For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
matxilQuote
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.
Quote
Testify
In my opinion the Stones should do what they want to do now and not look at what fans want. After all I think Mick and Keitk have shared the choices made in their recent album, Keith has signed up every single song.
Quote
bitusa2012
To anyone's knowledge, have the Stones ever road tested potential Album songs to studio execs before in order to get some form of "approval" or "affirmation"?
Quote
straycatuk
I remember a story of Mick presenting Emotional Rescue to EMI as a 2 track album with Jah is Not Dead filling one side (I forget the other) as a wind up.
sc uk
Quote
IanBillen
Quote
HairballQuote
IanBillen
Hi Ian,
Wondering what you're thoughts are on the delayed Stones album, and the fact that Mick has stepped to the front of the line about to release 'Getta Grip'.
Someone in the other thread had mentioned that Keith didn't like 'Getta Grip', and I was thinking it may have been part of the 'Hit the Wall' sessions last year.
Do you think the new Mick single will cause any more setbacks as far as recording sessions for the Stones are concerned?
Or maybe it's a good thing for Mick to get that stuff off his chest before he works with the Stones in a more collaborative fashion?
Quote
LongBeachArena72
I've been hunting around for a link and could use some help:
Did Keith actually say that line about 'he may have 40 crappy demos but I've got 3 killer riffs' or is that apocryphal and/or the product of speculation/rumor/etc?
Any help appreciated; thanks!
Quote
IanBillenQuote
LongBeachArena72
I've been hunting around for a link and could use some help:
Did Keith actually say that line about 'he may have 40 crappy demos but I've got 3 killer riffs' or is that apocryphal and/or the product of speculation/rumor/etc?
Any help appreciated; thanks!
______________________________
Keith said he isn't interested in being 'prolific' like Mick is and while Jagger may have 40 possible song ideas .. hes got three songs (full songs) that are in his words "dynamite".
He wasn't knocking the material Jagger had .. but he was saying he had three puppies that were .. versus / against 40 possible song 'ideas'. He was saying or pointing out that is how the two differ when writing on their own to bring things to the table for the Stones. That was the gist of it is all it was.
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
IanBillenQuote
LongBeachArena72
I've been hunting around for a link and could use some help:
Did Keith actually say that line about 'he may have 40 crappy demos but I've got 3 killer riffs' or is that apocryphal and/or the product of speculation/rumor/etc?
Any help appreciated; thanks!
______________________________
Keith said he isn't interested in being 'prolific' like Mick is and while Jagger may have 40 possible song ideas .. hes got three songs (full songs) that are in his words "dynamite".
He wasn't knocking the material Jagger had .. but he was saying he had three puppies that were .. versus / against 40 possible song 'ideas'. He was saying or pointing out that is how the two differ when writing on their own to bring things to the table for the Stones. That was the gist of it is all it was.
Thx, Ian. Do you recall where/when he said this so I can track down the context/conversation?
EDIT: found the quote. From an interview in Uncut. The interviewer says "Don Was tells me Mick's got 40 new songs." Keith replies: "Being prolific don't mean shit."
LOL. Meow!
Jagger's such a pussy for not stickin a jab into that geezer's nose!
Quote
MaindefenderQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
IanBillenQuote
LongBeachArena72
I've been hunting around for a link and could use some help:
Did Keith actually say that line about 'he may have 40 crappy demos but I've got 3 killer riffs' or is that apocryphal and/or the product of speculation/rumor/etc?
Any help appreciated; thanks!
______________________________
Keith said he isn't interested in being 'prolific' like Mick is and while Jagger may have 40 possible song ideas .. hes got three songs (full songs) that are in his words "dynamite".
He wasn't knocking the material Jagger had .. but he was saying he had three puppies that were .. versus / against 40 possible song 'ideas'. He was saying or pointing out that is how the two differ when writing on their own to bring things to the table for the Stones. That was the gist of it is all it was.
Thx, Ian. Do you recall where/when he said this so I can track down the context/conversation?
EDIT: found the quote. From an interview in Uncut. The interviewer says "Don Was tells me Mick's got 40 new songs." Keith replies: "Being prolific don't mean shit."
LOL. Meow!
Jagger's such a pussy for not stickin a jab into that geezer's nose!
Go Keith go.....
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
MaindefenderQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
IanBillenQuote
LongBeachArena72
I've been hunting around for a link and could use some help:
Did Keith actually say that line about 'he may have 40 crappy demos but I've got 3 killer riffs' or is that apocryphal and/or the product of speculation/rumor/etc?
Any help appreciated; thanks!
______________________________
Keith said he isn't interested in being 'prolific' like Mick is and while Jagger may have 40 possible song ideas .. hes got three songs (full songs) that are in his words "dynamite".
He wasn't knocking the material Jagger had .. but he was saying he had three puppies that were .. versus / against 40 possible song 'ideas'. He was saying or pointing out that is how the two differ when writing on their own to bring things to the table for the Stones. That was the gist of it is all it was.
Thx, Ian. Do you recall where/when he said this so I can track down the context/conversation?
EDIT: found the quote. From an interview in Uncut. The interviewer says "Don Was tells me Mick's got 40 new songs." Keith replies: "Being prolific don't mean shit."
LOL. Meow!
Jagger's such a pussy for not stickin a jab into that geezer's nose!
Go Keith go.....
It's amazing what a 'competition' it seems to be, isn't it? It always seems to be about who can get the nastiest zinger in about the other.
I wonder what you'd get if you tallied up over the past 30 years catty remarks made by each Glimmer about the other. It seems like Keith would win, hands-down ... but does Mick always take the high road? He must have made shitty remarks about Keith's songs, too, over the years, no?
I guess at the end of the day, they're both just addicted to the cash and stuck in a crappy marriage that most of the time is typified by jealousy and resentment. Now that's an environment that fosters creativity!
Quote
stone4everQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
MaindefenderQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
IanBillenQuote
LongBeachArena72
I've been hunting around for a link and could use some help:
Did Keith actually say that line about 'he may have 40 crappy demos but I've got 3 killer riffs' or is that apocryphal and/or the product of speculation/rumor/etc?
Any help appreciated; thanks!
______________________________
Keith said he isn't interested in being 'prolific' like Mick is and while Jagger may have 40 possible song ideas .. hes got three songs (full songs) that are in his words "dynamite".
He wasn't knocking the material Jagger had .. but he was saying he had three puppies that were .. versus / against 40 possible song 'ideas'. He was saying or pointing out that is how the two differ when writing on their own to bring things to the table for the Stones. That was the gist of it is all it was.
Thx, Ian. Do you recall where/when he said this so I can track down the context/conversation?
EDIT: found the quote. From an interview in Uncut. The interviewer says "Don Was tells me Mick's got 40 new songs." Keith replies: "Being prolific don't mean shit."
LOL. Meow!
Jagger's such a pussy for not stickin a jab into that geezer's nose!
Go Keith go.....
It's amazing what a 'competition' it seems to be, isn't it? It always seems to be about who can get the nastiest zinger in about the other.
I wonder what you'd get if you tallied up over the past 30 years catty remarks made by each Glimmer about the other. It seems like Keith would win, hands-down ... but does Mick always take the high road? He must have made shitty remarks about Keith's songs, too, over the years, no?
I guess at the end of the day, they're both just addicted to the cash and stuck in a crappy marriage that most of the time is typified by jealousy and resentment. Now that's an environment that fosters creativity!
Have you ever met Keith and looked into those eyes of his, he doesn't strike me as a man you want to cross the line with.
Actually once again longbeach you are very selective with the facts or you just don't listen much to keith's interviews. Over the last 30 years Keith's tally of things he has said that are supportive of Mick outnumber the supportive things Mick has said about Keith. I can't actually recall Mick praising Keith.
keith will tell you he has the best singer in the world, that he can dance and rock a small table let alone a stadium. He says he and Mick can write music like nobody's business. He has said countless times that he loves Mick and thinks of him as a Brother, only for Mick to come back with i already have a real Brother, keith is not my brother.
Its a shame people on here don't see the softer side to keith's character, he is a spiritual moral man, i see him these days like a sort of Budda, within all his Rock and Roll decadence and excess is a sort of purity, you really need to look under the surface guys, otherwise you come across as shallow, a bit, well i don't know, a bit like Mick.
Quote
stone4ever
Just came to mind that keith has said a few times that he can disrespect Mick but watch out if someone else disrespects Mick in front of keith. He is still supportive of Mick, make no mistake, these guys go back a long way and when it really matters i believe they are always there for each other.
On one level they might resent each other and almost hate each other, but on another level its maybe a bit like my relationship with my Brother, we argue and fight all the time but if anyone steps in to take sides we side against them. No amount of fighting takes the love away and i suspect Mick keith Ronnie and Charlie are that way towards each other after all these years.
Quote
retired_dog
If you ever meet Keith personally, don't treat him like your personal Buddah, because if you do, you will be lost. Treat him like a normal human being, like someone who's shit looks, smells and probably even tastes exactly (...well, maybe a bit depending on the kind of meal you had before!) like yours. You may be in for a treat if you follow my advice. And then tell me about the look in his eyes afterwards.
Quote
retired_dogQuote
stone4ever
Just came to mind that keith has said a few times that he can disrespect Mick but watch out if someone else disrespects Mick in front of keith. He is still supportive of Mick, make no mistake, these guys go back a long way and when it really matters i believe they are always there for each other.
On one level they might resent each other and almost hate each other, but on another level its maybe a bit like my relationship with my Brother, we argue and fight all the time but if anyone steps in to take sides we side against them. No amount of fighting takes the love away and i suspect Mick keith Ronnie and Charlie are that way towards each other after all these years.
Many, many years ago, when I was young, on a train ride in England, I listened to two elderly ladies talking about... THE ROYAL FAMILY! And you know what? This all sounds quite similar. Making thoughts about people as if you know them personally, but in fact do not.
If you ever meet Keith personally, don't treat him like your personal Buddah, because if you do, you will be lost. Treat him like a normal human being, like someone whose shit looks, smells and probably even tastes exactly (...well, maybe a bit depending on the kind of meal you had before!) like yours. You may be in for a treat if you follow my advice. And then tell me about the look in his eyes afterwards.
Quote
stone4ever
So what was the answer to Keith's question, I don't see it. Did he say 2019 lol. Have they fallen out over Mick's new single do you think.
This tour could be funny, Keith refuses to sign the song sheet before they go on stage, Keith says I'm not playing Miss You again. Mick starts crying, Keith says I still not playing it . Mick says right Keef that does it, Mick threatens to replace Chuck with Matt as musical director , Keith goes Oh alright then I'll play it.