Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Mel Belli

Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Roll73

Quote
keefriffhards
When Keith's album comes out, i think people will see the talent that has been wasted in reference to Mick dominating recordings for many years.
Keith is the musician after all. To my mind most of the Stones greatest recordings were when Mick let Keith flow with his genius, with Mick adding lyrics and melody's..
That is the Glimmers at their best. But this control thing with Mick has been the main issue. For me anyway.

Some might argue that Mick is a musician too! Even if he never sang a note and only played harp.

next you'll be suggesting he actually wrote some songs.

Listening to some on here i thought Mick wrote all the songs, except for JJF, which Bill wrote

I'm not rating this qualitatively one way or the other, but the percentage of 100%-Mick songs spiked in the mid-'70s and really hasn't declined since.

We know Keith's songs are all him. Mick has nothing to do with those. There is at least that much.

So true...Mick only contributes the lyrics and melody on those ones.

Err No

KEEF!!!

I have to respectfully disagree with those who say that the music suffers because of Mick's contributions.

There are a couple of great tracks off of Wandering Spirit which would have made classic Stones songs. I love Sweet Thing and Evening Gown off of that album. Those are classic, great Rolling Stones tracks that are underappreciated but would have been great on one of their albums.

I really wish they would discard modern technology and go back to a vintage recording style. it suits them better. Or at least record the new album with the style that they used on the Some Girls bonus disc. To me that was an absolute great album in and of itself and it's buried under the Some Girls title which is a shame. They could have released that as a standalone disc. I even heard complaints about that one but I can listen to it by itself over and over again and I love every song on it.

Half of the people can be part pleased all of the time
Some of the people can be all pleased part of the time
But all of the people can’t be all pleased all of the time

Quote
corriecas
The Stones are On FIRE !!!!
New Keith album, Some Keef Solo gigs, a new Stones cd, more Stones touring !!!
Gonna be great year ahead !!

jeroen

...and anothet producer (Rick Rubin) would be perfect!

Rick Rubin is a bad idea. Worse than Don Was.

AGREE ... NO Rubin and definitely NO Jack White .........



ROCKMAN

Quote
sanQ
I have to respectfully disagree with those who say that the music suffers because of Mick's contributions.

There are a couple of great tracks off of Wandering Spirit which would have made classic Stones songs. I love Sweet Thing and Evening Gown off of that album. Those are classic, great Rolling Stones tracks that are underappreciated but would have been great on one of their albums.

I really wish they would discard modern technology and go back to a vintage recording style. it suits them better. Or at least record the new album with the style that they used on the Some Girls bonus disc. To me that was an absolute great album in and of itself and it's buried under the Some Girls title which is a shame. They could have released that as a standalone disc. I even heard complaints about that one but I can listen to it by itself over and over again and I love every song on it.

Half of the people can be part pleased all of the time
Some of the people can be all pleased part of the time
But all of the people can’t be all pleased all of the time

I agree with everything you say.
I did not mean Mick's contributions should be to blame for anything, its just that when it seems to be more of a 50 50 effort from the Glimmer twins the results are much better. The last 2 Stones albums seem to lack Keith's presence, but lets face it with Keith more sober and straight these days a new stones album is only going to be better this time.
As you say the vintage recording style would be a fantastic idea sanQ
also plundered my soul has that great old feel to it, so it can be done

Nice as it would be to get another Stones album, I'll wait till Mick or Charlie say it's happening (as opposed to Mick saying he might do a Stones album or a solo album), relying on Keith or Ronnie's statements to the press is not usually advisable.

Quote
GasLightStreet
Rick Rubin is a bad idea. Worse than Don Was.

I think at this stage in the game Mick and Keith are more than qualified to produce their own sound.
It would be to intimidating for a producer to actually not just be a yes man.

My observation is that it's a whole new ball game now. Mick and Keith appear to be getting on better than they have in years. Keith is probably healthier, and is certainly more sober than he has been in the last 25 years. If ever there was a chance for a true collaboration between the glimmers it is now. A rock band in it's 54th year putting out a new record is an unprecedented landmark, and one of rock's geatest song writing collaborations will have an opportunity to make a mark on that milestone. I think if they undertake this project it will be done with great care and respect for their legacy.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-07-24 00:20 by Woz.

Quote
Woz
My observation is that it's a whole new ball game now. Mick and Keith appear to be getting on better than they have in years. Keith is probably healthier, and is certainly more sober than he has been in the last 25 years. If ever there was a chance for a true collaoration between the glimmers it is now. A rock band in it's 54th year putting out a new record is an unprecedented landmark, and one of rock's geatest song writing collaborators will have an opportunity to maje a mark on that milestone. I think if they undertake this project it will be done with great care and respect for their legacy.

Absolutely

Quote
KRiffhard

...and another producer (Rick Rubin) would be perfect!

As much as I like Rubin his working method doesn't match the Stones' :
he drops in the studio one afternoon lays on a couch closes his eyes listens to the band's demos says "yeahhh" or "this one needs more work" then leaves and he doesn't come back for a month or two. ><

In short : Rubin's the anti Jimmy Miller who helped the Stones build their songs step by step minute after minute.

About Rubin's method Angus Young said it's complete rubbish and he basically called Rubin a fraud.

Dcba: Yes. Too true. RR is more of an exec producer, or basic idea man, maybe giving input into the concept of an album (acoustic, cover songs, combining rock with drum machine, etc.) than a song or technical producer. His main idea with Jagger was a blues album with the Red Devils. Jimmy Miller took the basic ideas he was working on with Traffic, and then Delaney and Bonnie, to the Stones, including some of the players involved.

Quote
keefriffhards
When Keith's album comes out, i think people will see the talent that has been wasted in reference to Mick dominating recordings for many years.
Keith is the musician after all. To my mind most of the Stones greatest recordings were when Mick let Keith flow with his genius, with Mick adding lyrics and melody's..
That is the Glimmers at their best. But this control thing with Mick has been the main issue. For me anyway.

It's difficult for me to imagine something I disagree more with. I don't mean any disrespect, in fact I am convinced I must be misunderstanding something ... so, in the spirit of educating myself, might I ask some questions?

--How has Keith's talent been wasted on "recordings for many years"? Did he have better songs that didn't make the cut? Is Mick that powerful/stupid/spiteful that he would put out lesser material just because he wanted to be in "control"?

--So, of the two of them, Keith is "the musician." What does that mean, exactly? That Keith can play an instrument and Mick can't? That he can write music and Mick can't? Something else?

--On those songs where Keith "flowed with his genius" what did he do, exactly? If Mick, even on those songs, provided lyrics and melody, what did Keith provide? I believe in pop music that lyrics and melody go a pretty far way in creating a song.

I love Keith. One of my favorite rock stars. I just have never understood the whole "Keith's contributions are greater/lesser than Mick's in the band" debate. I'm not in that band and so have no first-hand knowledge. And I guess I haven't read enough about how the songs are actually composed and chosen for recording ... and as a result, I just figure they're Jagger/Richards songs and I take them as a I hear them.

Keith's an old snakeskin-suited rascal selling his usual snake oil: how many variations of "oh, the boys are really cookin' now, gotta get 'em in the studio, fresh off the road" have we heard over the past 18 years (which have resulted in a grand total of one record)?

He's got a product to promote, god bless 'im, and he'll say what he needs to say to get both the faithful and the rock critics fired up. Nothing wrong with that. Keith's a smart guy.

And, for what it's worth, I don't think The Stones should record an album. At least not in the traditional sense. We all know that full-length albums are dead and it's all about hit singles. Assuming that they have the musical ability to write hit singles any more (a BIG assumption), I would advise them to write and record a half-dozen or so killer tracks. Then, on their next three two-month tours (a la Zip Code), release one of those killer singles every month while they are on the road and play the shit out of it live. Get people excited about new product, build a buzz.

It's wishful thinking, of course, and of course they can't do it. They haven't had a hit in ages ... how could they possibly write six now? But it's what would be required in today's scene to get people truly interested in hearing new stuff.

Alternatively, they'll just come up with a slightly new wrinkle (hey, 50 years, hey, MT, hey, Sticky Fingers) and trot out the same set they've been playing since Hector was a pup. Why shouldn't they? People seem to dig it.

Ohhhhh - did you really say "since Hector was a pup"? Love it :E

Anyone here from UK who could buy this Mojo issue and send it to me?

Please provide payment Details to my E-Mail: stmeise@gmail.com

Your help is very much appreciated!!!

Quote
LongBeachArena72

Quote
keefriffhards
When Keith's album comes out, i think people will see the talent that has been wasted in reference to Mick dominating recordings for many years.
Keith is the musician after all. To my mind most of the Stones greatest recordings were when Mick let Keith flow with his genius, with Mick adding lyrics and melody's..
That is the Glimmers at their best. But this control thing with Mick has been the main issue. For me anyway.

It's difficult for me to imagine something I disagree more with. I don't mean any disrespect, in fact I am convinced I must be misunderstanding something ... so, in the spirit of educating myself, might I ask some questions?

--How has Keith's talent been wasted on "recordings for many years"? Did he have better songs that didn't make the cut? Is Mick that powerful/stupid/spiteful that he would put out lesser material just because he wanted to be in "control"?

--So, of the two of them, Keith is "the musician." What does that mean, exactly? That Keith can play an instrument and Mick can't? That he can write music and Mick can't? Something else?

--On those songs where Keith "flowed with his genius" what did he do, exactly? If Mick, even on those songs, provided lyrics and melody, what did Keith provide? I believe in pop music that lyrics and melody go a pretty far way in creating a song.

I love Keith. One of my favorite rock stars. I just have never understood the whole "Keith's contributions are greater/lesser than Mick's in the band" debate. I'm not in that band and so have no first-hand knowledge. And I guess I haven't read enough about how the songs are actually composed and chosen for recording ... and as a result, I just figure they're Jagger/Richards songs and I take them as a I hear them.

Keith's an old snakeskin-suited rascal selling his usual snake oil: how many variations of "oh, the boys are really cookin' now, gotta get 'em in the studio, fresh off the road" have we heard over the past 18 years (which have resulted in a grand total of one record)?

He's got a product to promote, god bless 'im, and he'll say what he needs to say to get both the faithful and the rock critics fired up. Nothing wrong with that. Keith's a smart guy.

And, for what it's worth, I don't think The Stones should record an album. At least not in the traditional sense. We all know that full-length albums are dead and it's all about hit singles. Assuming that they have the musical ability to write hit singles any more (a BIG assumption), I would advise them to write and record a half-dozen or so killer tracks. Then, on their next three two-month tours (a la Zip Code), release one of those killer singles every month while they are on the road and play the shit out of it live. Get people excited about new product, build a buzz.

It's wishful thinking, of course, and of course they can't do it. They haven't had a hit in ages ... how could they possibly write six now? But it's what would be required in today's scene to get people truly interested in hearing new stuff.

Alternatively, they'll just come up with a slightly new wrinkle (hey, 50 years, hey, MT, hey, Sticky Fingers) and trot out the same set they've been playing since Hector was a pup. Why shouldn't they? People seem to dig it.

You picked up on a discussion that went on all day yesterday lol.
So for fear of repeating myself i will answer your questions as quickly as i can without going over the same ground.
Yes i think Keith's talent has been wasted in two respects. The drink seemed to take his creative juices away before he straightened up since 2007. Mick and Keith have not made an album together since 2005 so that is a waste of talent.
Keith had no involvement on plundered my soul another example of Micks dominance.
Many recent Stones album's don't have Keith's sound to them. The Stones sound.
My personal view is that Mick has dominated production of these albums and they sound like Mick solo albums to me, with keith guesting on guitar.
I say keith is the musician because the sound of the stones we all love is Keith's sound, Keiths riffs, hooks and rhythms.
In reference to what does Keith or Mick do its all been explained in detail in 'life' and various interviews.
Mick's strong points are lyrics and melody's, Keiths strong points are the sound he makes,riffs, the atmosphere, the strings, cords, the beat the structure of the rhythms. Like YOU DONT MOVE ME for instance.
They both seem to write to halves of the songs in recent history. But the best results are when they write together through every development of the song including end production. I feel that the finished article in recent decades has Mick all over it. They don't have the collaboration between then.
Thats all a have to say today.
your idea of them having a single out every so often is brilliant by the way

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Mel Belli

Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Roll73

Quote
keefriffhards
When Keith's album comes out, i think people will see the talent that has been wasted in reference to Mick dominating recordings for many years.
Keith is the musician after all. To my mind most of the Stones greatest recordings were when Mick let Keith flow with his genius, with Mick adding lyrics and melody's..
That is the Glimmers at their best. But this control thing with Mick has been the main issue. For me anyway.

Some might argue that Mick is a musician too! Even if he never sang a note and only played harp.

next you'll be suggesting he actually wrote some songs.

Listening to some on here i thought Mick wrote all the songs, except for JJF, which Bill wrote

I'm not rating this qualitatively one way or the other, but the percentage of 100%-Mick songs spiked in the mid-'70s and really hasn't declined since.

We know Keith's songs are all him. Mick has nothing to do with those. There is at least that much.

So true...Mick only contributes the lyrics and melody on those ones.

you obviously know nothing about songwriting.

songwriting is two things! melody and lyrics. that´s it.

so according to you it´s 100% mick who writes the songs.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-07-24 14:47 by SL818.

Look I know keith also does lyrics and melodys but Keiths strenghts are his signiture Riffs that run through songs like satisfaction and JJF. HTW. SMU. TD. The list is endless. Do I really have to explain this. A lyric and a melody is no more than a nursary ryhme until keith gets his hands on it.

If these guys truly collaborate it will be magic, if not it will be what we've gotten which is still okay but an opportunity missed which would be a shame.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Roll73

Quote
keefriffhards
When Keith's album comes out, i think people will see the talent that has been wasted in reference to Mick dominating recordings for many years.
Keith is the musician after all. To my mind most of the Stones greatest recordings were when Mick let Keith flow with his genius, with Mick adding lyrics and melody's..
That is the Glimmers at their best. But this control thing with Mick has been the main issue. For me anyway.

Some might argue that Mick is a musician too! Even if he never sang a note and only played harp.

next you'll be suggesting he actually wrote some songs.

Brown Sugar is not a bad song, is it?

It's highly unlikely that the Glimmer Twins will hole up for a few weeks to write new songs. Expect the usual arrangement of them agreeing stuff at a meeting and then going in the studio separately. It would be fantastic if they could work together but I think that boat has long since sailed.

All I pray for is not another ABB, that record is just dreadful in every way imaginable and would have been better left on the shelf. maybe the way forward if there is one is to have Ronnie included as he writes the best songs these days and could act as a kind of go between!

Brown sugar is a perfect example. Great Mick SONG but without those lovely guitars it would be another girlish nursary rhyme chant like the whole of She's The Boss

Quote
crumbling_mice
It's highly unlikely that the Glimmer Twins will hole up for a few weeks to write new songs. Expect the usual arrangement of them agreeing stuff at a meeting and then going in the studio separately. It would be fantastic if they could work together but I think that boat has long since sailed.

All I pray for is not another ABB, that record is just dreadful in every way imaginable and would have been better left on the shelf. maybe the way forward if there is one is to have Ronnie included as he writes the best songs these days and could act as a kind of go between!

agree 100%

sc uk

Quote
keefriffhards
Brown sugar is a perfect example. Great Mick SONG but without those lovely guitars it would be another girlish nursary rhyme chant like the whole of She's The Boss

Truer words have never been spoken (written)!

Quote
straycatuk

All I pray for is not another ABB, that record is just dreadful in every way imaginable and would have been better left on the shelf.
sc uk

What is dreadful about Rough Justice, Oh No Not You Again, Driving Too Fast, Rain Fall Down, It Won´t Take Long, Look What The Cat Dragged In, This Place Is Empty, Under The Radar?

Shorten it to 40 minutes and you have a very fresh rocking and sparkling Stones-album. I do not expect more than 40 minutes, even 35 will do. Using full CD-capacity only leads artists to include the horrible and mediocre. Not every bit of an idea must end on a record...

I stripped down ABB for my own use and I love the result.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-07-24 18:34 by HMS.

Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
LongBeachArena72

Quote
keefriffhards
When Keith's album comes out, i think people will see the talent that has been wasted in reference to Mick dominating recordings for many years.
Keith is the musician after all. To my mind most of the Stones greatest recordings were when Mick let Keith flow with his genius, with Mick adding lyrics and melody's..
That is the Glimmers at their best. But this control thing with Mick has been the main issue. For me anyway.

It's difficult for me to imagine something I disagree more with. I don't mean any disrespect, in fact I am convinced I must be misunderstanding something ... so, in the spirit of educating myself, might I ask some questions?

--How has Keith's talent been wasted on "recordings for many years"? Did he have better songs that didn't make the cut? Is Mick that powerful/stupid/spiteful that he would put out lesser material just because he wanted to be in "control"?

--So, of the two of them, Keith is "the musician." What does that mean, exactly? That Keith can play an instrument and Mick can't? That he can write music and Mick can't? Something else?

--On those songs where Keith "flowed with his genius" what did he do, exactly? If Mick, even on those songs, provided lyrics and melody, what did Keith provide? I believe in pop music that lyrics and melody go a pretty far way in creating a song.

I love Keith. One of my favorite rock stars. I just have never understood the whole "Keith's contributions are greater/lesser than Mick's in the band" debate. I'm not in that band and so have no first-hand knowledge. And I guess I haven't read enough about how the songs are actually composed and chosen for recording ... and as a result, I just figure they're Jagger/Richards songs and I take them as a I hear them.

Keith's an old snakeskin-suited rascal selling his usual snake oil: how many variations of "oh, the boys are really cookin' now, gotta get 'em in the studio, fresh off the road" have we heard over the past 18 years (which have resulted in a grand total of one record)?

He's got a product to promote, god bless 'im, and he'll say what he needs to say to get both the faithful and the rock critics fired up. Nothing wrong with that. Keith's a smart guy.

And, for what it's worth, I don't think The Stones should record an album. At least not in the traditional sense. We all know that full-length albums are dead and it's all about hit singles. Assuming that they have the musical ability to write hit singles any more (a BIG assumption), I would advise them to write and record a half-dozen or so killer tracks. Then, on their next three two-month tours (a la Zip Code), release one of those killer singles every month while they are on the road and play the shit out of it live. Get people excited about new product, build a buzz.

It's wishful thinking, of course, and of course they can't do it. They haven't had a hit in ages ... how could they possibly write six now? But it's what would be required in today's scene to get people truly interested in hearing new stuff.

Alternatively, they'll just come up with a slightly new wrinkle (hey, 50 years, hey, MT, hey, Sticky Fingers) and trot out the same set they've been playing since Hector was a pup. Why shouldn't they? People seem to dig it.

You picked up on a discussion that went on all day yesterday lol.
So for fear of repeating myself i will answer your questions as quickly as i can without going over the same ground.
Yes i think Keith's talent has been wasted in two respects. The drink seemed to take his creative juices away before he straightened up since 2007. Mick and Keith have not made an album together since 2005 so that is a waste of talent.
Keith had no involvement on plundered my soul another example of Micks dominance.
Many recent Stones album's don't have Keith's sound to them. The Stones sound.
My personal view is that Mick has dominated production of these albums and they sound like Mick solo albums to me, with keith guesting on guitar.
I say keith is the musician because the sound of the stones we all love is Keith's sound, Keiths riffs, hooks and rhythms.
In reference to what does Keith or Mick do its all been explained in detail in 'life' and various interviews.
Mick's strong points are lyrics and melody's, Keiths strong points are the sound he makes,riffs, the atmosphere, the strings, cords, the beat the structure of the rhythms. Like YOU DONT MOVE ME for instance.
They both seem to write to halves of the songs in recent history. But the best results are when they write together through every development of the song including end production. I feel that the finished article in recent decades has Mick all over it. They don't have the collaboration between then.
Thats all a have to say today.
your idea of them having a single out every so often is brilliant by the way

I understand your position but it seems to me that you are really selling Keith short. Is he that whipped by Jagger that he can't get his stuff on Stones records? Keith is the badass guitar gunslinger, no? Mick is not that intimidating, man. Hell, Charlie punched him in the nose! I don't buy that Keith is as helpless as your position implies. It's just as likely that we've heard all his best stuff and the band decided not to release the rest.

Quote
LongBeachArena72

Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
LongBeachArena72

Quote
keefriffhards
When Keith's album comes out, i think people will see the talent that has been wasted in reference to Mick dominating recordings for many years.
Keith is the musician after all. To my mind most of the Stones greatest recordings were when Mick let Keith flow with his genius, with Mick adding lyrics and melody's..
That is the Glimmers at their best. But this control thing with Mick has been the main issue. For me anyway.

It's difficult for me to imagine something I disagree more with. I don't mean any disrespect, in fact I am convinced I must be misunderstanding something ... so, in the spirit of educating myself, might I ask some questions?

--How has Keith's talent been wasted on "recordings for many years"? Did he have better songs that didn't make the cut? Is Mick that powerful/stupid/spiteful that he would put out lesser material just because he wanted to be in "control"?

--So, of the two of them, Keith is "the musician." What does that mean, exactly? That Keith can play an instrument and Mick can't? That he can write music and Mick can't? Something else?

--On those songs where Keith "flowed with his genius" what did he do, exactly? If Mick, even on those songs, provided lyrics and melody, what did Keith provide? I believe in pop music that lyrics and melody go a pretty far way in creating a song.

I love Keith. One of my favorite rock stars. I just have never understood the whole "Keith's contributions are greater/lesser than Mick's in the band" debate. I'm not in that band and so have no first-hand knowledge. And I guess I haven't read enough about how the songs are actually composed and chosen for recording ... and as a result, I just figure they're Jagger/Richards songs and I take them as a I hear them.

Keith's an old snakeskin-suited rascal selling his usual snake oil: how many variations of "oh, the boys are really cookin' now, gotta get 'em in the studio, fresh off the road" have we heard over the past 18 years (which have resulted in a grand total of one record)?

He's got a product to promote, god bless 'im, and he'll say what he needs to say to get both the faithful and the rock critics fired up. Nothing wrong with that. Keith's a smart guy.

And, for what it's worth, I don't think The Stones should record an album. At least not in the traditional sense. We all know that full-length albums are dead and it's all about hit singles. Assuming that they have the musical ability to write hit singles any more (a BIG assumption), I would advise them to write and record a half-dozen or so killer tracks. Then, on their next three two-month tours (a la Zip Code), release one of those killer singles every month while they are on the road and play the shit out of it live. Get people excited about new product, build a buzz.

It's wishful thinking, of course, and of course they can't do it. They haven't had a hit in ages ... how could they possibly write six now? But it's what would be required in today's scene to get people truly interested in hearing new stuff.

Alternatively, they'll just come up with a slightly new wrinkle (hey, 50 years, hey, MT, hey, Sticky Fingers) and trot out the same set they've been playing since Hector was a pup. Why shouldn't they? People seem to dig it.

You picked up on a discussion that went on all day yesterday lol.
So for fear of repeating myself i will answer your questions as quickly as i can without going over the same ground.
Yes i think Keith's talent has been wasted in two respects. The drink seemed to take his creative juices away before he straightened up since 2007. Mick and Keith have not made an album together since 2005 so that is a waste of talent.
Keith had no involvement on plundered my soul another example of Micks dominance.
Many recent Stones album's don't have Keith's sound to them. The Stones sound.
My personal view is that Mick has dominated production of these albums and they sound like Mick solo albums to me, with keith guesting on guitar.
I say keith is the musician because the sound of the stones we all love is Keith's sound, Keiths riffs, hooks and rhythms.
In reference to what does Keith or Mick do its all been explained in detail in 'life' and various interviews.
Mick's strong points are lyrics and melody's, Keiths strong points are the sound he makes,riffs, the atmosphere, the strings, cords, the beat the structure of the rhythms. Like YOU DONT MOVE ME for instance.
They both seem to write to halves of the songs in recent history. But the best results are when they write together through every development of the song including end production. I feel that the finished article in recent decades has Mick all over it. They don't have the collaboration between then.
Thats all a have to say today.
your idea of them having a single out every so often is brilliant by the way

I understand your position but it seems to me that you are really selling Keith short. Is he that whipped by Jagger that he can't get his stuff on Stones records? Keith is the badass guitar gunslinger, no? Mick is not that intimidating, man. Hell, Charlie punched him in the nose! I don't buy that Keith is as helpless as your position implies. It's just as likely that we've heard all his best stuff and the band decided not to release the rest.

I think when the new album comes out September we will find out who is right.
Keith has a way of coming back when you least expect it.
Thanks for your thoughts on the subject. Its interesting, they are in a unique position now. Most people don't hold much hope for one last great album, but if they can settle their differences they could surprise us all..

Quote
SL818

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Mel Belli

Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Roll73

Quote
keefriffhards
When Keith's album comes out, i think people will see the talent that has been wasted in reference to Mick dominating recordings for many years.
Keith is the musician after all. To my mind most of the Stones greatest recordings were when Mick let Keith flow with his genius, with Mick adding lyrics and melody's..
That is the Glimmers at their best. But this control thing with Mick has been the main issue. For me anyway.

Some might argue that Mick is a musician too! Even if he never sang a note and only played harp.

next you'll be suggesting he actually wrote some songs.

Listening to some on here i thought Mick wrote all the songs, except for JJF, which Bill wrote

I'm not rating this qualitatively one way or the other, but the percentage of 100%-Mick songs spiked in the mid-'70s and really hasn't declined since.

We know Keith's songs are all him. Mick has nothing to do with those. There is at least that much.

So true...Mick only contributes the lyrics and melody on those ones.

you obviously know nothing about songwriting.

songwriting is two things! melody and lyrics. that´s it.

so according to you it´s 100% mick who writes the songs.

Thanks for your contribution...we'll go with your conclusion then.

Quote
mtaylor

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Roll73

Quote
keefriffhards
When Keith's album comes out, i think people will see the talent that has been wasted in reference to Mick dominating recordings for many years.
Keith is the musician after all. To my mind most of the Stones greatest recordings were when Mick let Keith flow with his genius, with Mick adding lyrics and melody's..
That is the Glimmers at their best. But this control thing with Mick has been the main issue. For me anyway.

Some might argue that Mick is a musician too! Even if he never sang a note and only played harp.

next you'll be suggesting he actually wrote some songs.

Brown Sugar is not a bad song, is it?

Next you'll be suggesting Mick had a hand in SFTD...you slay me man.

Quote
HMS

Quote
straycatuk

All I pray for is not another ABB, that record is just dreadful in every way imaginable and would have been better left on the shelf.
sc uk

What is dreadful about Rough Justice, Oh No Not You Again, Driving Too Fast, Rain Fall Down, It Won´t Take Long, Look What The Cat Dragged In, This Place Is Empty, Under The Radar?

Shorten it to 40 minutes and you have a very fresh rocking and sparkling Stones-album. I do not expect more than 40 minutes, even 35 will do. Using full CD-capacity only leads artists to include the horrible and mediocre. Not every bit of an idea must end on a record...

I stripped down ABB for my own use and I love the result.

Yes, and I think you could say the last 3 studio albums suffer the same fate.

Cut Voodoo, B2B and ABB down to 10 or 11 songs each and now you have some excellent albums.

I'd even go so far to say that if they'd taken the leftovers, and put a bit more work into those songs, you could even have had one or two more very good albums during this last 20 or so years.