Tell Me :
Talk
I agree totally, and just as much as the next fan I'd love to get a brand new album from my favourite band.
But I reckon they won't do it as long as the fans don't appreciate the new music. They should make an album anyway, though
And still people are forgetting the brand-new recording of theirs, which even had Bill Wyman on it...
- Doxa
Yeah, how tragical is it that such a great, vital, forward-looking, inspired band is surrounded by such a bad fanbase... 'Well, what a can poor boy do...' .
- Doxa
hang around long enough and you'll get over it.
I will survive.
Which one do you mean , doxa..
Jeroen
fantastic, I can't believe I missed that the first time around.
two observations, Mick's 'delivery' is far better than the actual jokes, he really can sell it.
second observation, Mick looks 10 years younger than Letterman, who is ten years younger than Jagger.
By "no one" Mick means the 97% of the show-goers that are there just to see Start Me Up, Miss You, Satisfaction, Brown Sugar and JJF.
The 3% or so won't buy enough copies of the new album to make it 'worth it' in his eyes, at least that's my read of it.
However what's missing, or what's been missing, is the 'killer single' that rules the airwaves, that would help 'sell' that album. The Miss You, or the Start Me Up.
They haven't had one like that in 35 years, so difficult to imagine them pulling one like that out of their hat. It is possible but unlikely. If it were easy, they'd have done it again some time in the last few decades.
Watching the river flow - boogie for stu
I dunno...I think that Miss You and SMU would chart extremely well today. Maybe not runaway singles as before but 'surprise' top ten hits for sure; not appearing on the charts at #97 for one week and disappearing.
I agree there is an agism to this kind of thing, but if the song is good enough, it will sell. I'm sure there are other examples, but Cher comes to mind with her, Believe In Love, or whatever it was called. No one saw that one coming and it was huge.
To be fair they are only an oldies act when performing with the Stones. And with the kind of money they are making I think happiness might just be bought. I think they have collectively given in to their business senses with the Stones and are obviously using other projects to fulfill their creative needs. Each member has established himself as a musician outside of the Stones, hard as that might be for us to accept. peace
When I read that 'no one wants to hear your new material' argument Mick keeps throwing up, I instantly think of the Some Girls tour, where many if not all of the setlists, had SEVEN 'new' songs from the new album...and they all were played one after one with no warhorses to break up the pace.
Yeah but so much has changed in 35 years. Maybe he is calling us die hard fans "no one" but I suspect it's more to do with the changes in the popular music styles and the fact that the recent writing of Jagger/Richards is far from mainstream and far from the great deliveries of the golden age. There are still artists out there where the new material is what it's all about. peace
Even though I agree that there is a certain generation gap in explaining the chartings of hit singles - especially in American market - I don't think we could so easily assume that it is the bad timing only, which makes Stones singles to flop in charts. Or that back in the old days it wasn't something to do with quality of the songs why many of them were big hits - some even smashing big ones. This is to say I don't buy the claim that songs are as good as always, or that the quality doesn't mean anything, and it is nothing but the context, which makes the difference (why some turned out to be hits, and some not).
I really can't see, for example, "Rough Justice" having a strong commercial value ever. Their old albums had better Stones-type of basic rockers that never saw the light of the day as singles. And as far as those songs which made it - well, "Rough JUstice" is not exactly "Jumpin' Jack Flash", "Brown Sugar" or "Start Me Up". Nor 'even' "Tumbling Dice", "Happy", "Heartbreaker" or "It's Only Rock'n'Roll" - classical songs that had difficulties even making top ten at the time! Hard to think that such a basic Stones rocker could have made better than, say, more radio- and dance-floor friendly "Undercover of The Night", "Harlem Shuffle" or "Mixed Emotions", their last top ten ten hits in the States. More I think "Rough Justice" would have been in the range of "She Was Hot", "One Hit" or "Rock & A Hard Place", a bit touching Top Forty. If even that.
Why earlier "Angie", "Fool To Cry", "Miss You" and "Emotional Rescue" made the top ten was not that they sounded 'classical' Stones, but just being kind of songs that had a commercial appeal at the time (besides being great songs). One could say that "Start Me Up" was actually a rare exception to a rule - after many 'different' hit singles it was a traditional Stones-sounding rock tune with a catchy riff (the first since "Tumbling Dice"). If we look at the songs trying to re-use its receipt of success - "Mixed Emotions", "Highwire", "Love Is Strong", "Don't Stop", "Rough Justice" - the reason they (except "Mixed Emotions") flopped wasn't just the change of climate and the generation gap - none of them, I claim, had that immedeatily recognizable hit character in them. None of those songs would have been as huge hits as "Start Me Up" was in its day. Nor had, say, "Anybody Seen My Baby?" seen the success of "Miss You" in 1978 nor "Out of Tears" or "Streets of Love" that of "Angie", "Fool To Cry" or "Beast of Burden" in their heyday. Or do we really think those songs are equal in greatness to them?
Another issue is how well those old hits would do now if released today. Not probably (certainly) doing so well, but I am rather sure much better than how their singles are doing these days.
So the moral of my post is that it wasn't so easy even back then for them to make 'hits'. The age profile of buying audience was more on their side, yeah, but still they had to have great and suitable kind of songs to make the top ten - and damn catchy tunes hitting the very top. We probably need to go back to mid-60's when just being a new Rolling Stones single, containing almost whatever, was a sure top ten hit (and considered almost a flop if not taking the top position). But jeez, they put all their creative energy in those singles at those 'ancient' times.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-18 23:13 by Doxa.
I have to concur. As great a song as Rough Justice is, and as pleasant and refreshing it sounded it in no way is a 'hit single' style song, certainly not a LEAD single that could sell and album.
And to be fair, 'hit singles' are hard to come by. You mention IORR, which is one of the warhorses, but that didn't crack top ten I don't think, and that was back in the day, a year after Angie was a worldwide number 1.
It's tough selling big singles, as it should be, and they just haven't been up to the task. And as much as I love Undercover of the Night, I recall at the time thinking it was an odd choice for a lead single.
I'm glad they did it, but the resulting relative commercial flop of the album I think in great part is due to that single, not being 'commercial enough'.
Anyway, it would be great if they could produce that one last over-the-top commercially successful single, that would sell the album, that they would then be proud to flog in concert. That is going to be extremely unlikely unfortunately.
Yes, but another blown opportunity to use Bill in a meaningful way. This was not an organic Stones cut, with them up each other's noses. Everybody's part was phoned in from around the world. The live shows were nice, with Ron and Mick T. and Charlie.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: February 18, 2015 15:33
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
The Stones have so many fans who complain about their recent output. Market- and demand-driven as they are, they listened to those fans and in six years they released more music than they have in decades:
Exile Deluxe
Ladies And Gentlemen
Charlie Is My Darling
Checkerboard Lounge
Some Girls Deluxe
Live In Texas
Brussels 1973
LA I 1975 (11th)
LA II 1975 (13th)
Hampton 1981
Leeds 1982
Tokyo 1990
Toronto 2005
Doom And Gloom/One More Shot
Sweet Summer Sun
And soon: Sticky Fingers Deluxe...
Who's complaining?
And I actually listen and enjoy much more many of that stuff than I do of A BIGGER BANG...
But I still understand the sentiments of the original post... There is some kind of special attraction and thrill engaged when it goes to new studio albums... Probably having lived during the age when those releases had a special meaning... You know, a brandnew Rolling Stones album, full of new music... Probably even having that kind of feeling is some kind of sign of of nostalgia...
I try to cope with the facts and recent currents, but somehow the idea that the band 'exists' only in form of doing concerts but not releasing new music just don't quite fit to the old(-fashionable) idea I have of Rolling Stones or rock artists in general...
But that said, just do the concerts but keep the vaults open, and I'll be happy...
- Doxa
I agree totally, and just as much as the next fan I'd love to get a brand new album from my favourite band.
But I reckon they won't do it as long as the fans don't appreciate the new music. They should make an album anyway, though
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
MrThompsonWooft
()
Date: February 18, 2015 15:33
So, a lot of recycled past but no new product. Disappointing.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: February 18, 2015 15:39
Quote
Cristiano RadtkeQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Silver DaggerQuote
DandelionPowderman
The Stones have so many fans who complain about their recent output. Market- and demand-driven as they are, they listened to those fans and in six years they released more music than they have in decades:
Exile Deluxe
Ladies And Gentlemen
Charlie Is My Darling
Checkerboard Lounge
Some Girls Deluxe
Live In Texas
Brussels 1973
LA I 1975 (11th)
LA II 1975 (13th)
Hampton 1981
Leeds 1982
Tokyo 1990
Toronto 2005
Doom And Gloom/One More Shot
Sweet Summer Sun
And soon: Sticky Fingers Deluxe...
Who's complaining?
Plus there's been the Ed Sullivan shows, T.A.M.I. Show, Get Yer Ya Yas box, the Crossfire Hurricane and Stones In Exile films.
I knew I forgot something. Thanks
And the 7" with the 1964 BBC recordings and the 1963 IBC recordings bonus CD on the deluxe box-set of Grrr!.
And still people are forgetting the brand-new recording of theirs, which even had Bill Wyman on it...
- Doxa
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: February 18, 2015 15:49
Quote
DandelionPowderman
But I reckon they won't do it as long as the fans don't appreciate the new music.
Yeah, how tragical is it that such a great, vital, forward-looking, inspired band is surrounded by such a bad fanbase... 'Well, what a can poor boy do...' .
- Doxa
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 18, 2015 16:37
Quote
MrThompsonWooft
So, a lot of recycled past but no new product. Disappointing.
hang around long enough and you'll get over it.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
MrThompsonWooft
()
Date: February 18, 2015 16:39
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
MrThompsonWooft
So, a lot of recycled past but no new product. Disappointing.
hang around long enough and you'll get over it.
I will survive.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 18, 2015 16:51
Quote
MrThompsonWooftQuote
treaclefingersQuote
MrThompsonWooft
So, a lot of recycled past but no new product. Disappointing.
hang around long enough and you'll get over it.
I will survive.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
fuzzbox
()
Date: February 18, 2015 16:52
Quote
DandelionPowderman
The Stones have so many fans who complain about their recent output. Market- and demand-driven as they are, they listened to those fans and in six years they released more music than they have in decades:
Exile Deluxe
Ladies And Gentlemen
Charlie Is My Darling
Checkerboard Lounge
Some Girls Deluxe
Live In Texas
Brussels 1973
LA I 1975 (11th)
LA II 1975 (13th)
Hampton 1981
Leeds 1982
Tokyo 1990
Toronto 2005
Doom And Gloom/One More Shot
Sweet Summer Sun
And soon: Sticky Fingers Deluxe...
Who's complaining?
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
runrudolph
()
Date: February 18, 2015 16:53
Quote
DoxaQuote
Cristiano RadtkeQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Silver DaggerQuote
DandelionPowderman
The Stones have so many fans who complain about their recent output. Market- and demand-driven as they are, they listened to those fans and in six years they released more music than they have in decades:
Exile Deluxe
Ladies And Gentlemen
Charlie Is My Darling
Checkerboard Lounge
Some Girls Deluxe
Live In Texas
Brussels 1973
LA I 1975 (11th)
LA II 1975 (13th)
Hampton 1981
Leeds 1982
Tokyo 1990
Toronto 2005
Doom And Gloom/One More Shot
Sweet Summer Sun
And soon: Sticky Fingers Deluxe...
Who's complaining?
Plus there's been the Ed Sullivan shows, T.A.M.I. Show, Get Yer Ya Yas box, the Crossfire Hurricane and Stones In Exile films.
I knew I forgot something. Thanks
And the 7" with the 1964 BBC recordings and the 1963 IBC recordings bonus CD on the deluxe box-set of Grrr!.
And still people are forgetting the brand-new recording of theirs, which even had Bill Wyman on it...
- Doxa
Which one do you mean , doxa..
Jeroen
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
RobertJohnson
()
Date: February 18, 2015 16:55
I'm pleased that they released some treasures from the vault hoping for more, but also I'm disappointed to get no new album(s) for ten years, from a band which released in 64/65 three albums in Britain (The Rolling Stones, Nr. 2, Out of Our Heads) and five in the US (England's Newest Hitmakers, 12x5, Now!, Out of Our Heads, December's Children). I know it is a long while since, but somewhat of their creativity must be still alive, I think.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
bv
()
Date: February 18, 2015 17:01
Paul McCartney is one person, he can do as he likes, he does not have to talk to three other guys. It is like playing poker. One ace is easy. Four aces are harder on the same hand.
Bjornulf
Bjornulf
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
marcovandereijk
()
Date: February 18, 2015 17:01
What Mick learned after 50 years of Rock 'n Roll: number 10 (at 1:46)
Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away
Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 18, 2015 17:11
Quote
marcovandereijk
What Mick learned after 50 years of Rock 'n Roll: number 10 (at 1:46)
fantastic, I can't believe I missed that the first time around.
two observations, Mick's 'delivery' is far better than the actual jokes, he really can sell it.
second observation, Mick looks 10 years younger than Letterman, who is ten years younger than Jagger.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: February 18, 2015 17:28
It's weird that Mick thinks no one likes the new songs
on a new album when they played all the singles from
VOODOO at some point on the VOODOO tour and likewise
with BRIDGES. No one left in droves.
The 1990s went by fast yet the Stones only released 2 studio albums...
not sure where Mick gets the idea no one wants to hear the new
songs when record sales were good and the new songs fit in well
with the other and older songs.
And no one left in droves.
No one wants to hear the new songs? Then why did they record
howevermany for LICKS and finished 4 of them with one being a
single? Why did they release A BIGGER BANG then?
Because no one wants to hear new songs?
And why record two new songs for another hits comp?
Mick needs to zip it about that.
on a new album when they played all the singles from
VOODOO at some point on the VOODOO tour and likewise
with BRIDGES. No one left in droves.
The 1990s went by fast yet the Stones only released 2 studio albums...
not sure where Mick gets the idea no one wants to hear the new
songs when record sales were good and the new songs fit in well
with the other and older songs.
And no one left in droves.
No one wants to hear the new songs? Then why did they record
howevermany for LICKS and finished 4 of them with one being a
single? Why did they release A BIGGER BANG then?
Because no one wants to hear new songs?
And why record two new songs for another hits comp?
Mick needs to zip it about that.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 18, 2015 17:35
Quote
GasLightStreet
It's weird that Mick thinks no one likes the new songs
on a new album when they played all the singles from
VOODOO at some point on the VOODOO tour and likewise
with BRIDGES. No one left in droves.
The 1990s went by fast yet the Stones only released 2 studio albums...
not sure where Mick gets the idea no one wants to hear the new
songs when record sales were good and the new songs fit in well
with the other and older songs.
And no one left in droves.
No one wants to hear the new songs? Then why did they record
howevermany for LICKS and finished 4 of them with one being a
single? Why did they release A BIGGER BANG then?
Because no one wants to hear new songs?
And why record two new songs for another hits comp?
Mick needs to zip it about that.
By "no one" Mick means the 97% of the show-goers that are there just to see Start Me Up, Miss You, Satisfaction, Brown Sugar and JJF.
The 3% or so won't buy enough copies of the new album to make it 'worth it' in his eyes, at least that's my read of it.
However what's missing, or what's been missing, is the 'killer single' that rules the airwaves, that would help 'sell' that album. The Miss You, or the Start Me Up.
They haven't had one like that in 35 years, so difficult to imagine them pulling one like that out of their hat. It is possible but unlikely. If it were easy, they'd have done it again some time in the last few decades.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: February 18, 2015 17:44
True. But it still didn't stop them from doing new LPs and singles and videos and playing those songs on the tours.
I'm just wanting to know when did Mick suddenly feel that way. Because if it was in the midst of one of those albums... why bother doing another one? His idea of an LP being successful is or was how high it charted and if it sold enough copies. Meanwhile Keith's idea of a successful album is if people like it at all.
I'm just wanting to know when did Mick suddenly feel that way. Because if it was in the midst of one of those albums... why bother doing another one? His idea of an LP being successful is or was how high it charted and if it sold enough copies. Meanwhile Keith's idea of a successful album is if people like it at all.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
liddas
()
Date: February 18, 2015 18:40
I agree that D&G + 1MS in 10 years is not exactly something that we can call an impressive output, but it is fair to note that the individual members kept themselves busy with more than one interesting original project.
That said I am looking forward to a new release and I do think that at this point they should record a new album of originals.
Not for the fans, not for the legacy, not for the money.
Just for the sake of it!
C
That said I am looking forward to a new release and I do think that at this point they should record a new album of originals.
Not for the fans, not for the legacy, not for the money.
Just for the sake of it!
C
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: February 18, 2015 19:06
,,,the Rolling Stones have ceased being recording artists and instead have made millions touring behind their legacy and brand name.
Next question?
Next question?
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
Rik
()
Date: February 18, 2015 19:08
Quote
corriecasQuote
DoxaQuote
Cristiano RadtkeQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Silver DaggerQuote
DandelionPowderman
The Stones have so many fans who complain about their recent output. Market- and demand-driven as they are, they listened to those fans and in six years they released more music than they have in decades:
Exile Deluxe
Ladies And Gentlemen
Charlie Is My Darling
Checkerboard Lounge
Some Girls Deluxe
Live In Texas
Brussels 1973
LA I 1975 (11th)
LA II 1975 (13th)
Hampton 1981
Leeds 1982
Tokyo 1990
Toronto 2005
Doom And Gloom/One More Shot
Sweet Summer Sun
And soon: Sticky Fingers Deluxe...
Who's complaining?
Plus there's been the Ed Sullivan shows, T.A.M.I. Show, Get Yer Ya Yas box, the Crossfire Hurricane and Stones In Exile films.
I knew I forgot something. Thanks
And the 7" with the 1964 BBC recordings and the 1963 IBC recordings bonus CD on the deluxe box-set of Grrr!.
And still people are forgetting the brand-new recording of theirs, which even had Bill Wyman on it...
- Doxa
Which one do you mean , doxa..
Jeroen
Watching the river flow - boogie for stu
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: February 18, 2015 20:04
<<And still people are forgetting the brand-new recording of theirs, which even had Bill Wyman on it...>>
Covers are often easy to forget, whereas Plundered My Soul stays in one's head.
<<what's missing, or what's been missing, is the 'killer single' that rules the airwaves, that would help 'sell' that album. The Miss You, or the Start Me Up.
They haven't had one like that in 35 years>>
They had one in Rough Justice, which if put on Steel Wheels in place of Mixed Emotions would have been an even bigger hit. If Out Of Control had been on Tattoo You it would have been top 10 and maybe even top 5. If Miss You and Start Me Up were released as brand new in 2015 they would barely scrape the tip of the top 100.
The reason is that hit singles are for a younger market, and the kiddies don't make hits out of stuff that comes from their grandparents' generation. All the popular long-standing artists from the sixties, Stones included, stopped having hits after age 45, despite often worthy new material.
That's why when Mick gets a group together for a side project like SuperHeavy he does so with younger artists that a younger market would recognize rather than other artists his own age.
The only way the Stones could find mass appeal with a younger audience at this point would be to have their songs licensed for the soundtrack of some trendy TV show, the 2015 equivalent of Breaking Bad or something. If they could do this with new material, then they might have a chance at something approaching a hit. If they just do it the way they've always done it, then their only market exposure will be classic rock stations who might play it for 2 or 3 weeks before setting it aside for endless heavy rotation of Start Me Up and Honky Tonk Women.
There's an inconvenient truth about celebrity and especially the music business--age matters.
Covers are often easy to forget, whereas Plundered My Soul stays in one's head.
<<what's missing, or what's been missing, is the 'killer single' that rules the airwaves, that would help 'sell' that album. The Miss You, or the Start Me Up.
They haven't had one like that in 35 years>>
They had one in Rough Justice, which if put on Steel Wheels in place of Mixed Emotions would have been an even bigger hit. If Out Of Control had been on Tattoo You it would have been top 10 and maybe even top 5. If Miss You and Start Me Up were released as brand new in 2015 they would barely scrape the tip of the top 100.
The reason is that hit singles are for a younger market, and the kiddies don't make hits out of stuff that comes from their grandparents' generation. All the popular long-standing artists from the sixties, Stones included, stopped having hits after age 45, despite often worthy new material.
That's why when Mick gets a group together for a side project like SuperHeavy he does so with younger artists that a younger market would recognize rather than other artists his own age.
The only way the Stones could find mass appeal with a younger audience at this point would be to have their songs licensed for the soundtrack of some trendy TV show, the 2015 equivalent of Breaking Bad or something. If they could do this with new material, then they might have a chance at something approaching a hit. If they just do it the way they've always done it, then their only market exposure will be classic rock stations who might play it for 2 or 3 weeks before setting it aside for endless heavy rotation of Start Me Up and Honky Tonk Women.
There's an inconvenient truth about celebrity and especially the music business--age matters.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 18, 2015 20:37
Quote
stonehearted
<<And still people are forgetting the brand-new recording of theirs, which even had Bill Wyman on it...>>
Covers are often easy to forget, whereas Plundered My Soul stays in one's head.
<<what's missing, or what's been missing, is the 'killer single' that rules the airwaves, that would help 'sell' that album. The Miss You, or the Start Me Up.
They haven't had one like that in 35 years>>
They had one in Rough Justice, which if put on Steel Wheels in place of Mixed Emotions would have been an even bigger hit. If Out Of Control had been on Tattoo You it would have been top 10 and maybe even top 5. If Miss You and Start Me Up were released as brand new in 2015 they would barely scrape the tip of the top 100.
The reason is that hit singles are for a younger market, and the kiddies don't make hits out of stuff that comes from their grandparents' generation. All the popular long-standing artists from the sixties, Stones included, stopped having hits after age 45, despite often worthy new material.
That's why when Mick gets a group together for a side project like SuperHeavy he does so with younger artists that a younger market would recognize rather than other artists his own age.
The only way the Stones could find mass appeal with a younger audience at this point would be to have their songs licensed for the soundtrack of some trendy TV show, the 2015 equivalent of Breaking Bad or something. If they could do this with new material, then they might have a chance at something approaching a hit. If they just do it the way they've always done it, then their only market exposure will be classic rock stations who might play it for 2 or 3 weeks before setting it aside for endless heavy rotation of Start Me Up and Honky Tonk Women.
There's an inconvenient truth about celebrity and especially the music business--age matters.
I dunno...I think that Miss You and SMU would chart extremely well today. Maybe not runaway singles as before but 'surprise' top ten hits for sure; not appearing on the charts at #97 for one week and disappearing.
I agree there is an agism to this kind of thing, but if the song is good enough, it will sell. I'm sure there are other examples, but Cher comes to mind with her, Believe In Love, or whatever it was called. No one saw that one coming and it was huge.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
James Kirk
()
Date: February 18, 2015 21:05
Despite claims that nobody wants to hear new Stones music don't forget that A Bigger Bang was #1 on the global charts for two weeks in a row...ABB's final sales totals weren't eye popping, but they were more than respectable in an era where nobody buys records in nearly any genre at the rate they did in past decades.
I never thought I would see the day where Mick Jagger is happy being an oldies act.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-18 21:07 by James Kirk.
I never thought I would see the day where Mick Jagger is happy being an oldies act.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-18 21:07 by James Kirk.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: February 18, 2015 21:26
Quote
James Kirk
Despite claims that nobody wants to hear new Stones music don't forget that A Bigger Bang was #1 on the global charts for two weeks in a row...ABB's final sales totals weren't eye popping, but they were more than respectable in an era where nobody buys records in nearly any genre at the rate they did in past decades.
I never thought I would see the day where Mick Jagger is happy being an oldies act.
To be fair they are only an oldies act when performing with the Stones. And with the kind of money they are making I think happiness might just be bought. I think they have collectively given in to their business senses with the Stones and are obviously using other projects to fulfill their creative needs. Each member has established himself as a musician outside of the Stones, hard as that might be for us to accept. peace
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
BeforeTheyMakeMeRun
()
Date: February 18, 2015 22:33
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
GasLightStreet
It's weird that Mick thinks no one likes the new songs
on a new album when they played all the singles from
VOODOO at some point on the VOODOO tour and likewise
with BRIDGES. No one left in droves.
The 1990s went by fast yet the Stones only released 2 studio albums...
not sure where Mick gets the idea no one wants to hear the new
songs when record sales were good and the new songs fit in well
with the other and older songs.
And no one left in droves.
No one wants to hear the new songs? Then why did they record
howevermany for LICKS and finished 4 of them with one being a
single? Why did they release A BIGGER BANG then?
Because no one wants to hear new songs?
And why record two new songs for another hits comp?
Mick needs to zip it about that.
By "no one" Mick means the 97% of the show-goers that are there just to see Start Me Up, Miss You, Satisfaction, Brown Sugar and JJF.
The 3% or so won't buy enough copies of the new album to make it 'worth it' in his eyes, at least that's my read of it.
However what's missing, or what's been missing, is the 'killer single' that rules the airwaves, that would help 'sell' that album. The Miss You, or the Start Me Up.
They haven't had one like that in 35 years, so difficult to imagine them pulling one like that out of their hat. It is possible but unlikely. If it were easy, they'd have done it again some time in the last few decades.
When I read that 'no one wants to hear your new material' argument Mick keeps throwing up, I instantly think of the Some Girls tour, where many if not all of the setlists, had SEVEN 'new' songs from the new album...and they all were played one after one with no warhorses to break up the pace.Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: February 18, 2015 22:43
Quote
BeforeTheyMakeMeRun
Yeah but so much has changed in 35 years. Maybe he is calling us die hard fans "no one" but I suspect it's more to do with the changes in the popular music styles and the fact that the recent writing of Jagger/Richards is far from mainstream and far from the great deliveries of the golden age. There are still artists out there where the new material is what it's all about. peace
Re: Anniversary of the release of "A Bigger Bang"
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: February 18, 2015 23:00
Quote
stonehearted
They had one in Rough Justice, which if put on Steel Wheels in place of Mixed Emotions would have been an even bigger hit. If Out Of Control had been on Tattoo You it would have been top 10 and maybe even top 5. If Miss You and Start Me Up were released as brand new in 2015 they would barely scrape the tip of the top 100.
Even though I agree that there is a certain generation gap in explaining the chartings of hit singles - especially in American market - I don't think we could so easily assume that it is the bad timing only, which makes Stones singles to flop in charts. Or that back in the old days it wasn't something to do with quality of the songs why many of them were big hits - some even smashing big ones. This is to say I don't buy the claim that songs are as good as always, or that the quality doesn't mean anything, and it is nothing but the context, which makes the difference (why some turned out to be hits, and some not).
I really can't see, for example, "Rough Justice" having a strong commercial value ever. Their old albums had better Stones-type of basic rockers that never saw the light of the day as singles. And as far as those songs which made it - well, "Rough JUstice" is not exactly "Jumpin' Jack Flash", "Brown Sugar" or "Start Me Up". Nor 'even' "Tumbling Dice", "Happy", "Heartbreaker" or "It's Only Rock'n'Roll" - classical songs that had difficulties even making top ten at the time! Hard to think that such a basic Stones rocker could have made better than, say, more radio- and dance-floor friendly "Undercover of The Night", "Harlem Shuffle" or "Mixed Emotions", their last top ten ten hits in the States. More I think "Rough Justice" would have been in the range of "She Was Hot", "One Hit" or "Rock & A Hard Place", a bit touching Top Forty. If even that.
Why earlier "Angie", "Fool To Cry", "Miss You" and "Emotional Rescue" made the top ten was not that they sounded 'classical' Stones, but just being kind of songs that had a commercial appeal at the time (besides being great songs). One could say that "Start Me Up" was actually a rare exception to a rule - after many 'different' hit singles it was a traditional Stones-sounding rock tune with a catchy riff (the first since "Tumbling Dice"). If we look at the songs trying to re-use its receipt of success - "Mixed Emotions", "Highwire", "Love Is Strong", "Don't Stop", "Rough Justice" - the reason they (except "Mixed Emotions") flopped wasn't just the change of climate and the generation gap - none of them, I claim, had that immedeatily recognizable hit character in them. None of those songs would have been as huge hits as "Start Me Up" was in its day. Nor had, say, "Anybody Seen My Baby?" seen the success of "Miss You" in 1978 nor "Out of Tears" or "Streets of Love" that of "Angie", "Fool To Cry" or "Beast of Burden" in their heyday. Or do we really think those songs are equal in greatness to them?
Another issue is how well those old hits would do now if released today. Not probably (certainly) doing so well, but I am rather sure much better than how their singles are doing these days.
So the moral of my post is that it wasn't so easy even back then for them to make 'hits'. The age profile of buying audience was more on their side, yeah, but still they had to have great and suitable kind of songs to make the top ten - and damn catchy tunes hitting the very top. We probably need to go back to mid-60's when just being a new Rolling Stones single, containing almost whatever, was a sure top ten hit (and considered almost a flop if not taking the top position). But jeez, they put all their creative energy in those singles at those 'ancient' times.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-18 23:13 by Doxa.
Re: Anniversary of the release of "A Bigger Bang"
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 19, 2015 00:55
Quote
DoxaQuote
stonehearted
They had one in Rough Justice, which if put on Steel Wheels in place of Mixed Emotions would have been an even bigger hit. If Out Of Control had been on Tattoo You it would have been top 10 and maybe even top 5. If Miss You and Start Me Up were released as brand new in 2015 they would barely scrape the tip of the top 100.
Even though I agree that there is a certain generation gap in explaining the chartings of hit singles - especially in American market - I don't think we could so easily assume that it is the bad timing only, which makes Stones singles to flop in charts. Or that back in the old days it wasn't something to do with quality of the songs why many of them were big hits - some even smashing big ones. This is to say I don't buy the claim that songs are as good as always, or that the quality doesn't mean anything, and it is nothing but the context, which makes the difference (why some turned out to be hits, and some not).
I really can't see, for example, "Rough Justice" having a strong commercial value ever. Their old albums had better Stones-type of basic rockers that never saw the light of the day as singles. And as far as those songs which made it - well, "Rough JUstice" is not exactly "Jumpin' Jack Flash", "Brown Sugar" or "Start Me Up". Nor 'even' "Tumbling Dice", "Happy", "Heartbreaker" or "It's Only Rock'n'Roll" - classical songs that had difficulties even making top ten at the time! Hard to think that such a basic Stones rocker could have made better than, say, more radio- and dance-floor friendly "Undercover of The Night", "Harlem Shuffle" or "Mixed Emotions", their last top ten ten hits in the States. More I think "Rough Justice" would have been in the range of "She Was Hot", "One Hit" or "Rock & A Hard Place", a bit touching Top Forty. If even that.
Why earlier "Angie", "Fool To Cry", "Miss You" and "Emotional Rescue" made the top ten was not that they sounded 'classical' Stones, but just being kind of songs that had a commercial appeal at the time (besides being great songs). One could say that "Start Me Up" was actually a rare exception to a rule - after many 'different' hit singles it was a traditional Stones-sounding rock tune with a catchy riff (the first since "Tumbling Dice"). If we look at the songs trying to re-use its receipt of success - "Mixed Emotions", "Highwire", "Love Is Strong", "Don't Stop", "Rough Justice" - the reason they (except "Mixed Emotions") flopped wasn't just the change of climate and the generation gap - none of them, I claim, had that immedeatily recognizable hit character in them. None of those songs would have been as huge hits as "Start Me Up" was in its day. Nor had, say, "Anybody Seen My Baby?" seen the success of "Miss You" in 1978 nor "Out of Tears" or "Streets of Love" that of "Angie", "Fool To Cry" or "Beast of Burden" in their heyday. Or do we really think those songs are equal in greatness to them?
Another issue is how well those old hits would do now if released today. Not probably (certainly) doing so well, but I am rather sure much better than how their singles are doing these days.
So the moral of my post is that it wasn't so easy even back then for them to make 'hits'. The age profile of buying audience was more on their side, yeah, but still they had to have great and suitable kind of songs to make the top ten - and damn catchy tunes hitting the very top. We probably need to go back to mid-60's when just being a new Rolling Stones single, containing almost whatever, was a sure top ten hit (and considered almost a flop if not taking the top position). But jeez, they put all their creative energy in those singles at those 'ancient' times.
- Doxa
I have to concur. As great a song as Rough Justice is, and as pleasant and refreshing it sounded it in no way is a 'hit single' style song, certainly not a LEAD single that could sell and album.
And to be fair, 'hit singles' are hard to come by. You mention IORR, which is one of the warhorses, but that didn't crack top ten I don't think, and that was back in the day, a year after Angie was a worldwide number 1.
It's tough selling big singles, as it should be, and they just haven't been up to the task. And as much as I love Undercover of the Night, I recall at the time thinking it was an odd choice for a lead single.
I'm glad they did it, but the resulting relative commercial flop of the album I think in great part is due to that single, not being 'commercial enough'.
Anyway, it would be great if they could produce that one last over-the-top commercially successful single, that would sell the album, that they would then be proud to flog in concert. That is going to be extremely unlikely unfortunately.
Re: Anniversary of the release of "A Bigger Bang"
Posted by:
umakmehrd
()
Date: February 19, 2015 00:55
voodoo lounge 20 years holy crap - did anyone else have the pc video game of the voodoo lounge where you walk around to different area's of the lounge, it was hilarious - both good albums imo I still listen to them both every once in a while.
Re: In the 10 years since the Rolling Stones released A Bigger Bang
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: February 19, 2015 01:01
Quote
RikQuote
corriecasQuote
DoxaQuote
Cristiano RadtkeQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Silver DaggerQuote
DandelionPowderman
The Stones have so many fans who complain about their recent output. Market- and demand-driven as they are, they listened to those fans and in six years they released more music than they have in decades:
Exile Deluxe
Ladies And Gentlemen
Charlie Is My Darling
Checkerboard Lounge
Some Girls Deluxe
Live In Texas
Brussels 1973
LA I 1975 (11th)
LA II 1975 (13th)
Hampton 1981
Leeds 1982
Tokyo 1990
Toronto 2005
Doom And Gloom/One More Shot
Sweet Summer Sun
And soon: Sticky Fingers Deluxe...
Who's complaining?
Plus there's been the Ed Sullivan shows, T.A.M.I. Show, Get Yer Ya Yas box, the Crossfire Hurricane and Stones In Exile films.
I knew I forgot something. Thanks
And the 7" with the 1964 BBC recordings and the 1963 IBC recordings bonus CD on the deluxe box-set of Grrr!.
And still people are forgetting the brand-new recording of theirs, which even had Bill Wyman on it...
- Doxa
Which one do you mean , doxa..
Jeroen
Watching the river flow - boogie for stu
Yes, but another blown opportunity to use Bill in a meaningful way. This was not an organic Stones cut, with them up each other's noses. Everybody's part was phoned in from around the world. The live shows were nice, with Ron and Mick T. and Charlie.
Re: Anniversary of the release of "A Bigger Bang"
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: February 19, 2015 01:09
Even though Doom and Gloom is the only meaningful song the Stones have released since A Bigger Bang, it was astonishingly good. It doesn't sound like anything the Stones had done before, in a good way. The bass doesn't do crap for the song, but I've given up any of those @#$%& understanding good bass at this point. But the rest of it was really catchy and up to date without being annoying (like some of Bridges to Babylon).
I think in order for a single to really hit now it has to have a dance club element, ala Iggy Azalea's 'I'm So Fancy', Robin Thicke's 'Blurred Lines', or 'I Am The Best' by the Korean Pop Group 2NE1. The Stones can't really compete with that. In the old days they would take what's big, huge dance club sound, and fused it with their own rock and blues elements to create a monster hybrid, like they did with 'Miss You'. Still, I wouldn't put it past them to pull something like that off. I can't help but feel there's one more worldwide, late career smash for them.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-19 01:10 by 24FPS.
I think in order for a single to really hit now it has to have a dance club element, ala Iggy Azalea's 'I'm So Fancy', Robin Thicke's 'Blurred Lines', or 'I Am The Best' by the Korean Pop Group 2NE1. The Stones can't really compete with that. In the old days they would take what's big, huge dance club sound, and fused it with their own rock and blues elements to create a monster hybrid, like they did with 'Miss You'. Still, I wouldn't put it past them to pull something like that off. I can't help but feel there's one more worldwide, late career smash for them.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-19 01:10 by 24FPS.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
alexander paul , bauk77 , django , gativubi , GJB , GuessWho , Irix , keef62 , poti , rastakeith , Rokyfan , Sir Mick , spiderman , steffialicia , tommyturbo76
Guests:
1994
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10