Quote
wonderboy
so long as Mick and Keith aren't working together, then I doubt we will see a new album. And I don't think they would ever put out an album with one side of Mick songs and another side of Keith material.
We got B&L because they hit a wall and couldn't work together and I doubt anything has changed since then.

Why not?
The Beatles did....Abbey Road was (and still is) a great album.
It didn't matter if they weren't getting along...maybe fired up their competitive natures.

Quote
wonderboy
so long as Mick and Keith aren't working together, then I doubt we will see a new album. And I don't think they would ever put out an album with one side of Mick songs and another side of Keith material.
We got B&L because they hit a wall and couldn't work together and I doubt anything has changed since then.

How do we know they aren't?

Quote
jlowe

Quote
wonderboy
so long as Mick and Keith aren't working together, then I doubt we will see a new album. And I don't think they would ever put out an album with one side of Mick songs and another side of Keith material.
We got B&L because they hit a wall and couldn't work together and I doubt anything has changed since then.

Why not?
The Beatles did....Abbey Road was (and still is) a great album.
It didn't matter if they weren't getting along...maybe fired up their competitive natures.

The Beatles were a pop/songwriters band. McCartney (especially), Lennon and Harrison were all capable of writing good, brilliant pop-songs on their own, and you're right that Abbey Road is a great example of that. Each went into the studio with their own songs, and then either played most of the song by themselves, or let the rest play some parts, almost like session musicians. That works for excellent song-writing in pop-music.
The Stones are a groove band. It's based on grooves, riffs, rhythm and some weird interaction based on feel, between Charlie, Keith and Mick especially (in the past obviously Bill also played a role). It's not based on clever harmonies and sus9+11-13# chord progressions and melodies that are all over the map.
It's not something you can do with hired session musicians, and it's not a matter of bringing a ready-to-go song in the studio and then let the rest fill in the gaps.

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
wonderboy
so long as Mick and Keith aren't working together, then I doubt we will see a new album. And I don't think they would ever put out an album with one side of Mick songs and another side of Keith material.

We ALMOST did with Bridges.....

Agreed - the two moments that came closest to such a thing, imo, were "Bridges" - ànd the consecutive "Wandering Spirit" / "Main Offender" solo releases.
I'd say especially that last one 'd qualify as a possible result of such an approach... (with, in this particular case, obviously missing Charlie & Ron on both releases.)

Having said that: I don't care much for such an idea... no siree.
I'm not naive; I know they haven't shared a bathroom for a long, long while - but still: the only true Stones album would be one where they (M & K) would bounce off their own ideas of one another.
(So I don't particularly like the idea of the most prolific one coming in the studio with demo tapes of tracks that are 95% 'ready', leaving the other one in charge of sprinkling some 'fairy dust' over 'em... That ain't the way to make a Stones song!!)

Well, i am glad we will get some new stuff.. And i think it will be great. relying on the stones to deliver one last great album and put the bars high
jeroen

Quote
matxil
The Stones are a groove band. It's based on grooves, riffs, rhythm and some weird interaction based on feel, between Charlie, Keith and Mick especially (in the past obviously Bill also played a role).

Anything in particular from anything recent (whatever that means) strike you as having anything along the lines of what you described?

Because I can't think of any. Well, maybe Low Down. But I was thinking - the last thing they did that was based on all of what you described - and still had a hook to it - was Pretty Beat Up. A BIGGER BANG has some decent riffs on it - She Saw Me Coming, Rough Justice, maybe some good grooves - Dangerous Beauty, She Saw Me Coming, maybe a few others - but there's no interaction going on. It's very contrived and sterile. BRIDGES TO BABYLON has some good things on it - Flip The Switch, Keith's 3 tracks, Low Down - but it's also rather bland and sterile in the feel department. VOODOO LOUNGE is one giant carpet bomb of dullness.

When Bill left they lost their rhythmic mojo. The push and pull, the swagger, was no more.

Now it's just push.

Quote
IanBillen
I could be wrong ..but I 'thought' The Stones had one more 'studio' album to fufill under their contract. I thought they had two new studio albums (and we already had B&L) and their entire catalog to be handled under Universal via the contract in 2008 / 2009?

The pact covers future albums by the Rolling Stones and the single most iconic catalogue in rock & roll, including such landmark albums as “Sticky Fingers,” “Exile On Main St.” and “Black And Blue,”...

[www.universalmusic.com]

Not exactly insightful but the way it's worded it seems hopeful, not expectant.

Were you aware that BLACK AND BLUE is a landmark album?

The new deal for another one album of originals has been signed this year in spring.News was on the major tabloid around early June when the band was in the studio in London.

Quote
IanBillen
I could be wrong ..but I 'thought' The Stones had one more 'studio' album to fufill under their contract. I thought they had two new studio albums (and we already had B&L) and their entire catalog to be handled under Universal via the contract in 2008 / 2009?
...
Still not 100% sure but I thought they had two new studio albums to do with The Contract.

Ian,
sorry, no offence meant (in case it came across that way)

Actually, I truly hope you're right because in that case they *have* to deliver something at some point. Admittedly I know nothing about their present contract. I just would find it surprising if Mick had made a deal at that point that would *force* them to deliver something new. I would rather guess it's about the back catalogue and distributing a new product in case there is any.

If I remember that correctly, they had a couple of three album contracts in the past that always resulted in a live album (that noone needed), a Best Of album (that noone needed either) and a new studio album.

I think noone doubts that there has been some studio work towards a new album, but it doesn't really seem a top priority to me. If a few studio days here and there between tours do the job that's also fine with me (as long as anything gets done), but to judge from what various better-informed people here let transpire it rather seems like they need to get better acquainted with the new material by simply playing it to find out where it would go - which possibly takes more that just a few studio days.

4,5 million pounds the deal for one new album of originals...UMG crew has listened about 15 demos and...Eveybody had been very happy!

I'm not sure they're capable of much more than a simple blues album. Which is fine. They might be able to squeeze out a decent single, but an entire album worth of new, worthy material? From this bunch? Keith's songwriting has nosedived since 'The Worst' in '94. We know their rhythm section is not memorable since about the same time. They record Charlie's cymbals like their trash can lids. Honestly, they could only surprise me, because the studio magic died many years ago. Even Voodoo Lounge was an admitted throwback sound.

I've admittedly not listened to Charlie Watt's jazz albums so I don't know if he's created some substantial music on his own. Ronnie seems to have lost his desire to write and release his own albums. The last great 'Stones' records I heard was 'Warring People' with Mick in the group Superheavy. And Bill Wyman's 'What & How & If & When & Why' off his recent record. (But I understand he most likely won't be on the new album). I skipped through 'Crosseyed Heart' from the library, and never found a song worth listening to. (And yes, I liked Keith in the past).

I think we're asking way too much for a great album from what's left of the Stones at this point. We should expect little, so that maybe, just maybe, we could be pleasantly surprised.

I'm giving next year's album 8/10. A nice warm, surprising record of love, pop and sizzle........><

Quote
mailexile67
The new deal for another one album of originals has been signed this year in spring.News was on the major tabloid around early June when the band was in the studio in London.

Quote
mailexile67
4,5 million pounds the deal for one new album of originals

Thanks, had forgotten about that "news". £2m, according to the Daily Mail.

Maybe georgelicks can shed some light on the terms of the 2008 and 2017 deals.

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
IanBillen
I could be wrong ..but I 'thought' The Stones had one more 'studio' album to fufill under their contract. I thought they had two new studio albums (and we already had B&L) and their entire catalog to be handled under Universal via the contract in 2008 / 2009?
...
Still not 100% sure but I thought they had two new studio albums to do with The Contract.

Ian,
sorry, no offence meant (in case it came across that way)

Actually, I truly hope you're right because in that case they *have* to deliver something at some point. Admittedly I know nothing about their present contract. I just would find it surprising if Mick had made a deal at that point that would *force* them to deliver something new. I would rather guess it's about the back catalogue and distributing a new product in case there is any.

If I remember that correctly, they had a couple of three album contracts in the past that always resulted in a live album (that noone needed), a Best Of album (that noone needed either) and a new studio album.

I think noone doubts that there has been some studio work towards a new album, but it doesn't really seem a top priority to me. If a few studio days here and there between tours do the job that's also fine with me (as long as anything gets done), but to judge from what various better-informed people here let transpire it rather seems like they need to get better acquainted with the new material by simply playing it to find out where it would go - which possibly takes more that just a few studio days.

_______________________________


No ... I knew how you meant it... you were more or less 'wondering'. That's why I answered as to what I 'thought'. The new contract was signed this past summer for another studio album (supposedly).

Quote
bye bye johnny

Quote
mailexile67
The new deal for another one album of originals has been signed this year in spring.News was on the major tabloid around early June when the band was in the studio in London.

Quote
mailexile67
4,5 million pounds the deal for one new album of originals

Thanks, had forgotten about that "news". £2m, according to the Daily Mail.

Maybe georgelicks can shed some light on the terms of the 2008 and 2017 deals.

________________________________


I am not referring to you in any way here ... I am simply commenting on your info here to some others. So why would they be signing for another album or originals if they certainly did not ever plan on it....?

I understand Hairball thinks one will come quite possibly but he is not sure when? Record companies don't make contracts based on 'when you guys feel like it' ...or 'when it comes about'. They want time frames ...usually the year.

The record company would not agree to giving millions and signing a contract if said year was not named. They would want a specific 'year' (at least) ..and the contract included a year in the print I am sure.


The Stones very much plan on finishing and releasing an album next year.


Once again .. it is what it is.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-21 00:39 by IanBillen.

Really? You think the Rolling Stones signed a deal where they are obligated to release an album by a particular point in time? Or what? They don't get the money. Whether or not they do record and release an album will not be because they are compelled to. It may well be, "hey guys, we get a million apiece for this so let's not @#$%& it up." It may well be that they have signed to terms too good to forego. But they are not compelled by contract to go into a studio and record, I guarantee that no way they would sign a deal with any provision like that (which would mean that they would have to pay a financial penalty if they don't deliver by a particular date), regardless of what record companies usually want.

Quote
IanBillen
I understand Hairball thinks one will come quite possibly but he is not sure when? Record companies don't make contracts based on 'when you guys feel like it' ...or 'when it comes about'. They want time frames ...usually the year.

You think the Stones really give a crap about what some silly record company thinks? And do you really think Mick (and the rest) are naive enough to sign some sort of contract where they're bound to deliver an album in a certain time frame? They're in their '70's and are well experienced at all this -the current elderly statesmen/Godfathers of Rock and Roll - they haven't released a new album of originals in 13 years...they work at their own pace and answer to no one.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

I've recently gotten back to playing music in the house, CD burner for the most part, and have all kinds of things about and one of them is BLUE & LONESOME, which I've listened to twice this weekend.

It's pretty damn good. It's now been listened to this year more than the following Stones albums combined (seeing that I never listen to their worst album ever, DIRTY WORK, I felt I still should include it):

THE ROLLING STONES
THE ROLLING STONES NO. 2
THE ROLLING STONES NOW!
12X5
DECEMBER'S CHILDREN
OUT OF OUR HEADS
AFTERMATH
BETWEEN THE BUTTONS
THEIR SATANIC MAJESTIES REQUEST
IT'S ONLY ROCK'N'ROLL
SOME GIRLS
DIRTY WORK
STEEL WHEELS
VOODOO LOUNGE
BRIDGES TO BABYLON
A BIGGER BANG

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
wonderboy
so long as Mick and Keith aren't working together, then I doubt we will see a new album. And I don't think they would ever put out an album with one side of Mick songs and another side of Keith material.
We got B&L because they hit a wall and couldn't work together and I doubt anything has changed since then.

How do we know they aren't?

If they were working together, we'd have an album. Just my view. I don't see evidence they are still collaborating.
I kinda blame Mick for this. He doesn't want to spend weeks in the studio working on songs with Keith, but really that's how they did things at their peak and into the late '70s and it didn't take *that* long. Most of their sessions were weeks or a couple of months. Other bands would go into the studio for years.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
IanBillen
I understand Hairball thinks one will come quite possibly but he is not sure when? Record companies don't make contracts based on 'when you guys feel like it' ...or 'when it comes about'. They want time frames ...usually the year.

You think the Stones really give a crap about what some silly record company thinks? And do you really think Mick (and the rest) are naive enough to sign some sort of contract where they're bound to deliver an album in a certain time frame? They're in their '70's and are well experienced at all this -the current elderly statesmen/Godfathers of Rock and Roll - they haven't released a new album of originals in 13 years...they work at their own pace and answer to no one.

_________________________________


Sure they do. Yes they care.. because they will lose out on millions and / or get sued for millions if they do not deliver. As well Universal would cut percentages on the stuff they already have. It would cost The Stones major cash and would put an end to Universal promoting their stuff. It's not if they want to care .. they 'have' to care.


They can work at their own pace ..sure but they (Universal AND The Stones) agree to it...and the record company accepts. A Time frame is given.

Record companies cut The Stones plenty of slack and give em what they want but they arent that darn nice. They are not going to pay out 4 million dollars just because The Stones are in their 70's and because they feel sorry for them or because of their name. They are in it to make money ... They would 'require' a time frame.. and if The Stones dont deliver that simply because they are too unfocused as you say that would jeopardize their relationship ...potentially get them sued and lose out on millions.


A Time frame was given / required on the contract ...>> Time Frame of release is 2018. Those are the facts... Ima tellin ya.

Ask Georgelicks ... The album is coming in 2018 unless something catastrophic happens... The Stones have planned it since summer .. Universal paid them millions for it .. Its big business involved.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-21 03:16 by IanBillen.

If I didn't like you Ian, I would say you are being a bit delusional.
See doitywoiks post above:

"I just would find it surprising if Mick had made a deal at that point that would *force* them to deliver something new.
I would rather guess it's about the back catalogue and distributing a new product in case there is any".


And then see Rokyfan's post above:

"...they are not compelled by contract to go into a studio and record, I guarantee that no way they would sign a deal with any provision like that
(which would mean that they would have to pay a financial penalty if they don't deliver by a particular date)"

Quote
wonderboy
If they were working together, we'd have an album. Just my view. I don't see evidence they are still collaborating.
I kinda blame Mick for this. He doesn't want to spend weeks in the studio working on songs with Keith, but really that's how they did things at their peak and into the late '70s and it didn't take *that* long. Most of their sessions were weeks or a couple of months. Other bands would go into the studio for years.

Yes would have to agree, but will also say that aside from a few random generic quotes from the band ("working on it" )and some occasional speculative blurbs from inside sources ("they will reconvene in December" or "they either tour or record, but not both"), as well as 90 pages of brainstorming back and forth nonsense amongst members here including myself (some of it a bit unrealistic), it's all a mystery to me.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-21 03:48 by Hairball.

-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-21 04:56 by Doxa.

See Here:

[economictimes.indiatimes.com]

And also Here:

[www.rockarchive.com]


A few people here are saying they doubt they will record .. and blah-blah-blah but come on ... the news, their producer, and The Stones themselves are saying otherwise.


Their record contract was extended under the agreement that they release an album next year. It would of been renewed anyway ... We all know that... BUT they were paid two million extra dollars up front to deliver an album. It was their bargaining chip on their renewal.


They renewed and got two million dollars upfront on the basis of a new album. Its in writing .. It was a 'stipulation' .... And of the best entertainment lawyers in the world met and worked that out ..on The Stones behalf and on Universals.

I think you are basing far too much of your skepticism on the last 13 years. SEe HERE: ***BELIEVE ME .. I feel ya. I was tired of all their blurbs "oh yeah ...probably maybe next year" ... "Oh yeah ...we basically have enoughmaterial for a whole new album." ... "Oh yes ... hopefully Ill get these guys in the studio soon to lay down something for a new album" ....Then it never occurs. It was all chatter ...nothing more on their behalf. Look I get it.... Believe me I get all that lol. You are preaching to the choir here in that regard lol.


>>BUT now those circumstances have changed...'officially' changed. They began work on one. They got a new contract based on it. They were paid millions to do it already. Their producer, Chuck Levell ... they all flew to London to work on it already.

That is the reality ..."now"... None of those circumstances occurred over the last 13 years. In fact... none of that was <even close> to being a reality over the last 13 years. That is something you should ponder for a second. It's not speculation ... it's official'. they are delivering a new studio album next year.

I think you may be turning a blind eye to it in a sense.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-21 05:07 by IanBillen.

Indeed Ian - definitely something to ponder amidst all the other speculation in this thread.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
Hairball
Indeed Ian - definitely something to ponder amidst all the other speculation in this thread.

_______________________________


Yezzzzzz ... I jus wanted you to understand we are on the same page about all this... BELIEVE ME I feel ya. I even told a friend in 2014 ..."Look man... I dont want to hear anything about a new friggin album from them or anyone else until their is an official release date or an official time frame such as the season it is to come."


Keith popped off in 2001 ...2010 ...2013 ... saying he was looking forward to getting in the studio. Ron Wood said they had a whole new album in the making simply from the 2002 sessions in 2003. Nothing ever happened ..it was them simply chattering. A Bigger Bang had basically all new stuff written in 2004-05 for it.


However now over the last 2 years that has changed. Things became real "FINALLY" Lol .. So much so they began work on one and an unexpected blues album already came out if it.Then they worked on it a bit more and even based a renewal contract on it. Studios were booked and they have began work on it.


So I wanted you to consider. Its like me telling you for 10-12 years I cant wait to start painting again.

Finally one day I start. A little while later my agent and publisher sees my work and we do a contract to deliver three paintings next year. I set up an studio an officially began work (very short work) .. Yet plan to hit it hard in December-February.


It is finally happening. That's where I am coming from ...Dats all Ima tryin to say and get across here ... .



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-21 05:19 by IanBillen.

Yes Ian you've made that all very clear!

Time will tell....

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
Hairball
Yes Ian you've made that all very clear!

Time will tell....

_______________________________



True ..very true. One thing is for certain .. It is always a good experience to converse with you on matters. You are a pretty smart / astute bloke it seems.


Rock Onward!!

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
Hairball
Yes Ian you've made that all very clear!

Time will tell....

_______________________________

True ..very true. One thing is for certain .. It is always a good experience to converse with you on matters. You are a pretty smart / astute bloke it seems.


Rock Onward!!

Yes Ian good times we've experienced in this thread.
In fact, I'd almost prefer this thread to go on forever rather than having the Stones finish a new album just so we can speculate and debate all of this! (just kidding )

It's only rock and roll...

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
bye bye johnny
Thanks, had forgotten about that "news". £2m, according to the Daily Mail.

I must admit, I had forgotten about that, too. Or rather, I had forgotten it was this year only, feels like it was longer ago to me but obviously wasn't...

So looks like Ian *was/is* right in the end (which is not the worst thing).

At any rate, it makes sense now: they just had an unexpectedly successful album of covers out and presumably enough new (and presentable/useful) material in the can to be able to approach prospective business partners and negotiate a deal.

I still believe that Mick is too cautious for making a (possibly risky) deal empty-handed, so one might perhaps conclude that even now there is enough (pre-brick wall hitting, though) material done to fulfill the contract if all other things go wrong. At least, enough material for Mick to go into negotiations confidently.

If memory serves, we have heard quite diverging statements from the band, from "Only a little more work is needed" (can't remember who), to "I hope the blues album leads to reconsidering a few things" (Keith) to "some/much of it will possibly be recorded anew" (Ronnie), and in addition Keith's remarks about being prolific. The latter still seem to me to indicate that Keith is short on the songwriting and doesn't like much of what Mich brought.

However, I don't think the situation is so much different from earlier times. The way I remember things, we always heard that Mick rather brings in complete songs whereas Keith preferred to work out his stuff in the Studio, and outtakes show that they often tried out a number of approaches to a particular song. (And a good deal of fighting was presumably about which version or mix would make it on the album.) What is different this time is possibly that peace is more fragile and they don't want to let things come to a head, and also that noone feels like spending endless time in the studio to work on the material.

Apart from that, I don't see a reason why they shouldn't be able to come up with a bunch of reasonable songs anymore. I just find it a pity - still - that Doom & Gloom was wasted on the Gorilla. What a great album opener that would have been!

There was a great quote from a 17th or 18th century historical figure regarding the process of creating (writing, painting, etc.).
Whoever said it has currently slipped my mind right now, but it is something that has always stuck with me.

To paraphrase - the greatest joy for an artist is the actual act of creating itself. When the product is finished, the artists realizes a part of him has died.

Maybe the Stones are simply enjoying the long drawn out process of creating, and the thought of a finished album (which could be their last) is not something they really want to face at this point in time. That, combined with some procrastination and other aspects of their personal lives, are part of the reasons for the long delay.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......