Tell Me :
Talk
Regarding your second paragraph Rocky, I think we're on the same page - or at least a similar page.
While you say most of Crosseyed Heart wouldn't suit Mick, I would say that Mick really wouldn't suit most of Crosseyed Heart. There's something about those songs that would lose something big without Keith singing them. I've said it since the beginning that having Mick stomp all over those just wouldn't sound right. Had they collaborated on those songs, then Mick would have been able to convey something, but seeing as they're solely Keith tunes, best to leave well enough alone. As for any connection between Crosseyed Heart and B&L, perhaps you misunderstood me as that's not what I said. Again, Crosseyed Heart is mostly originals with minimal invasive production (no synthesizers, bells, whistles, drum machines, etc.), while B&L is purely a covers album slapped together in a couple of days almost 'live'. So in that sense they do have certain commonality as far as production goes. Ultimately, I was saying they could/should take the best of both worlds from those two albums (new originals, production, etc.), and make a hybrid...it could end up being a near masterpiece. But again, they need good songs to begin with which might be asking too much at this point.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
From your lips to God's ear ...
As they used to say, and maybe some still do say...I can dig it!
edit:
ps - I still would love to hear Keith's genuine original version of One More Shot, which according to Steve Jordan is very different and far superior.
Perhaps he's a bit bias considering he's a "teammate" with Keith, but I would lean towards believing him given the mish mash it ended up turning out with Mick on vocals.
Stripped down to it's essence with Keith on vocals for a song he wrote solely on his own...hope it gets released some day.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-17 07:05 by Hairball.
Lol...Certainly not ACDC.
Me too. To me, OMS is one of the songs that don't work for Mick's vocal style. Keith should have sung it also on Grrr (or whatever ist was).
To my ears Mick sings One More Shot like he didn't bother to learn it properly, especially when he sang it live.
I think he spent all his time learning the lyrics to his song instead.
Fair enough. Why should he invest effort in a song that's ultimately forgettable to start with? Just to do Keith a favour? Imo One More Shot is Lowdown's little sister mixed with a mishmash of over-familiar stonesy riffs, and Lowdown, while nice, is not exactly a highpoint in the Stones recording career either.
There seems to be that notion of Keith coming up with a great song that is destroyed by Mick because of his disinterest. Isn't it possible that Mick's lacking enthusiasm has something to do with the quality of a song? I hear nothing in OMS that's promising - and Keith vocals would not change that impression.
And an impression not far from truth... and the criterion of a truth, of course, is nothing but my subjective opinion...
Seriously, I have similar thoughts - not only about the nature of Mick and Keith's different paths in the latter half of their career but about the suitability of Keith's solo material for Mick. Yeah, it could be that they all are - like Keith claimed some years ago - written for Mick (The Stones, that is), but how well they would fit for Jagger or how inspiring Jagger would find them to develop them further to suit to him (adding the Jagger-factor in song-writing) is another thing. If the evidence is "One More Shot" - the only CROSSEYED HEART tune that made it through - it doesn't sound too good. I also belong to the camp that would like to hear the 'original' Keith version and I expect the version sounding better. The problem with the Stones version, to start with, is that the lines are way too short and having way too few words (plus including phrases totally unfitting) for Jagger's mid/up-tempto rocker style. For Keith that fits. Keith's style, something he has mastered especially in his solo records, has that intentionally lazy way of uttering words and melody, which allows and asks a lot of 'space', including many dramatic pauses, and thereby emphasizing some token-like individual words or phrases. Take, for example, his key solo tune (me thinks) "Take it So Hard" - I could never imagine Jagger being able to deliver the vocals so 'dramatically' as Keith does there. Even better example of Keith's effective 'minimalism' would be "Yap Yap" - just think Jagger doing that... Had those tunes ended up being Stones tunes, I believe, like ROcky does, they had been very different sounding songs, having way, way more words and more coherent one-note-after-the other melodies with no 'dramatic' silent vocal moments within the lines or looong emphasized singular wordings in them. Probably sounding more like what "Rough Justice" does (Keith can be a great story-teller in his interviews, but what goes for writing songs, that seems to Jagger's area). But with "One More Shot" to me it sounds like MIck didn't bother to do almost anything to Keith's song (they recorded it in one day, right?), so it does sound like Jagger singing karaoke to Keith's already written song. The result sounds like one of the worst Jagger/Richards 'colloborations' ever me thinks.
I was talking here only of Keith's X-Winos-style rockers - I am with Rocky that basically that kind of material can be 'Jaggerized' enough to make a worthwhile Stones songs, if Jagger is for it, but it could be that in the case of ballads that's a mission impossible. Those songs have so deep Keith idiosyncratic feel on them that Jagger seemingly doesn't relate to them at all (it would be interesting, just out of curiosity, to hear that Jagger version of "Thief In The Night"). Was actually "Almost Hear You Sigh" - a TALK IS CHEAP left-over - the last Richards ballad, delivered by Jagger, they thought was good enough to be released? It looks like that after that Mick has written his own ballads and Keith his own to sing.
Keith, and especially his fans, love to talk about 'feelings' the music expresses. In the case of Keith that's very explicit, but however, the same can be said of Jagger as well; he needs to feel for the thing to make it convincing (and for that he needs to re-write the songs to fit to him). This is also to say that Jagger really isn't such a strong cold-blooded professional he is sometimes thought to be - when he really doesn't have all his heart in the music or doesn't relate to the feelings the song is about to express, there is some 'fakeness' easily to be heard (with Keith that probably happens very rarely, since he just doesn't seem to do anything he is not 100% behind). The trouble seems to be that the scale of feelings differs so much between those two guys (nowadays or for the last 35 years or so) that they only seem to meet in some juvenile standard Stones-rocker section. And even there, as "One MOre Shot" shows, the result can be sub-par if the other Glimmer is not really involved.
I guess this issue could better discussed in the recent great thread about their writing than here....
- Doxa
Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-18 00:54 by Doxa.
While i disagree with your opinion of OMS, i do hear what you're saying, but aren't Mick and Keith supposed to be batting for the same team ?
In theory, yes, but this is no sports team, this is a team of artists/musicians. With music -at least on this level -, there's feeling involved. When it's simply not there, sheer professionalism can hide that only to a certain degree. Maybe outside our little world of Stones connoisseurs people just don't even notice a lack of dedication for a certain tune at all.
I guess they do, or supposed to do, but if maestro Richards or his songs don't inspire Jagger whose fault is that? Who has lost the mojo? Always Jagger to blame? Retired Dog pointed out a refreshing perspective compared to the notion so much stressed here - and not the least by you, Riffie...
My take is that both of these dudes are rather old guys and way past their creative prime.. and as is typical with senior folks, people tend to start being rather stubborn and slaves to their own routines... Keith's songs most likely are to Jagger's ears something he has over-heard through the decades, most of them small variations of the same pattern, and what Mick is able to do with them is something he has learned to do by his very own routines... Which probably doesn't motivate him much at all. What goes for Keith's "dynamite riffs" I have long thought that he emptied his pockets of those in MAIN OFFENDER like making a final statement that 'yep, you want a riffmaster, there you have it. Now leave me alone'. What he offers there goes beyond my taste and stamina, but hey, I dig that non-compromised hardcore attitude! (and I also like the 'new Keith' in CROSSEYED HEART - the one going beyond that hard rocking riffmaster-thing and having matured up being this full-grown, easy-going rootsie singer/song-writer of which he had shown some signals over the years in Stones records. I just wish I could enjoy more of his music.)
I am afraid that the troubles of creativity started the day when the guys started thinking that 'hey, this song would suit for the Stones, and I'll keep this one for my solo doings'. The outcome of this thinking is that the Stones music is sort of fixed deal and by definition any 'new' material must be some kind of variation of their older doings, thereby not the one inspiring creativity and originality. Instead of challenging each other, kicking each other's butt, Mick and Keith meet in a compromise safe zone created by both of them in their long past, both trying one's best to not upset each other by too radical suggestions. For that reason I have found both Mick an Keith's solo albums more interesting and lasting works than what the Stones are being to able offer since, say, STEEL WHEELS. I guess DIRTY WORK, despite having many well-known faults in it and being far from any greatness, is still the last Stones album including some sort of non-compromised spark in it (BLUE & LONESOME doesn't count here).
- Doxa
While I agree with you here, I don't think that this is the entire truth. It's one ingredient, sure. Imo other factors that play a role are
a) the growing personal and even local separation between the two since the early 70's and development of increasingly different personal musical interests, more or less resulting in
b) Mick trying to integrate new musical trends into the Stones sound to keep them "current", even "significant" in contrast to Keith developing a more conservative approach and, last but not least
c) the fact that the Stones simply were not creatively challenged by the outside world anymore after 1989 - commercially they stayed on top of the business due to massive touring.
For the new studio album, they may feel creatively challenged for the first time since at least Steel Wheels, knowing it may well be their very last and therefore want to deliver something really worthwile.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-18 07:37 by retired_dog.
Maybe its just me but i hear OMS as just about made for Mick to sing, its classic Stones. I can hear in my head a dedicated passionate vocal from Mick, a gutsy full on thrusting attack, but sadly this is not the way Mick dealt with OMS. He sort of delicately respectfully pussy's around it like he is unsure he wants to tread on it. It serves up as a lame attempt. Maybe he's chops just can't get around a song like this these days, i get the feeling if Get Off Of My Cloud were released today it would sound lame.
So it's Mick's fault, eh? What I hear is a lame attempt at writing a song that sounds like classic Stones, but maybe that's exactly what bores Mick to hell
in this case because it's not a good song to start with and the Stones at the time of recording had enough "classic Stones" sounding songs under their belt already that are far better, Get Off Of My Cloud being just one of them. It's definitely not Mick's vocals that are bothering me, it is the simple fact that the song is just so cliche-ridden right from the start.
Come off it mate, ''a lame attempt at writing a Stones classic'' OMS is as good as its ever going to get at this stage. If Rock and Roll bores the hell out of Mick why has he spent the last 4 decades singing the same frigin 20 Rock and Roll songs live every night. You cant have it both ways dude, Mick either loves it or he fakes it for the money. So if he is going to fake not being bored by it every night on tour why would you blame Keith for offering it to him in the studio, because believe it or not man , the Stones play Rock And Roll not Rap or Hip Hop. OMS is R&R and if Mick is the lead singer of the Stones its his job sing it as such, otherwise give the song back to Keith to sing or do something else. One More Shot live was piss poor from Mick period.
Just thinking about it, a song written by Keith and Jordan, it never had a chance, Mick would of been bored with it if it was Gimme Shelter.
My mind goes back to a keith interview where he said he played Talk Is Cheap to Mick and all Mick could say was that the drums are too loud lol.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-18 12:27 by stone4ever.
...and in studio too.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-18 12:27 by KRiffhard.
Yes good point, i was thinking the same, these lyrics from Keith are asking Mick to give him one more chance, cos its all he's got, that's one reason i love this track, its similar to Mixed Emotions, its the olive branch.
Exactly, very well put! Couldn't agree more with every account. My observation was basically just the symptom of your points (a) and (b). Add there the most natural one: the aging factor; most of the people simply are not so creative as they were in their twenties or thirties. I think one reason to go with (c) is that Jagger kinda accepted, after his experiences with his solo albums, that the Stones more or less are, thanks to their potential big audience, a 'nostalgia act' musically, which is close to Keith's conservatism. This at least to my impression a bit killed some of his own ambition, as he started to see that the closer they are to the 'classical Stones' the better commercial chances they going to have. This goes with the fact that the albums started to be nothing but items to promote tours in where the big money was - not the other way round as before. If in the past making hit records was the means to survive, after 1989 or 1994 it started to be nothing but a PR move giving the impression that 'we are still a living and breathing band' hiding the cruel reality that the Stones essentially are nothing but a touring nostalgia act.
I think the Stones are a kind of Darwinian band by nature: for them the struggle for survival means for them being on the very top of their game - nothing 'lesser' is accepted for the 'greatest rock and roll band in the world'. They are damn competitive by nature, so the challenge by the outer world has a huge motivation factor for them and to their muse. After they realized that they don't need any longer musically reinvent themselves or do anything of the sort for being still damn succesful, but just enjoy their status of a certain 'elder statemen of rock', relying on nostalgia with no shame, that naturally affected to their creative juices. Their existence didn't any longer depand on their new, relevant records. They didn't any new BEGGARS BANQUET or SOME GIRLS to 'prove' anything.
Like you Retired Dog I hope that they feel themselves challanged now. I think the situation today is that the 'outer world', those outside the realm of some die-hard Stones fans, are expecting from them nothing. It is only we 'die-hards' who 'need' another Rolling Stones album, the rest of the world, including the so important 'casual' fans, couldn't care less. They could, if they like, to tour the world with their greatest hits show and no new record for another five years or so (the time for PR albums has passed a long time ago). The challenge for them today, I think, comes more like proving that there is a point releasing a new (and a final?) album - it must be the music itself which does the talking. With BLUE & LONESOME, a kind of side project deriving from the sessions for the new album (though I don't think it was such a contingent affair it has been promoted), they actually already succeeded in that, most likely better they could ever had imagined. Now they need to do it with their original material. I think it is a good sign that making the album has taken so long, and seemingly having involved some inner conflicts and problems and second-thoughts - for example, those of 'hitting a wall', Keith's bitter remarks of Mick's demos and of their differences in song-writing, Mick's and Ronnie's remarks about possibly re-recording all the stuff they have cut so far - for me that looks like the guys are serious about the album, and that the easiest compromises are to be avoided. If that amounts to a 'significant' album to be born, like our moderator with all his authority has predicted, only time will tell...
- Doxa
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-18 15:46 by Doxa.
It was called THE SIMIAN INCIDENT.
Doxa certainly pinned something down - "Oh I'll keep this one for the Stones".
Uh huh. Because...? EXACTLY. It's safe. It "sounds" like The Stones. Which ties into C in bold - Sad Sad Sad was the clang of 'We're still here, actually'; Mixed Emotions was 'See? We can do better than that excuse of a last album'; Almost Hear You Sigh was 'See? We've still got that tender side to us' and Break The Spell was 'See? We're still doing blues'. Etc. Although I wouldn't consider STEEL WHEELS' music as being creatively challenged by the outside world. In fact, if it weren't for their legacy at the time to get above the shambles of SHE'S THE BOSS/DIRTY WORK/PRIMITIVE COOL I'd say there was no challenge at all.
I musta missed this 1st time around. Riffie i love ya dude but this is tinfoil hat territory. Are you actually suggesting that Mick Jagger sang a 'Keith song' poorly so that a 'Mick song' would be the single?
Relations between them were at a very low point at this time. I don't think there was a chance in hell Keith's song ( a Richards Jordan collaboration ) was going to be the new single over Micks effort, no matter how well Mick sang it.
You should try those tinfoil hat's they really work
I agree. One might say "Terrifying" or "Contentintal Drift" or "Rock and a Hard Place" are "experimental" (in the sense of not typical or obvious) but still way too safe compared to experiments made by other bands at that time, or even experiments made by them previously ("Heaven", "See His Face").
I know you not gonna like this but if there's one merit to Dirty Work, is that at least they tried to do something different, they went out there and reached for something new. Admittedly, they fell flat on their face, but I wonder if that's not preferable to the long list of "Sad Sad Sad", "I Go Wild" and "Too Tight" by-the-numbers fillers we have gotten since.
Didn't happen in Europe
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: July 17, 2017 04:25
Quote
Rocky Dijon
It's not very likely the two tracks on Mick's new solo single are rejected Stones songs. Mick always says he writes some things that are suitable for the Stones and some things that are more suitable for solo recordings. On occasion, Keith will agree to be more experimental and open and some of the songs Mick would have held back do become Stones songs. While it does appear there are some experimental tracks on the next Stones album, chances are good neither "Gotta Get a Grip" (which is allegedly more dance-orientated) and "England Lost" (which is allegedly topical) were ever considered for the album. Both seem like the sort of songs Keith would prefer The Stones avoid tackling.
Most of CROSSEYED HEART would not suit Mick. The majority of the tracks could have made a Stones album as Keith's lead vocal spots, but they're just the sort of song that wouldn't really work well for Mick to sing. To be fair, I don't see much connection between BLUE AND LONESOME and CROSSEYED HEART either. The former is simply the blues album that has been discussed for 25 years. The difference is this time all concerned were up for it and they found their producer and label enthusiastic about the idea of it opening the door to launching what one must presume is the last act of their recording career.
Additionally, if the label dismissed "Gotta Get a Grip" and "England Lost" as uneven, they wouldn't be releasing them as a solo single with budgets for music videos attached. This is simply Mick solo and something Universal is behind because it can continue to build a buzz and audience support for the new Stones album next year. In that sense, it's just the same as CROSSEYED HEART or SUPERHEAVY. These are solo excursions that help the artists stay creative and potentially expand the market for the band's next effort.
Regarding your second paragraph Rocky, I think we're on the same page - or at least a similar page.
While you say most of Crosseyed Heart wouldn't suit Mick, I would say that Mick really wouldn't suit most of Crosseyed Heart. There's something about those songs that would lose something big without Keith singing them. I've said it since the beginning that having Mick stomp all over those just wouldn't sound right. Had they collaborated on those songs, then Mick would have been able to convey something, but seeing as they're solely Keith tunes, best to leave well enough alone. As for any connection between Crosseyed Heart and B&L, perhaps you misunderstood me as that's not what I said. Again, Crosseyed Heart is mostly originals with minimal invasive production (no synthesizers, bells, whistles, drum machines, etc.), while B&L is purely a covers album slapped together in a couple of days almost 'live'. So in that sense they do have certain commonality as far as production goes. Ultimately, I was saying they could/should take the best of both worlds from those two albums (new originals, production, etc.), and make a hybrid...it could end up being a near masterpiece. But again, they need good songs to begin with which might be asking too much at this point.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: July 17, 2017 05:27
I agree, Hairball, the thing is it's just my opinion. I don't have authority to say anything else. I just found your remarks interesting enough to build upon. Whether what I wrote is any good is up to the individual reading it.
Mick can do Winos-type rockers just fine. VOODOO LOUNGE started incorporating the Winos backing vocal style in a very simple way, but by BRIDGES TO BABYLON tracks like "Flip the Switch," "Low Down," and "Too Tight" sound very much like Mick Jagger and The X-Pensive Winos.
Why that wouldn't happen with CROSSEYED HEART is because most of the songs were closer to Keith's lead vocal cuts on BRIDGES TO BABYLON. I suppose you could alter "Trouble," "Nothing on Me," and "Something for Nothing" enough to have them work for Mick, but they would be very different songs and you'd likely come closer to "One More Shot." To me, those three rockers on CROSSEYED HEART came off far, far better.
There's a Mick vocal on "Thief in the Night" somewhere in the vaults that I just can't imagine working unless it had a very different backing track. Over the last thirty years or so, Mick and Keith evolved into two musicians who were no longer pursuing the same muse. I suspect Mick recognized that first and the result was his "hobby" (as he once called it) of a solo career. Keith had his long-stated desire of "growing the music up" which largely seemed to mean following Bob Dylan's lead or Tom Waits' spin on Captain Beefheart. That works fine for Keith as a cult figure, but doesn't justify multi-million dollar recording contracts or keep you performing in stadiums and arenas. Mick could still deliver the latter and so the fragile alliance was brokered. Keith's wisecracks about Peter Pan growing up have some truth, but how do you grow up Mick Jagger? STRIPPED? BLUE AND LONESOME? Maybe. Would either work as anything other than a one-off? Probably not. In the end, if the goal was commercial success, Mick likely led the band down the only road open to them.
Again, just my impression.
Mick can do Winos-type rockers just fine. VOODOO LOUNGE started incorporating the Winos backing vocal style in a very simple way, but by BRIDGES TO BABYLON tracks like "Flip the Switch," "Low Down," and "Too Tight" sound very much like Mick Jagger and The X-Pensive Winos.
Why that wouldn't happen with CROSSEYED HEART is because most of the songs were closer to Keith's lead vocal cuts on BRIDGES TO BABYLON. I suppose you could alter "Trouble," "Nothing on Me," and "Something for Nothing" enough to have them work for Mick, but they would be very different songs and you'd likely come closer to "One More Shot." To me, those three rockers on CROSSEYED HEART came off far, far better.
There's a Mick vocal on "Thief in the Night" somewhere in the vaults that I just can't imagine working unless it had a very different backing track. Over the last thirty years or so, Mick and Keith evolved into two musicians who were no longer pursuing the same muse. I suspect Mick recognized that first and the result was his "hobby" (as he once called it) of a solo career. Keith had his long-stated desire of "growing the music up" which largely seemed to mean following Bob Dylan's lead or Tom Waits' spin on Captain Beefheart. That works fine for Keith as a cult figure, but doesn't justify multi-million dollar recording contracts or keep you performing in stadiums and arenas. Mick could still deliver the latter and so the fragile alliance was brokered. Keith's wisecracks about Peter Pan growing up have some truth, but how do you grow up Mick Jagger? STRIPPED? BLUE AND LONESOME? Maybe. Would either work as anything other than a one-off? Probably not. In the end, if the goal was commercial success, Mick likely led the band down the only road open to them.
Again, just my impression.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
LongBeachArena72
()
Date: July 17, 2017 06:24
Quote
doitywoikQuote
LongBeachArena72
If there's a god in heaven this WILL be the cover.
Yeah, but drawn by Robert Crumb
From your lips to God's ear ...
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: July 17, 2017 06:58
Quote
Rocky Dijon
I agree, Hairball, the thing is it's just my opinion. I don't have authority to say anything else. I just found your remarks interesting enough to build upon. Whether what I wrote is any good is up to the individual reading it.
Mick can do Winos-type rockers just fine. VOODOO LOUNGE started incorporating the Winos backing vocal style in a very simple way, but by BRIDGES TO BABYLON tracks like "Flip the Switch," "Low Down," and "Too Tight" sound very much like Mick Jagger and The X-Pensive Winos.
Why that wouldn't happen with CROSSEYED HEART is because most of the songs were closer to Keith's lead vocal cuts on BRIDGES TO BABYLON. I suppose you could alter "Trouble," "Nothing on Me," and "Something for Nothing" enough to have them work for Mick, but they would be very different songs and you'd likely come closer to "One More Shot." To me, those three rockers on CROSSEYED HEART came off far, far better.
There's a Mick vocal on "Thief in the Night" somewhere in the vaults that I just can't imagine working unless it had a very different backing track. Over the last thirty years or so, Mick and Keith evolved into two musicians who were no longer pursuing the same muse. I suspect Mick recognized that first and the result was his "hobby" (as he once called it) of a solo career. Keith had his long-stated desire of "growing the music up" which largely seemed to mean following Bob Dylan's lead or Tom Waits' spin on Captain Beefheart. That works fine for Keith as a cult figure, but doesn't justify multi-million dollar recording contracts or keep you performing in stadiums and arenas. Mick could still deliver the latter and so the fragile alliance was brokered. Keith's wisecracks about Peter Pan growing up have some truth, but how do you grow up Mick Jagger? STRIPPED? BLUE AND LONESOME? Maybe. Would either work as anything other than a one-off? Probably not. In the end, if the goal was commercial success, Mick likely led the band down the only road open to them.
Again, just my impression.
As they used to say, and maybe some still do say...I can dig it!
edit:
ps - I still would love to hear Keith's genuine original version of One More Shot, which according to Steve Jordan is very different and far superior.
Perhaps he's a bit bias considering he's a "teammate" with Keith, but I would lean towards believing him given the mish mash it ended up turning out with Mick on vocals.
Stripped down to it's essence with Keith on vocals for a song he wrote solely on his own...hope it gets released some day.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-17 07:05 by Hairball.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
Maindefender
()
Date: July 17, 2017 12:14
Quote
peoplewitheyes
'soulful balls' - isn't that a Barry White album?
Lol...Certainly not ACDC.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
doitywoik
()
Date: July 17, 2017 15:27
Quote
Hairball
ps - I still would love to hear Keith's genuine original version of One More Shot
Me too. To me, OMS is one of the songs that don't work for Mick's vocal style. Keith should have sung it also on Grrr (or whatever ist was).
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
KRiffhard
()
Date: July 17, 2017 16:21
Quote
doitywoikQuote
Hairball
ps - I still would love to hear Keith's genuine original version of One More Shot
Me too. To me, OMS is one of the songs that don't work for Mick's vocal style. Keith should have sung it also on Grrr (or whatever ist was).
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: July 17, 2017 21:35
Quote
KRiffhardQuote
doitywoikQuote
Hairball
ps - I still would love to hear Keith's genuine original version of One More Shot
Me too. To me, OMS is one of the songs that don't work for Mick's vocal style. Keith should have sung it also on Grrr (or whatever ist was).
To my ears Mick sings One More Shot like he didn't bother to learn it properly, especially when he sang it live.
I think he spent all his time learning the lyrics to his song instead.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
Maindefender
()
Date: July 17, 2017 22:50
OMS was a snappy little live tune in 2012, Keith certainly was invested!!
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
retired_dog
()
Date: July 17, 2017 23:40
Quote
stone4ever
To my ears Mick sings One More Shot like he didn't bother to learn it properly, especially when he sang it live.
I think he spent all his time learning the lyrics to his song instead.
Fair enough. Why should he invest effort in a song that's ultimately forgettable to start with? Just to do Keith a favour? Imo One More Shot is Lowdown's little sister mixed with a mishmash of over-familiar stonesy riffs, and Lowdown, while nice, is not exactly a highpoint in the Stones recording career either.
There seems to be that notion of Keith coming up with a great song that is destroyed by Mick because of his disinterest. Isn't it possible that Mick's lacking enthusiasm has something to do with the quality of a song? I hear nothing in OMS that's promising - and Keith vocals would not change that impression.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: July 18, 2017 00:31
Quote
Rocky Dijon
I agree, Hairball, the thing is it's just my opinion. I don't have authority to say anything else. I just found your remarks interesting enough to build upon. Whether what I wrote is any good is up to the individual reading it.
Mick can do Winos-type rockers just fine. VOODOO LOUNGE started incorporating the Winos backing vocal style in a very simple way, but by BRIDGES TO BABYLON tracks like "Flip the Switch," "Low Down," and "Too Tight" sound very much like Mick Jagger and The X-Pensive Winos.
Why that wouldn't happen with CROSSEYED HEART is because most of the songs were closer to Keith's lead vocal cuts on BRIDGES TO BABYLON. I suppose you could alter "Trouble," "Nothing on Me," and "Something for Nothing" enough to have them work for Mick, but they would be very different songs and you'd likely come closer to "One More Shot." To me, those three rockers on CROSSEYED HEART came off far, far better.
There's a Mick vocal on "Thief in the Night" somewhere in the vaults that I just can't imagine working unless it had a very different backing track. Over the last thirty years or so, Mick and Keith evolved into two musicians who were no longer pursuing the same muse. I suspect Mick recognized that first and the result was his "hobby" (as he once called it) of a solo career. Keith had his long-stated desire of "growing the music up" which largely seemed to mean following Bob Dylan's lead or Tom Waits' spin on Captain Beefheart. That works fine for Keith as a cult figure, but doesn't justify multi-million dollar recording contracts or keep you performing in stadiums and arenas. Mick could still deliver the latter and so the fragile alliance was brokered. Keith's wisecracks about Peter Pan growing up have some truth, but how do you grow up Mick Jagger? STRIPPED? BLUE AND LONESOME? Maybe. Would either work as anything other than a one-off? Probably not. In the end, if the goal was commercial success, Mick likely led the band down the only road open to them.
Again, just my impression.
And an impression not far from truth... and the criterion of a truth, of course, is nothing but my subjective opinion...
Seriously, I have similar thoughts - not only about the nature of Mick and Keith's different paths in the latter half of their career but about the suitability of Keith's solo material for Mick. Yeah, it could be that they all are - like Keith claimed some years ago - written for Mick (The Stones, that is), but how well they would fit for Jagger or how inspiring Jagger would find them to develop them further to suit to him (adding the Jagger-factor in song-writing) is another thing. If the evidence is "One More Shot" - the only CROSSEYED HEART tune that made it through - it doesn't sound too good. I also belong to the camp that would like to hear the 'original' Keith version and I expect the version sounding better. The problem with the Stones version, to start with, is that the lines are way too short and having way too few words (plus including phrases totally unfitting) for Jagger's mid/up-tempto rocker style. For Keith that fits. Keith's style, something he has mastered especially in his solo records, has that intentionally lazy way of uttering words and melody, which allows and asks a lot of 'space', including many dramatic pauses, and thereby emphasizing some token-like individual words or phrases. Take, for example, his key solo tune (me thinks) "Take it So Hard" - I could never imagine Jagger being able to deliver the vocals so 'dramatically' as Keith does there. Even better example of Keith's effective 'minimalism' would be "Yap Yap" - just think Jagger doing that... Had those tunes ended up being Stones tunes, I believe, like ROcky does, they had been very different sounding songs, having way, way more words and more coherent one-note-after-the other melodies with no 'dramatic' silent vocal moments within the lines or looong emphasized singular wordings in them. Probably sounding more like what "Rough Justice" does (Keith can be a great story-teller in his interviews, but what goes for writing songs, that seems to Jagger's area). But with "One More Shot" to me it sounds like MIck didn't bother to do almost anything to Keith's song (they recorded it in one day, right?), so it does sound like Jagger singing karaoke to Keith's already written song. The result sounds like one of the worst Jagger/Richards 'colloborations' ever me thinks.
I was talking here only of Keith's X-Winos-style rockers - I am with Rocky that basically that kind of material can be 'Jaggerized' enough to make a worthwhile Stones songs, if Jagger is for it, but it could be that in the case of ballads that's a mission impossible. Those songs have so deep Keith idiosyncratic feel on them that Jagger seemingly doesn't relate to them at all (it would be interesting, just out of curiosity, to hear that Jagger version of "Thief In The Night"). Was actually "Almost Hear You Sigh" - a TALK IS CHEAP left-over - the last Richards ballad, delivered by Jagger, they thought was good enough to be released? It looks like that after that Mick has written his own ballads and Keith his own to sing.
Keith, and especially his fans, love to talk about 'feelings' the music expresses. In the case of Keith that's very explicit, but however, the same can be said of Jagger as well; he needs to feel for the thing to make it convincing (and for that he needs to re-write the songs to fit to him). This is also to say that Jagger really isn't such a strong cold-blooded professional he is sometimes thought to be - when he really doesn't have all his heart in the music or doesn't relate to the feelings the song is about to express, there is some 'fakeness' easily to be heard (with Keith that probably happens very rarely, since he just doesn't seem to do anything he is not 100% behind). The trouble seems to be that the scale of feelings differs so much between those two guys (nowadays or for the last 35 years or so) that they only seem to meet in some juvenile standard Stones-rocker section. And even there, as "One MOre Shot" shows, the result can be sub-par if the other Glimmer is not really involved.
I guess this issue could better discussed in the recent great thread about their writing than here....
- Doxa
Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-18 00:54 by Doxa.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: July 18, 2017 02:08
Quote
retired_dogQuote
stone4ever
To my ears Mick sings One More Shot like he didn't bother to learn it properly, especially when he sang it live.
I think he spent all his time learning the lyrics to his song instead.
Fair enough. Why should he invest effort in a song that's ultimately forgettable to start with? Just to do Keith a favour? Imo One More Shot is Lowdown's little sister mixed with a mishmash of over-familiar stonesy riffs, and Lowdown, while nice, is not exactly a highpoint in the Stones recording career either.
There seems to be that notion of Keith coming up with a great song that is destroyed by Mick because of his disinterest. Isn't it possible that Mick's lacking enthusiasm has something to do with the quality of a song? I hear nothing in OMS that's promising - and Keith vocals would not change that impression.
While i disagree with your opinion of OMS, i do hear what you're saying, but aren't Mick and Keith supposed to be batting for the same team ?
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
retired_dog
()
Date: July 18, 2017 03:04
Quote
stone4everQuote
retired_dogQuote
stone4ever
To my ears Mick sings One More Shot like he didn't bother to learn it properly, especially when he sang it live.
I think he spent all his time learning the lyrics to his song instead.
Fair enough. Why should he invest effort in a song that's ultimately forgettable to start with? Just to do Keith a favour? Imo One More Shot is Lowdown's little sister mixed with a mishmash of over-familiar stonesy riffs, and Lowdown, while nice, is not exactly a highpoint in the Stones recording career either.
There seems to be that notion of Keith coming up with a great song that is destroyed by Mick because of his disinterest. Isn't it possible that Mick's lacking enthusiasm has something to do with the quality of a song? I hear nothing in OMS that's promising - and Keith vocals would not change that impression.
While i disagree with your opinion of OMS, i do hear what you're saying, but aren't Mick and Keith supposed to be batting for the same team ?
In theory, yes, but this is no sports team, this is a team of artists/musicians. With music -at least on this level -, there's feeling involved. When it's simply not there, sheer professionalism can hide that only to a certain degree. Maybe outside our little world of Stones connoisseurs people just don't even notice a lack of dedication for a certain tune at all.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: July 18, 2017 03:30
Quote
stone4everQuote
retired_dogQuote
stone4ever
To my ears Mick sings One More Shot like he didn't bother to learn it properly, especially when he sang it live.
I think he spent all his time learning the lyrics to his song instead.
Fair enough. Why should he invest effort in a song that's ultimately forgettable to start with? Just to do Keith a favour? Imo One More Shot is Lowdown's little sister mixed with a mishmash of over-familiar stonesy riffs, and Lowdown, while nice, is not exactly a highpoint in the Stones recording career either.
There seems to be that notion of Keith coming up with a great song that is destroyed by Mick because of his disinterest. Isn't it possible that Mick's lacking enthusiasm has something to do with the quality of a song? I hear nothing in OMS that's promising - and Keith vocals would not change that impression.
While i disagree with your opinion of OMS, i do hear what you're saying, but aren't Mick and Keith supposed to be batting for the same team ?
I guess they do, or supposed to do, but if maestro Richards or his songs don't inspire Jagger whose fault is that? Who has lost the mojo? Always Jagger to blame? Retired Dog pointed out a refreshing perspective compared to the notion so much stressed here - and not the least by you, Riffie...
My take is that both of these dudes are rather old guys and way past their creative prime.. and as is typical with senior folks, people tend to start being rather stubborn and slaves to their own routines... Keith's songs most likely are to Jagger's ears something he has over-heard through the decades, most of them small variations of the same pattern, and what Mick is able to do with them is something he has learned to do by his very own routines... Which probably doesn't motivate him much at all. What goes for Keith's "dynamite riffs" I have long thought that he emptied his pockets of those in MAIN OFFENDER like making a final statement that 'yep, you want a riffmaster, there you have it. Now leave me alone'. What he offers there goes beyond my taste and stamina, but hey, I dig that non-compromised hardcore attitude! (and I also like the 'new Keith' in CROSSEYED HEART - the one going beyond that hard rocking riffmaster-thing and having matured up being this full-grown, easy-going rootsie singer/song-writer of which he had shown some signals over the years in Stones records. I just wish I could enjoy more of his music.)
I am afraid that the troubles of creativity started the day when the guys started thinking that 'hey, this song would suit for the Stones, and I'll keep this one for my solo doings'. The outcome of this thinking is that the Stones music is sort of fixed deal and by definition any 'new' material must be some kind of variation of their older doings, thereby not the one inspiring creativity and originality. Instead of challenging each other, kicking each other's butt, Mick and Keith meet in a compromise safe zone created by both of them in their long past, both trying one's best to not upset each other by too radical suggestions. For that reason I have found both Mick an Keith's solo albums more interesting and lasting works than what the Stones are being to able offer since, say, STEEL WHEELS. I guess DIRTY WORK, despite having many well-known faults in it and being far from any greatness, is still the last Stones album including some sort of non-compromised spark in it (BLUE & LONESOME doesn't count here).
- Doxa
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
retired_dog
()
Date: July 18, 2017 07:34
Quote
Doxa
I am afraid that the troubles of creativity started the day when the guys started thinking that 'hey, this song would suit for the Stones, and I'll keep this one for my solo doings'. The outcome of this thinking is that the Stones music is sort of fixed deal and by definition any 'new' material must be some kind of variation of their older doings, thereby not the one inspiring creativity and originality. Instead of challenging each other, kicking each other's butt, Mick and Keith meet in a compromise safe zone created by both of them in their long past, both trying one's best to not upset each other by too radical suggestions.
- Doxa
While I agree with you here, I don't think that this is the entire truth. It's one ingredient, sure. Imo other factors that play a role are
a) the growing personal and even local separation between the two since the early 70's and development of increasingly different personal musical interests, more or less resulting in
b) Mick trying to integrate new musical trends into the Stones sound to keep them "current", even "significant" in contrast to Keith developing a more conservative approach and, last but not least
c) the fact that the Stones simply were not creatively challenged by the outside world anymore after 1989 - commercially they stayed on top of the business due to massive touring.
For the new studio album, they may feel creatively challenged for the first time since at least Steel Wheels, knowing it may well be their very last and therefore want to deliver something really worthwile.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-18 07:37 by retired_dog.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: July 18, 2017 09:33
Quote
retired_dogQuote
stone4everQuote
retired_dogQuote
stone4ever
To my ears Mick sings One More Shot like he didn't bother to learn it properly, especially when he sang it live.
I think he spent all his time learning the lyrics to his song instead.
Fair enough. Why should he invest effort in a song that's ultimately forgettable to start with? Just to do Keith a favour? Imo One More Shot is Lowdown's little sister mixed with a mishmash of over-familiar stonesy riffs, and Lowdown, while nice, is not exactly a highpoint in the Stones recording career either.
There seems to be that notion of Keith coming up with a great song that is destroyed by Mick because of his disinterest. Isn't it possible that Mick's lacking enthusiasm has something to do with the quality of a song? I hear nothing in OMS that's promising - and Keith vocals would not change that impression.
While i disagree with your opinion of OMS, i do hear what you're saying, but aren't Mick and Keith supposed to be batting for the same team ?
In theory, yes, but this is no sports team, this is a team of artists/musicians. With music -at least on this level -, there's feeling involved. When it's simply not there, sheer professionalism can hide that only to a certain degree. Maybe outside our little world of Stones connoisseurs people just don't even notice a lack of dedication for a certain tune at all.
Maybe its just me but i hear OMS as just about made for Mick to sing, its classic Stones. I can hear in my head a dedicated passionate vocal from Mick, a gutsy full on thrusting attack, but sadly this is not the way Mick dealt with OMS. He sort of delicately respectfully pussy's around it like he is unsure he wants to tread on it. It serves up as a lame attempt. Maybe he's chops just can't get around a song like this these days, i get the feeling if Get Off Of My Cloud were released today it would sound lame.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
retired_dog
()
Date: July 18, 2017 10:07
Quote
stone4everQuote
retired_dogQuote
stone4everQuote
retired_dogQuote
stone4ever
To my ears Mick sings One More Shot like he didn't bother to learn it properly, especially when he sang it live.
I think he spent all his time learning the lyrics to his song instead.
Fair enough. Why should he invest effort in a song that's ultimately forgettable to start with? Just to do Keith a favour? Imo One More Shot is Lowdown's little sister mixed with a mishmash of over-familiar stonesy riffs, and Lowdown, while nice, is not exactly a highpoint in the Stones recording career either.
There seems to be that notion of Keith coming up with a great song that is destroyed by Mick because of his disinterest. Isn't it possible that Mick's lacking enthusiasm has something to do with the quality of a song? I hear nothing in OMS that's promising - and Keith vocals would not change that impression.
While i disagree with your opinion of OMS, i do hear what you're saying, but aren't Mick and Keith supposed to be batting for the same team ?
In theory, yes, but this is no sports team, this is a team of artists/musicians. With music -at least on this level -, there's feeling involved. When it's simply not there, sheer professionalism can hide that only to a certain degree. Maybe outside our little world of Stones connoisseurs people just don't even notice a lack of dedication for a certain tune at all.
Maybe its just me but i hear OMS as just about made for Mick to sing, its classic Stones. I can hear in my head a dedicated passionate vocal from Mick, a gutsy full on thrusting attack, but sadly this is not the way Mick dealt with OMS. He sort of delicately respectfully pussy's around it like he is unsure he wants to tread on it. It serves up as a lame attempt. Maybe he's chops just can't get around a song like this these days, i get the feeling if Get Off Of My Cloud were released today it would sound lame.
So it's Mick's fault, eh? What I hear is a lame attempt at writing a song that sounds like classic Stones, but maybe that's exactly what bores Mick to hell
in this case because it's not a good song to start with and the Stones at the time of recording had enough "classic Stones" sounding songs under their belt already that are far better, Get Off Of My Cloud being just one of them. It's definitely not Mick's vocals that are bothering me, it is the simple fact that the song is just so cliche-ridden right from the start.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: July 18, 2017 12:19
Quote
retired_dogQuote
stone4everQuote
retired_dogQuote
stone4everQuote
retired_dogQuote
stone4ever
To my ears Mick sings One More Shot like he didn't bother to learn it properly, especially when he sang it live.
I think he spent all his time learning the lyrics to his song instead.
Fair enough. Why should he invest effort in a song that's ultimately forgettable to start with? Just to do Keith a favour? Imo One More Shot is Lowdown's little sister mixed with a mishmash of over-familiar stonesy riffs, and Lowdown, while nice, is not exactly a highpoint in the Stones recording career either.
There seems to be that notion of Keith coming up with a great song that is destroyed by Mick because of his disinterest. Isn't it possible that Mick's lacking enthusiasm has something to do with the quality of a song? I hear nothing in OMS that's promising - and Keith vocals would not change that impression.
While i disagree with your opinion of OMS, i do hear what you're saying, but aren't Mick and Keith supposed to be batting for the same team ?
In theory, yes, but this is no sports team, this is a team of artists/musicians. With music -at least on this level -, there's feeling involved. When it's simply not there, sheer professionalism can hide that only to a certain degree. Maybe outside our little world of Stones connoisseurs people just don't even notice a lack of dedication for a certain tune at all.
Maybe its just me but i hear OMS as just about made for Mick to sing, its classic Stones. I can hear in my head a dedicated passionate vocal from Mick, a gutsy full on thrusting attack, but sadly this is not the way Mick dealt with OMS. He sort of delicately respectfully pussy's around it like he is unsure he wants to tread on it. It serves up as a lame attempt. Maybe he's chops just can't get around a song like this these days, i get the feeling if Get Off Of My Cloud were released today it would sound lame.
So it's Mick's fault, eh? What I hear is a lame attempt at writing a song that sounds like classic Stones, but maybe that's exactly what bores Mick to hell
in this case because it's not a good song to start with and the Stones at the time of recording had enough "classic Stones" sounding songs under their belt already that are far better, Get Off Of My Cloud being just one of them. It's definitely not Mick's vocals that are bothering me, it is the simple fact that the song is just so cliche-ridden right from the start.
Come off it mate, ''a lame attempt at writing a Stones classic'' OMS is as good as its ever going to get at this stage. If Rock and Roll bores the hell out of Mick why has he spent the last 4 decades singing the same frigin 20 Rock and Roll songs live every night. You cant have it both ways dude, Mick either loves it or he fakes it for the money. So if he is going to fake not being bored by it every night on tour why would you blame Keith for offering it to him in the studio, because believe it or not man , the Stones play Rock And Roll not Rap or Hip Hop. OMS is R&R and if Mick is the lead singer of the Stones its his job sing it as such, otherwise give the song back to Keith to sing or do something else. One More Shot live was piss poor from Mick period.
Just thinking about it, a song written by Keith and Jordan, it never had a chance, Mick would of been bored with it if it was Gimme Shelter.
My mind goes back to a keith interview where he said he played Talk Is Cheap to Mick and all Mick could say was that the drums are too loud lol.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-18 12:27 by stone4ever.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
KRiffhard
()
Date: July 18, 2017 12:25
Quote
stone4everQuote
retired_dogQuote
stone4everQuote
retired_dogQuote
stone4everQuote
retired_dogQuote
stone4ever
To my ears Mick sings One More Shot like he didn't bother to learn it properly, especially when he sang it live.
I think he spent all his time learning the lyrics to his song instead.
Fair enough. Why should he invest effort in a song that's ultimately forgettable to start with? Just to do Keith a favour? Imo One More Shot is Lowdown's little sister mixed with a mishmash of over-familiar stonesy riffs, and Lowdown, while nice, is not exactly a highpoint in the Stones recording career either.
There seems to be that notion of Keith coming up with a great song that is destroyed by Mick because of his disinterest. Isn't it possible that Mick's lacking enthusiasm has something to do with the quality of a song? I hear nothing in OMS that's promising - and Keith vocals would not change that impression.
While i disagree with your opinion of OMS, i do hear what you're saying, but aren't Mick and Keith supposed to be batting for the same team ?
In theory, yes, but this is no sports team, this is a team of artists/musicians. With music -at least on this level -, there's feeling involved. When it's simply not there, sheer professionalism can hide that only to a certain degree. Maybe outside our little world of Stones connoisseurs people just don't even notice a lack of dedication for a certain tune at all.
Maybe its just me but i hear OMS as just about made for Mick to sing, its classic Stones. I can hear in my head a dedicated passionate vocal from Mick, a gutsy full on thrusting attack, but sadly this is not the way Mick dealt with OMS. He sort of delicately respectfully pussy's around it like he is unsure he wants to tread on it. It serves up as a lame attempt. Maybe he's chops just can't get around a song like this these days, i get the feeling if Get Off Of My Cloud were released today it would sound lame.
So it's Mick's fault, eh? What I hear is a lame attempt at writing a song that sounds like classic Stones, but maybe that's exactly what bores Mick to hell
in this case because it's not a good song to start with and the Stones at the time of recording had enough "classic Stones" sounding songs under their belt already that are far better, Get Off Of My Cloud being just one of them. It's definitely not Mick's vocals that are bothering me, it is the simple fact that the song is just so cliche-ridden right from the start.
Come off it mate, ''a lame attempt at writing a Stones classic''OMS is as good as its ever going to get at this stage. If Rock and Roll bores the hell out of Mick why has he spent the last 4 decades singing the same frigin 20 Rock and Roll songs live every night. You cant have it both ways dude, Mick either loves it or he fakes it for the money. So if he is going to fake not being bored by it every night on tour why would you blame Keith for offering it to him in the studio, because believe it or not man , the Stones play Rock And Roll not Rap or Hip Hop. OMS is R&R and if Mick is the lead singer of the Stones its his job sing it as such, otherwise give the song back to Keith to sing or do something else. One More Shot live was piss poor from Mick period.
Just thinking about it, a song written by Keith and Jordan, it never had a chance, Mick would of been bored with it if it was Gimme Shelter.
...and in studio too.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-18 12:27 by KRiffhard.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: July 18, 2017 12:45
Going back over these two songs OMS and DAG, these were two new tracks to be added to the Hits album, well Mick new that either his or Keith's song was going to be the new single, is it surprising that Mick made a piss poor job of it.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
EJM
()
Date: July 18, 2017 14:57
They were hardly on speaking terms at that point after THE BOOK ( remember the onstage body language in 2012/13 I can't believe they could have workd together " for the same team" on songs. OMS was surely Keith's best effort at a reaching out to Mick to put it behind him and play together again. Keith was also very rusty and Mick probably did not think he could carry a new song on tour.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: July 18, 2017 15:15
Quote
EJM
They were hardly on speaking terms at that point after THE BOOK ( remember the onstage body language in 2012/13 I can't believe they could have workd together " for the same team" on songs. OMS was surely Keith's best effort at a reaching out to Mick to put it behind him and play together again. Keith was also very rusty and Mick probably did not think he could carry a new song on tour.
Yes good point, i was thinking the same, these lyrics from Keith are asking Mick to give him one more chance, cos its all he's got, that's one reason i love this track, its similar to Mixed Emotions, its the olive branch.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: July 18, 2017 15:31
Quote
retired_dogQuote
Doxa
I am afraid that the troubles of creativity started the day when the guys started thinking that 'hey, this song would suit for the Stones, and I'll keep this one for my solo doings'. The outcome of this thinking is that the Stones music is sort of fixed deal and by definition any 'new' material must be some kind of variation of their older doings, thereby not the one inspiring creativity and originality. Instead of challenging each other, kicking each other's butt, Mick and Keith meet in a compromise safe zone created by both of them in their long past, both trying one's best to not upset each other by too radical suggestions.
- Doxa
While I agree with you here, I don't think that this is the entire truth. It's one ingredient, sure. Imo other factors that play a role are
a) the growing personal and even local separation between the two since the early 70's and development of increasingly different personal musical interests, more or less resulting in
b) Mick trying to integrate new musical trends into the Stones sound to keep them "current", even "significant" in contrast to Keith developing a more conservative approach and, last but not least
c) the fact that the Stones simply were not creatively challenged by the outside world anymore after 1989 - commercially they stayed on top of the business due to massive touring.
For the new studio album, they may feel creatively challenged for the first time since at least Steel Wheels, knowing it may well be their very last and therefore want to deliver something really worthwile.
Exactly, very well put! Couldn't agree more with every account. My observation was basically just the symptom of your points (a) and (b). Add there the most natural one: the aging factor; most of the people simply are not so creative as they were in their twenties or thirties. I think one reason to go with (c) is that Jagger kinda accepted, after his experiences with his solo albums, that the Stones more or less are, thanks to their potential big audience, a 'nostalgia act' musically, which is close to Keith's conservatism. This at least to my impression a bit killed some of his own ambition, as he started to see that the closer they are to the 'classical Stones' the better commercial chances they going to have. This goes with the fact that the albums started to be nothing but items to promote tours in where the big money was - not the other way round as before. If in the past making hit records was the means to survive, after 1989 or 1994 it started to be nothing but a PR move giving the impression that 'we are still a living and breathing band' hiding the cruel reality that the Stones essentially are nothing but a touring nostalgia act.
I think the Stones are a kind of Darwinian band by nature: for them the struggle for survival means for them being on the very top of their game - nothing 'lesser' is accepted for the 'greatest rock and roll band in the world'. They are damn competitive by nature, so the challenge by the outer world has a huge motivation factor for them and to their muse. After they realized that they don't need any longer musically reinvent themselves or do anything of the sort for being still damn succesful, but just enjoy their status of a certain 'elder statemen of rock', relying on nostalgia with no shame, that naturally affected to their creative juices. Their existence didn't any longer depand on their new, relevant records. They didn't any new BEGGARS BANQUET or SOME GIRLS to 'prove' anything.
Like you Retired Dog I hope that they feel themselves challanged now. I think the situation today is that the 'outer world', those outside the realm of some die-hard Stones fans, are expecting from them nothing. It is only we 'die-hards' who 'need' another Rolling Stones album, the rest of the world, including the so important 'casual' fans, couldn't care less. They could, if they like, to tour the world with their greatest hits show and no new record for another five years or so (the time for PR albums has passed a long time ago). The challenge for them today, I think, comes more like proving that there is a point releasing a new (and a final?) album - it must be the music itself which does the talking. With BLUE & LONESOME, a kind of side project deriving from the sessions for the new album (though I don't think it was such a contingent affair it has been promoted), they actually already succeeded in that, most likely better they could ever had imagined. Now they need to do it with their original material. I think it is a good sign that making the album has taken so long, and seemingly having involved some inner conflicts and problems and second-thoughts - for example, those of 'hitting a wall', Keith's bitter remarks of Mick's demos and of their differences in song-writing, Mick's and Ronnie's remarks about possibly re-recording all the stuff they have cut so far - for me that looks like the guys are serious about the album, and that the easiest compromises are to be avoided. If that amounts to a 'significant' album to be born, like our moderator with all his authority has predicted, only time will tell...
- Doxa
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-18 15:46 by Doxa.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: July 19, 2017 05:53
Quote
doitywoikQuote
Hairball
ps - I still would love to hear Keith's genuine original version of One More Shot
Me too. To me, OMS is one of the songs that don't work for Mick's vocal style. Keith should have sung it also on Grrr (or whatever ist was).
It was called THE SIMIAN INCIDENT.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: July 19, 2017 06:16
Quote
retired_dogQuote
Doxa
I am afraid that the troubles of creativity started the day when the guys started thinking that 'hey, this song would suit for the Stones, and I'll keep this one for my solo doings'. The outcome of this thinking is that the Stones music is sort of fixed deal and by definition any 'new' material must be some kind of variation of their older doings, thereby not the one inspiring creativity and originality. Instead of challenging each other, kicking each other's butt, Mick and Keith meet in a compromise safe zone created by both of them in their long past, both trying one's best to not upset each other by too radical suggestions.
While I agree with you here, I don't think that this is the entire truth. It's one ingredient, sure. Imo other factors that play a role are
a) the growing personal and even local separation between the two since the early 70's and development of increasingly different personal musical interests, more or less resulting in
b) Mick trying to integrate new musical trends into the Stones sound to keep them "current", even "significant" in contrast to Keith developing a more conservative approach and, last but not least
c) the fact that the Stones simply were not creatively challenged by the outside world anymore after 1989 - commercially they stayed on top of the business due to massive touring.
Doxa certainly pinned something down - "Oh I'll keep this one for the Stones".
Uh huh. Because...? EXACTLY. It's safe. It "sounds" like The Stones. Which ties into C in bold - Sad Sad Sad was the clang of 'We're still here, actually'; Mixed Emotions was 'See? We can do better than that excuse of a last album'; Almost Hear You Sigh was 'See? We've still got that tender side to us' and Break The Spell was 'See? We're still doing blues'. Etc. Although I wouldn't consider STEEL WHEELS' music as being creatively challenged by the outside world. In fact, if it weren't for their legacy at the time to get above the shambles of SHE'S THE BOSS/DIRTY WORK/PRIMITIVE COOL I'd say there was no challenge at all.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
LongBeachArena72
()
Date: July 19, 2017 07:35
Quote
stone4ever
Going back over these two songs OMS and DAG, these were two new tracks to be added to the Hits album, well Mick new that either his or Keith's song was going to be the new single, is it surprising that Mick made a piss poor job of it.
I musta missed this 1st time around. Riffie i love ya dude but this is tinfoil hat territory. Are you actually suggesting that Mick Jagger sang a 'Keith song' poorly so that a 'Mick song' would be the single?
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: July 19, 2017 09:29
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
stone4ever
Going back over these two songs OMS and DAG, these were two new tracks to be added to the Hits album, well Mick new that either his or Keith's song was going to be the new single, is it surprising that Mick made a piss poor job of it.
I musta missed this 1st time around. Riffie i love ya dude but this is tinfoil hat territory. Are you actually suggesting that Mick Jagger sang a 'Keith song' poorly so that a 'Mick song' would be the single?
Relations between them were at a very low point at this time. I don't think there was a chance in hell Keith's song ( a Richards Jordan collaboration ) was going to be the new single over Micks effort, no matter how well Mick sang it.
You should try those tinfoil hat's they really work
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: July 19, 2017 10:52
Regarding Keith's song One More Shot, it was a bit confusing when played live. Fans thought, with that opening guitar riff intro, that they were about to get Street Fighting Man. They cheered wildly, even screamed as the song started... then they were... huh? They listened patiently, but then applauded in lukewarm fashion when it was over -- just as they did after Doom and Gloom.
At least with D&G they knew what they were getting, something new. With OMS, metaphorically, they thought they'd be getting a filet mignon steak dinner -- what they got instead was leftover ground beef thrown together from various previous menus.
Maybe this helps clear that up a bit.
What they'll be getting from Mick's new recipe is processed fast food at best.
If those lyrics are correct, throwing in 2010s news headlines and such, then, like McDonald's hamburgers, it'll go stale even before the delivery process is complete -- because fast food... just isn't deliverable, not even with all the artificial ingredients and preservatives thrown in.
At least with D&G they knew what they were getting, something new. With OMS, metaphorically, they thought they'd be getting a filet mignon steak dinner -- what they got instead was leftover ground beef thrown together from various previous menus.
Maybe this helps clear that up a bit.
What they'll be getting from Mick's new recipe is processed fast food at best.
If those lyrics are correct, throwing in 2010s news headlines and such, then, like McDonald's hamburgers, it'll go stale even before the delivery process is complete -- because fast food... just isn't deliverable, not even with all the artificial ingredients and preservatives thrown in.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
matxil
()
Date: July 19, 2017 10:59
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
retired_dogQuote
Doxa
I am afraid that the troubles of creativity started the day when the guys started thinking that 'hey, this song would suit for the Stones, and I'll keep this one for my solo doings'. The outcome of this thinking is that the Stones music is sort of fixed deal and by definition any 'new' material must be some kind of variation of their older doings, thereby not the one inspiring creativity and originality. Instead of challenging each other, kicking each other's butt, Mick and Keith meet in a compromise safe zone created by both of them in their long past, both trying one's best to not upset each other by too radical suggestions.
While I agree with you here, I don't think that this is the entire truth. It's one ingredient, sure. Imo other factors that play a role are
a) the growing personal and even local separation between the two since the early 70's and development of increasingly different personal musical interests, more or less resulting in
b) Mick trying to integrate new musical trends into the Stones sound to keep them "current", even "significant" in contrast to Keith developing a more conservative approach and, last but not least
c) the fact that the Stones simply were not creatively challenged by the outside world anymore after 1989 - commercially they stayed on top of the business due to massive touring.
Doxa certainly pinned something down - "Oh I'll keep this one for the Stones".
Uh huh. Because...? EXACTLY. It's safe. It "sounds" like The Stones. Which ties into C in bold - Sad Sad Sad was the clang of 'We're still here, actually'; Mixed Emotions was 'See? We can do better than that excuse of a last album'; Almost Hear You Sigh was 'See? We've still got that tender side to us' and Break The Spell was 'See? We're still doing blues'. Etc. Although I wouldn't consider STEEL WHEELS' music as being creatively challenged by the outside world. In fact, if it weren't for their legacy at the time to get above the shambles of SHE'S THE BOSS/DIRTY WORK/PRIMITIVE COOL I'd say there was no challenge at all.
I agree. One might say "Terrifying" or "Contentintal Drift" or "Rock and a Hard Place" are "experimental" (in the sense of not typical or obvious) but still way too safe compared to experiments made by other bands at that time, or even experiments made by them previously ("Heaven", "See His Face").
I know you not gonna like this but if there's one merit to Dirty Work, is that at least they tried to do something different, they went out there and reached for something new. Admittedly, they fell flat on their face, but I wonder if that's not preferable to the long list of "Sad Sad Sad", "I Go Wild" and "Too Tight" by-the-numbers fillers we have gotten since.
Re: Another Stones studio album in 2018
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: July 19, 2017 11:20
Quote
stonehearted
Regarding Keith's song One More Shot, it was a bit confusing when played live. Fans thought, with that opening guitar riff intro, that they were about to get Street Fighting Man. They cheered wildly, even screamed as the song started... then they were... huh? They listened patiently, but then applauded in lukewarm fashion when it was over -- just as they did after Doom and Gloom.
At least with D&G they knew what they were getting, something new. With OMS, metaphorically, they thought they'd be getting a filet mignon steak dinner -- what they got instead was leftover ground beef thrown together from various previous menus.
Maybe this helps clear that up a bit.
What they'll be getting from Mick's new recipe is processed fast food at best.
If those lyrics are correct, throwing in 2010s news headlines and such, then, like McDonald's hamburgers, it'll go stale even before the delivery process is complete -- because fast food... just isn't deliverable, not even with all the artificial ingredients and preservatives thrown in.
Didn't happen in Europe
This Thread has been closed
Online Users
ChrisL , Dan , Domonkos , EggersBand , hot stuff , JamesBond , JMoisica , juano , keef62 , llsbsk , Meteor , Nobbi82 , paulstones , perkmo , Potato , rogerriffin , Sjouke , Stonesfan2146 , TooTight , VoodooAllie
Guests:
1573
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10