For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
stone4everQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
bv
1. The material should be significant
A great rule, indeed. One cannot help but wish they might've applied it to their last 6 or 7 records.
I doubt they set out to make poor records, they are probably too close to the music they create to know how it will be received until it is received , and even then it takes time. Exile had negative reviews, it took a few years for it to get the acclaim it deserved.
I actually thought the last 6 albums were pretty good as it happens, its just that folks on IORR are hard to please
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
stone4everQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
bv
1. The material should be significant
A great rule, indeed. One cannot help but wish they might've applied it to their last 6 or 7 records.
I doubt they set out to make poor records, they are probably too close to the music they create to know how it will be received until it is received , and even then it takes time. Exile had negative reviews, it took a few years for it to get the acclaim it deserved.
I actually thought the last 6 albums were pretty good as it happens, its just that folks on IORR are hard to please
...and you're right...only horrible record they've ever really put out is dirty work. the last several have been 'pretty good' for the most part, but not classic.
Quote
gaigai
What is significant in 2017? Facebook, Messenger, new apps, self-driving car, etc. That is significant. A song - not anymore a significant and effective form of communication.
This is not about the Stones. No matter how brilliant the new material would be, it just can not be significant.
Times have changed.
(And I'm not happy about it.)
Quote
KeithNacho
But enjoyable........................every single RS album is enjoyable, although maybe no significant
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
KeithNacho
But enjoyable........................every single RS album is enjoyable, although maybe no significant
The one from 1986 is not enjoyable.
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
gaigai
What is significant in 2017? Facebook, Messenger, new apps, self-driving car, etc. That is significant. A song - not anymore a significant and effective form of communication.
This is not about the Stones. No matter how brilliant the new material would be, it just can not be significant.
Times have changed.
(And I'm not happy about it.)
Yeah, it's a complicated question. I agree that it's nearly impossible now for a piece of pop music to achieve the kind of cultural significance that was possible in the 60's or 70's. People are consuming music perhaps as much or more than ever before ... but what does it really mean? I'm not sure.
I think that there is 'significant' music being made by talented artists in the pop realm (Kendrick Lamar comes to mind, e.g.) ... but to the 'casual' consumer of music today do Kendrick's records really 'mean' anything, the way that, say, Hendrix' records meant something to listeners in the late 60's?
I just don't know.
Quote
latebloomerQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
gaigai
What is significant in 2017? Facebook, Messenger, new apps, self-driving car, etc. That is significant. A song - not anymore a significant and effective form of communication.
This is not about the Stones. No matter how brilliant the new material would be, it just can not be significant.
Times have changed.
(And I'm not happy about it.)
Yeah, it's a complicated question. I agree that it's nearly impossible now for a piece of pop music to achieve the kind of cultural significance that was possible in the 60's or 70's. People are consuming music perhaps as much or more than ever before ... but what does it really mean? I'm not sure.
I think that there is 'significant' music being made by talented artists in the pop realm (Kendrick Lamar comes to mind, e.g.) ... but to the 'casual' consumer of music today do Kendrick's records really 'mean' anything, the way that, say, Hendrix' records meant something to listeners in the late 60's?
I just don't know.
From the passion in his voice and the look on his face when my son plays me a favorite Kendrick Lamar song, I'd say yes LongBeach. The kids are alright and so are we.
Quote
heinz57
From what I've heard the new album is coming together well with some good songs and a couple of great ones
Quote
retired_dogQuote
heinz57
From what I've heard the new album is coming together well with some good songs and a couple of great ones
And that's hardly surprising because that description would fit for almost every Stones album.
Quote
gaigai
What is significant in 2017? Facebook, Messenger, new apps, self-driving car, etc. That is significant. A song - not anymore a significant and effective form of communication.
This is not about the Stones. No matter how brilliant the new material would be, it just can not be significant.
Times have changed.
(And I'm not happy about it.)
Quote
heinz57
From what I've heard the new album is coming together well with some good songs and a couple of great ones[[/b]/quote]
Only a couple?!!
Quote
heinz57
From what I've heard the new album is coming together well with some good songs and a couple of great ones
Quote
IanBillenQuote
gaigai
What is significant in 2017? Facebook, Messenger, new apps, self-driving car, etc. That is significant. A song - not anymore a significant and effective form of communication.
This is not about the Stones. No matter how brilliant the new material would be, it just can not be significant.
Times have changed.
(And I'm not happy about it.)
________________________________________
I will speak for Bv and say when he said 'significant' he meant not just another Stones album or another great Stones release. They want this one to be a good cut above some of their recent stuff / releases ..
They dont want just another Stones album that's great .. they want it to be a memorable one in their catalog .. Not meaning it has to be of the quality or magnitude of their big four or anything like that.. He simply meant not just another great sounding Stones album .. it has to carry weight.. it has to be good... Something to truly behold .. Something that matters. Something hard to deny ..
Correct me if I'm mistaken but this is how I think he meant 'significant'.
Ian
Quote
MaindefenderQuote
IanBillenQuote
gaigai
What is significant in 2017? Facebook, Messenger, new apps, self-driving car, etc. That is significant. A song - not anymore a significant and effective form of communication.
This is not about the Stones. No matter how brilliant the new material would be, it just can not be significant.
Times have changed.
(And I'm not happy about it.)
________________________________________
I will speak for Bv and say when he said 'significant' he meant not just another Stones album or another great Stones release. They want this one to be a good cut above some of their recent stuff / releases ..
They dont want just another Stones album that's great .. they want it to be a memorable one in their catalog .. Not meaning it has to be of the quality or magnitude of their big four or anything like that.. He simply meant not just another great sounding Stones album .. it has to carry weight.. it has to be good... Something to truly behold .. Something that matters. Something hard to deny ..
Correct me if I'm mistaken but this is how I think he meant 'significant'.
Ian
Quote
VoodooLounge13
I would think to check off all of that, they would need to record at least some of it with Bill and Mick T, no?
Also, I'm always amazed at the disdain sent toward Dirty Work. I've always loved the grit of the guitars on that album. For me, the one album that I think is truly their weakest is its predecessor, Undercover. I rarely if ever listen to that one.
Quote
maumau
in retrospective I must say that Steel Wheels is the lowest point for me. Not much in songwriting as soundwise. That is an album that tries hard to "fit in" certain '80ies trends. The result I dont like, and it spoils also the good songs for me.
In some ways Steel Wheels it can be seenas a "case study" of Mick's falling short of his ambitions, also his "open" attitude and ears towards new trends in music. This attitude, imo, would be good if only he be keen to take more risks in being "different". In the end instead he seems happy just to apply a coat of paint of some kind of "new sound" in music instead of a full and risky commitment. I might not like the result either if he does so, but I would appreciate more the man and his creativity. Some Bridges to Babylon is an axample either of that.
On the opposite side Keith is almost irritating in his conservatorism, but he's got the feel deep in what he does. And that you hear in his solo albums and makes the special.
I hope for once to hear a "deep feel" in Mick wandering outside the comfort zone. With Keith doing his job we could be in for a nice late treat.
Too many if though ;-)
Quote
HairballQuote
maumau
in retrospective I must say that Steel Wheels is the lowest point for me. Not much in songwriting as soundwise. That is an album that tries hard to "fit in" certain '80ies trends. The result I dont like, and it spoils also the good songs for me.
In some ways Steel Wheels it can be seenas a "case study" of Mick's falling short of his ambitions, also his "open" attitude and ears towards new trends in music. This attitude, imo, would be good if only he be keen to take more risks in being "different". In the end instead he seems happy just to apply a coat of paint of some kind of "new sound" in music instead of a full and risky commitment. I might not like the result either if he does so, but I would appreciate more the man and his creativity. Some Bridges to Babylon is an axample either of that.
On the opposite side Keith is almost irritating in his conservatorism, but he's got the feel deep in what he does. And that you hear in his solo albums and makes the special.
I hope for once to hear a "deep feel" in Mick wandering outside the comfort zone. With Keith doing his job we could be in for a nice late treat.
Too many if though ;-)
Steel Wheels was sterile and generic sounding...mechanical and fake...tinny and phony. The production has not aged well, and when you have inferior songs to begin with the whole thing is completely forgettable
Quote
VoodooLounge13
I would think to check off all of that, they would need to record at least some of it with Bill and Mick T, no?
Also, I'm always amazed at the disdain sent toward Dirty Work. I've always loved the grit of the guitars on that album. For me, the one album that I think is truly their weakest is its predecessor, Undercover. I rarely if ever listen to that one.
Quote
frankotero
Yes, Steel Wheels monitor mixes was superior in music quality imo. Maybe The Stones are taking this into consideration with a new album? Must be a lot of work just thinking about the approach besides just making new songs.
Quote
HairballQuote
frankotero
Yes, Steel Wheels monitor mixes was superior in music quality imo. Maybe The Stones are taking this into consideration with a new album? Must be a lot of work just thinking about the approach besides just making new songs.
They should use the most recent releases - Blue and Lonesome and Crosseyed Heart - as blueprints for the production.
Seems only natural they would, but then again some strange curveballs (as has been mentioned) could take it to a different oddball territory.
Quote
IanBillen
I will speak for Bv and say when he said 'significant' he meant not just another Stones album or another great Stones release. They want this one to be a good cut above some of their recent stuff / releases ..
They dont want just another Stones album that's great .. they want it to be a memorable one in their catalog .. Not meaning it has to be of the quality or magnitude of their big four or anything like that.. He simply meant not just another great sounding Stones album .. it has to carry weight.. it has to be good... Something to truly behold .. Something that matters. Something hard to deny ..
Correct me if I'm mistaken but this is how I think he meant 'significant'.
Ian