some very high water marks that I'd prefer to have, than not.

Let them put out another album, another 5 albums. Just don't buy it if you don't like it.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Stoneage
If we get a new album it won't be "new" songs on it. It will be old almost finished songs delivered to the studio by Sir Michael and Keith for a final touch. Just like OMS and D&G were made.
Sir Michael and Keith can't write songs together since anno dazumal. In fact, they probably can't stand each other...

D&G was a new song. OMS may have been too, probably from the recent sessions Keith had with Steve Jordan.

Okey, to be more specific. There won't be any new Jagger/Richards compositions (even if the album sleeve will say so). It will be separate contributions to be polished up in the studio.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Gazza: a reason why the Stones fans behave like you say may have to do with the musical variety between different eras of this band. The "Congratulations-fan" might not be that interested in When The Whip Comes Down.

The result is that the Stones gather people who wanna hear completely different things

Just a thought...

Doesnt seem to be a problem to, say, Bob Dylan, whose musical career has spanned the same era and has actually been even more diverse.

I dont think too many of the fans who would have been around and enjoyed 'Congratulations' when it came out would still be going to concerts. I think you can say that of most people who were going to these shows almost 50 years ago. I'm not even expecting them to reach THAT deep into their history, in fairness

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
stonesrule
Selling a million won't be that easy no matter how good the album is.
Gazza has the right idea -- free CD with concert ticket. Big appeal to "old" fans as well as all the young ones that got hooked on the Stones from the 2012-2013 gigs.

Ha ha ha ha! The 'free' part is hilarious. Of course the cost of the record is in the ticket price! People love to (think they) get things for free! That way the LP can chart even - imagine that. 6 million people buy tickets... the new LP sold 6 million copies! Hell, they'd know about how many copies to print!

THAT is the way to do it. That is genius.

Prince did that about ten years ago w/Emancipation. Every week he had a concert or two his album would be back in the Billboard top 10. They may have changed the rules since on that, don't know.

Quote
Aquamarine

Quote
Gazza

The Stones really do appear to have a unique audience demographic in the music industry as they appear to be pretty much the only band in the world whose concert audience have to a large extent next to no interest in their music. Despite the fact that to be a part of that concert audience requiers more financial sacrifice than is the case for any other live act on the planet. I suppose you could argue that this is a consequence of a ticket pricing policy which excludes so many of what could be or used to be their fanbase.

This all seems dubious logic to me. But more to the point, what really is unique about their audience demographic is that on a forum of their own fans, threads are being made and supported that dissuade the band that people allegedly love from putting out new music. Then there are the people who want them to retire and never play again at all. Based on other music forums I've belonged or still belong to, this is a jaw-dropping phenomenon.

That's what happens when a band has been around for so long. As a Stones fan I recognise that they stopped being a creative force after UNDERCOVER. REWIND was the perfect end of an era. As a Stones fan I bought DIRTY WORK, very much so to my chagrin shortly after, but was indeed excited once I heard Mixed Emotions on the radio and got the 45 and was astounded by the B-side: there's hope yet.

STEEL WHEELS was very good at first; a very rocking and exciting album to listen to. I even liked Rock And A Hard Place. Getting the CD was great because it had print on it. Going to see them on that tour was a blast. The new songs fit in great. They played/sounded completely different from the TATTOO YOU tour. They played several songs from STEEL WHEELS. SFTD was awesomely different. It was a great show.

With a very polished but hitting live album, a bit of some time away and then another hits release followed by, at the time, a very good VOODOO LOUNGE and tour that when I saw them twice I was quite pleased - the new songs fit in well - STEEL WHEELS seemed like a long ago time. VOODOO was a huge change. It had big lumbering songs on it that, for the most part, worked really good live - Love Is Strong, You Got Me Rocking and I Go Wild were a perfect pace for the live show (even though Love Is Strong was quite bad live). The live version of the band had changed dramatically. It had the 81-82 looseness was back only with a cleaner sound. It seems like they'd pretty much slowed down every song, with exception to Tumbling Dice. Start Me Up was 10 times slower and dare I say it - boring.

BRIDGES TO BABYLON comes out and it made me wonder why I was so pleased with VOODOO. Sleek album cover aside it had some kickin' tunes on it (Flip The Switch, Lowdown, Out Of Control, Too Tight) as well as some smokers (all three of Keith's songs, Out Of Tears). An actual creative album! By that point STEEL WHEELS' Rock And A Hard Place had devolved to be one of their worst songs. Continental Drift, the actual song, not the drums, reminded me of horrible mall music that has birds in it. Mixed Emotions was suddenly Stones-by-number.

The thing is, those three LPs were when people still bought albums in a hard copy format and the Stones had a rather large presence due to back to back tours. FORTY LICKS was the last successful run for the band CD sales wise - iTunes was in its second year and had yet to take hold of the industry. LICKS sold rather well considering how many people already owned HOT ROCKS and to a huge lesser extent REWIND and its ugly little twin JUMP BACK; ABKCO had finally reissued the 1960s catalogue with a proper remastering and HOT ROCKS was again the best hits compilation to have. The band's (Mick's) current thought of 'a band moving forward' was a bit off regarding the 4 new tracks. Don't Stop was OK. The rest were pointless (although I do like Keith's track - it as if he had done it during BRIDGES) and lacked the quality of what made Stones songs hits - no hook, no good chorus. A whole lot of nothing. Great tour though.

When A BIGGER BANG came out things had already started changing. iTunes was in its 5th year. A rather large shift was taking place in the world of the music buying public - less people were buying, there was a lot more stealing. The Stones had gone away for quite some time. There weren't really any singles on ABB that had that magic singles require. They basically ignored the album live. Like Gazza said, their appearance at the Super Bowl did next to nothing for album sales of ABB. In fact it's probably absolutely pointless that they even played anything from it. They had become a nostalgia act through the pureness of ignoring their now, which the live fan base was doing, and focusing on the past, which is clearly what the live fan base 'wanted'. ABB was just a contract ending LP.

Releases since then have charted well at times but that means absolutely zero anymore; sales have been abysmal (for quite a lot of acts, of course). When people say 'GRRR sold 3 million world wide' or 'Exile went to #1 in'... well, sure, that's pretty good nowadays but think of how sad even that is in general. What's the lowest selling #1 LP somewhere? 54,000 copies? The days of a million plus copies sold in the opening week to chart at #1 are over. In reality, is it that people already own those tracks on the horrendously titled and album covered GRRRR and are not buying it in droves or is it just blind cheerleading saying 'It charted well in' whatever country for something that really doesn't matter anyway?

It's quite assumptive to suggest that a few people in a fan forum can "dissuade" the band. It's not any different than back in the 1960s when the geezer generation found them disgusting and would make sure to not buy their albums for their kids, all being broadcast on television for the world to see.

It cracks me up that people think the Stones actually care about what anyone thinks.

I don't know if you were referring to me, but since you quoted me--I'm not assuming that the Stones give a rat's ass what anybody on a forum says, and I certainly hope they don't. I'm just commenting on my own amazement at the attitudes directed toward a band I naively assumed people on a Stones forum would be enthusiastic about.

Personally I care absolutely zero about how much an album sells or whether it charts (I remember the days of taking pride in buying albums that didn't!). It's a whole new ballgame today in terms of how people acquire music. All that matters is whether that stuff matters enough to the band to affect their decision to release new music, which I doubt it would.

Quote
Aquamarine
... what really is unique about their audience demographic is that on a forum of their own fans, threads are being made and supported that dissuade the band that people allegedly love from putting out new music.

... and then afterwards get blamed by these very same fans for not being "an active unit/ working band/ creative force anymore".
SIGH.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-03 18:03 by RoughJusticeOnYa.

Make a new one.

what the world doesn't need is another "talent" show winner making formulated and souless music anymore!

Look the Stones are most likley not going to record a classic album that will be listned to for decades like thier best work but I still think they can nake good rock and roll, a bit of a dying art these days.

I only want a new record if they feel passionate enough to make one. I don't want one because they have to put out 'product'. If they are inspired, and can make that come thru in what is recorded and released, I would love to hear it.

I don't care if it is original Jagger/Richards compositions, cover material or rekindled songs from material they want to revisit. As longs as they are truly passionate about it....and not releasing a record just to release something.

Quote
Ket
what the world doesn't need is another "talent" show winner making formulated and souless music anymore!

Look the Stones are most likley not going to record a classic album that will be listned to for decades like thier best work but I still think they can nake good rock and roll, a bit of a dying art these days.

set 'em up in a studio,

get the jam going

don't forget to record it..

that's how they do it!

getting them there at the same time might take some doing..

but hey its the Stones!