For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Hairball
No disrespect taken Ian, but this isn't science or psychology...it's only rock and roll.
Categorizing, classifying, defining, and labeling fans seems silly to me as I said before, but if it means something to you don't let me stop you.
As far as I'm concerned, anyone who has taken the time to register an account on this website is a Stones fan...period - simple as that.
Quote
IanBillen_____________________________Quote
Hairball
No disrespect taken Ian, but this isn't science or psychology...it's only rock and roll.
Categorizing, classifying, defining, and labeling fans seems silly to me as I said before, but if it means something to you don't let me stop you.
As far as I'm concerned, anyone who has taken the time to register an account on this website is a Stones fan...period - simple as that.
It's Not Only In Rock and Roll (some pun ) and in the Rolling Stones Case .. but there are purists in almost every Art or sport .. and in many facets of life as you know...from Boxing .. to Football .. to Picasso .. to Language.
When I was a young kid the purist would say I like '...'old'.. Stones'. Now a days what exactly is old Stones? I mean Tattoo You came out 36 years ago lol.
Basketball has fans that are purists. Folks who think everyone travels today (and yes they are much more lenient with making that call today than say 40 years ago).They also are tired of all the bling in Basketball and the drama. They like Team ball versus one or two dominating super stars on various teams.
Some purists .. such as myself .. have switched to following college ball (Duke). I'm not interested in Pro Ball in it's current state (I was when I was a kid).. just as you aren't impressed or that interested with The Stones output in later days.
Am I still a basketball fan? Well .. sure.. but I'm more a purist. Are you still a Stones fan? .. Well sure.. but you are also more a purist (but not 100% ...not extreme in my humble opinion).
Purists exist in many areas .. I don't think it's silly to categorize at all .. it's 'what is a sort of reality.
Quote
IanBillen
just as you aren't impressed or that interested with The Stones output in later days.
Quote
HairballQuote
IanBillen_____________________________Quote
Hairball
No disrespect taken Ian, but this isn't science or psychology...it's only rock and roll.
Categorizing, classifying, defining, and labeling fans seems silly to me as I said before, but if it means something to you don't let me stop you.
As far as I'm concerned, anyone who has taken the time to register an account on this website is a Stones fan...period - simple as that.
It's Not Only In Rock and Roll (some pun ) and in the Rolling Stones Case .. but there are purists in almost every Art or sport .. and in many facets of life as you know...from Boxing .. to Football .. to Picasso .. to Language.
When I was a young kid the purist would say I like '...'old'.. Stones'. Now a days what exactly is old Stones? I mean Tattoo You came out 36 years ago lol.
Basketball has fans that are purists. Folks who think everyone travels today (and yes they are much more lenient with making that call today than say 40 years ago).They also are tired of all the bling in Basketball and the drama. They like Team ball versus one or two dominating super stars on various teams.
Some purists .. such as myself .. have switched to following college ball (Duke). I'm not interested in Pro Ball in it's current state (I was when I was a kid).. just as you aren't impressed or that interested with The Stones output in later days.
Am I still a basketball fan? Well .. sure.. but I'm more a purist. Are you still a Stones fan? .. Well sure.. but you are also more a purist (but not 100% ...not extreme in my humble opinion).
Purists exist in many areas .. I don't think it's silly to categorize at all .. it's 'what is a sort of reality.
Cheers Ian.
Now how about that new Stones album in 2019?
Quote
bitusa2012Quote
IanBillen
just as you aren't impressed or that interested with The Stones output in later days.
I AM interested in this - I just can't FIND much
Quote
bitusa2012Quote
IanBillen
just as you aren't impressed or that interested with The Stones output in later days.
I AM interested in this - I just can't FIND much
Quote
stoneheartedYes, you are right -- because there is also this bit of info to consider...Quote
Rocky Dijon
Saying the album will "never be made" is foolish considering they were specifically given a contract extension by their label for a new studio album after listening to the work-in-progress tracks.
"Jumpin' Jack cash! Rolling Stones set to pocket £2m from new album": [www.dailymail.co.uk]
That's 2 million pounds, as opposed to U.S. dollars.
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
stoneheartedYes, you are right -- because there is also this bit of info to consider...Quote
Rocky Dijon
Saying the album will "never be made" is foolish considering they were specifically given a contract extension by their label for a new studio album after listening to the work-in-progress tracks.
"Jumpin' Jack cash! Rolling Stones set to pocket £2m from new album": [www.dailymail.co.uk]
That's 2 million pounds, as opposed to U.S. dollars.
Well, if that's true then they really AREN'T doing it for the money. Work on something for years and take home less than you can make in 2 hours on stage? Dudes are gonna need to lay off some roadies in order to make these numbers work!
(I'm assuming $2.6 million for the record versus the rumored $1 million apiece for each live show; also assuming no hits bigger than anything on A Bigger Bang, i.e., no long-term royalty generators on the record.)
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
stoneheartedYes, you are right -- because there is also this bit of info to consider...Quote
Rocky Dijon
Saying the album will "never be made" is foolish considering they were specifically given a contract extension by their label for a new studio album after listening to the work-in-progress tracks.
"Jumpin' Jack cash! Rolling Stones set to pocket £2m from new album": [www.dailymail.co.uk]
That's 2 million pounds, as opposed to U.S. dollars.
Well, if that's true then they really AREN'T doing it for the money. Work on something for years and take home less than you can make in 2 hours on stage? Dudes are gonna need to lay off some roadies in order to make these numbers work!
(I'm assuming $2.6 million for the record versus the rumored $1 million apiece for each live show; also assuming no hits bigger than anything on A Bigger Bang, i.e., no long-term royalty generators on the record.)
Yeah, they got a #1 single with that album
Quote
IanBillenQuote
bitusa2012Quote
IanBillen
just as you aren't impressed or that interested with The Stones output in later days.
I AM interested in this - I just can't FIND much
______________________________
Hairball is interested too .. Im not saying he secretly likes their new stuff or is going to but he is very interested in it (I mis-spoke). You can ask him.. he will tell you hes interested and anxious.. though hes not expecting total greatness.. hes still very interested (he's here on this post and knows as much as anyone about the album ..).
There is hardly anything out there on the sessions .. It has been kept under wraps really well. We dont know hardly anything at all either. The Stones, their camp, and their management / staff and all insiders have been more than just 'tight lipped' .. they have been out of site all together with zero info to give about it. Very hush hush this time.
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
stoneheartedYes, you are right -- because there is also this bit of info to consider...Quote
Rocky Dijon
Saying the album will "never be made" is foolish considering they were specifically given a contract extension by their label for a new studio album after listening to the work-in-progress tracks.
"Jumpin' Jack cash! Rolling Stones set to pocket £2m from new album": [www.dailymail.co.uk]
That's 2 million pounds, as opposed to U.S. dollars.
Well, if that's true then they really AREN'T doing it for the money. Work on something for years and take home less than you can make in 2 hours on stage? Dudes are gonna need to lay off some roadies in order to make these numbers work!
(I'm assuming $2.6 million for the record versus the rumored $1 million apiece for each live show; also assuming no hits bigger than anything on A Bigger Bang, i.e., no long-term royalty generators on the record.)
Yeah, they got a #1 single with that album
Ah, yes. #1 in Spain. Bet they're still cashing the royalty checks from that one!
It would be interesting to see an accounting statement from their label about any of the post-Tattoo You records. It's my impression that the band still command a hefty 'advance' fee (arguably more for 'prestige' purposes than a reflection of actual chart performance). When you take a big advance, the label then of course has a huge debit against which they can charge back every cost known to man. Whether the Stones have ever 'earned out' the advances on their latter-day albums and started generating royalty payments beyond their advances would be interesting to know (at least to me.)
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72
assuming no hits bigger than anything on A Bigger Bang
Yeah, they got a #1 single with that album
Ah, yes. #1 in Spain.
I could have sworn it was Italy
Quote
For the U.S. audience, ABB is the forgotten Stones album. Of the five singles from ABB, for the first time ever not one single from a new Rolling Stones long player made the slightest dent in even the lower reaches of the singles charts.
Quote
georgelicksQuote
For the U.S. audience, ABB is the forgotten Stones album. Of the five singles from ABB, for the first time ever not one single from a new Rolling Stones long player made the slightest dent in even the lower reaches of the singles charts.
U.S. mainstream radio abandoned the Stones after the Steel Wheels tour, worldwide they still got hit singles even with Doom and Gloom but for U.S. audiences nothing after 1981 is interesting, not even their hit singles from the 80's, its all about the Hot Rocks and that's it.
Worldwide, their catalog appeal is wide open.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
georgelicksQuote
For the U.S. audience, ABB is the forgotten Stones album. Of the five singles from ABB, for the first time ever not one single from a new Rolling Stones long player made the slightest dent in even the lower reaches of the singles charts.
U.S. mainstream radio abandoned the Stones after the Steel Wheels tour, worldwide they still got hit singles even with Doom and Gloom but for U.S. audiences nothing after 1981 is interesting, not even their hit singles from the 80's, its all about the Hot Rocks and that's it.
Worldwide, their catalog appeal is wide open.
Well, Harlem Shuffle and Mixed Emotions both made it to #5 in the US. That wasn't too bad?
Love Is Strong, though, really flopped in the US...
Quote
georgelicksQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
georgelicksQuote
For the U.S. audience, ABB is the forgotten Stones album. Of the five singles from ABB, for the first time ever not one single from a new Rolling Stones long player made the slightest dent in even the lower reaches of the singles charts.
U.S. mainstream radio abandoned the Stones after the Steel Wheels tour, worldwide they still got hit singles even with Doom and Gloom but for U.S. audiences nothing after 1981 is interesting, not even their hit singles from the 80's, its all about the Hot Rocks and that's it.
Worldwide, their catalog appeal is wide open.
Well, Harlem Shuffle and Mixed Emotions both made it to #5 in the US. That wasn't too bad?
Love Is Strong, though, really flopped in the US...
Both HS and ME are "rarities" for U.S. audiences, you don't hear anything past Start Me Up on U.S. classic rock radio.
Quote
Harlem ShufflerQuote
georgelicksQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
georgelicksQuote
For the U.S. audience, ABB is the forgotten Stones album. Of the five singles from ABB, for the first time ever not one single from a new Rolling Stones long player made the slightest dent in even the lower reaches of the singles charts.
U.S. mainstream radio abandoned the Stones after the Steel Wheels tour, worldwide they still got hit singles even with Doom and Gloom but for U.S. audiences nothing after 1981 is interesting, not even their hit singles from the 80's, its all about the Hot Rocks and that's it.
Worldwide, their catalog appeal is wide open.
Well, Harlem Shuffle and Mixed Emotions both made it to #5 in the US. That wasn't too bad?
Love Is Strong, though, really flopped in the US...
Both HS and ME are "rarities" for U.S. audiences, you don't hear anything past Start Me Up on U.S. classic rock radio.
Well, someone start me up (heh heh!) a radio station that plays album tracks as well as singles that isn't ruled by corporate scum.
Quote
HairballQuote
Harlem ShufflerQuote
georgelicksQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
georgelicksQuote
For the U.S. audience, ABB is the forgotten Stones album. Of the five singles from ABB, for the first time ever not one single from a new Rolling Stones long player made the slightest dent in even the lower reaches of the singles charts.
U.S. mainstream radio abandoned the Stones after the Steel Wheels tour, worldwide they still got hit singles even with Doom and Gloom but for U.S. audiences nothing after 1981 is interesting, not even their hit singles from the 80's, its all about the Hot Rocks and that's it.
Worldwide, their catalog appeal is wide open.
Well, Harlem Shuffle and Mixed Emotions both made it to #5 in the US. That wasn't too bad?
Love Is Strong, though, really flopped in the US...
Both HS and ME are "rarities" for U.S. audiences, you don't hear anything past Start Me Up on U.S. classic rock radio.
Well, someone start me up (heh heh!) a radio station that plays album tracks as well as singles that isn't ruled by corporate scum.
I sometimes listen to KTYD based in Santa Barbara. Along with the standard classic rock overkill, they occasionally play "deep cuts" that are never heard on other stations. As for "recent" Stones, I occasionally hear Saint of Me and Rain Fall Down (among others), and they played cuts from Crosseyed Heart and Blue and Lonesome when they were released - still haven't heard Getta Grip though.
Quote
mailexile67
IanBillen, is it a joke?!?
Quote
It's still rock & roll. What I'm doing is not hugely different to the Stones. I'm not going off and doing opera, I'm not going off and doing Irish folk music, much as those two areas are very interesting. It's not much different to the Stones - but the recording process IS different because it's not a committee of squabbling people. It's much more INSTANT which I think a lot of pop writing SHOULD be. With me and Keith it was NEVER instant. The Rolling Stones recently would go in the studio with very little prepared material and just live in there and camp out there for as long as it took which was sometimes SO frustrating. With the Stones it wasn't just an individual saying, Okay, this is what you do, ding ding ding, which I CAN say to Jeff Beck. I could NEVER say that to Keith because if I did he'd just play something completely different. You can't just throw a song at Keith because he'd probably loathe it on principle. So we'd go in the studio with just a few licks and there was no structure at all and you'd just hang around waiting for a spark. But with my own LPs I had complete songs and complete arrangements and the whole thing of it mentally, and the ability to present my stuff to the players without everybody going, Oh no, that's no good was sort of a new thing for me. Quite refreshing.
- Mick Jagger, 1987
Quote
TeddyB1018
That quote basically says that the methodology that the Stones used to create all their best work was wrong, and Mick would prefer to dictate to minions, “This is what you do, Bing Bing Bing.” Why doesn’t he just confess on the witness stand?
Quote
gotdablouse
The "methodology" had indeed not worked very well for UC or DW...endless sessions, endless arguing !