I would be happy with a quality new song not a full album. We ( I) keep hoping that the group has one more "satisfaction" type song in they heads. And if not, I am OK with that too. Just the fact that I they have given us over 50 years of song and concerts, and that alone is "satisfaction!

Only petition I would be interested in is one for a private IORR/fans gig.

1000 of us at $2000 a head would gross 2 mil.
2000 of us at 1500 a ticket would gross 3 mil etc..

Plenty of professionals here that could help put together contract etc., Have to do it like the other private gigs they've done, around a tour etc., a vote on possible location(s), but not that far fetched of a possibility. And the kicker, we get to choose (part of) the setlist.

petition !!!! ..... Stones don't work that way



ROCKMAN

A Go Fund Me would probably work better than a petition.

.... Stones have always lead a life of Lovin' & Laughin' ...



ROCKMAN

i've noticed keith doesn't take kindly to unsolicited suggestions

[www.youtube.com]

when i was back there in semiNary school there was a person there who put
forth the proposition that you could petition the Stones with prayer


petition the Stones with prayer


petition the Stones with prayer




YOU CANNOT PETITION THE STONES WITH PRAYER !

And what would a petition do?

Quote
Irix
I wouldn't too. It puts some pressure onto the Band which isn't good for the Album's quality.

To me it's ok when we get the new Album for the 60th Anniversary of the Band.

Let the time (and ideas) working for the Album ....

Really? You think a bunch of keyboard warriors running a petition to release the new album is going to put the Stones under pressure? So, they survived divorce, drug addiction, drug busts, sex scandals, death, a massive tax bill etc but you think they will crumble because of an IORR petition.

This is soooooooo funny!

No i don't think so, personally i don't think the Stones owe us anything , in fact they have given more than i could have ever envisaged, certainly i didn't expect Keith to still be playing with those fingers as they are.

I think Keith was keen to do the album but for some reason that we will never know the album is delayed.

To be fair Blue And lonesome would never have happened had they not started making this album so we have that to be thankful for.

Fingers crossed it will get finished and show up in the future, perhaps Christmas 2019, that's my guess.

We actually might get solo albums from them before the Stones album gets released, i look forward to solo albums from Mick Keith and Ronnie in the meantime.

Doom and Gloom is pretty great, imo.

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

You think a bunch of keyboard warriors running a petition to release the new album is going to put the Stones under pressure?

No, you have it misunderstood - Rockman said it better: [iorr.org] . That's my opinion too.

On the other hand: Universal Music could put on some pressure because they need something new to sell. But again, such pressure isn't good for the Album's quality and the Stones don't work that way.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-04 21:55 by Irix.

Don't think a petition would be very effective.

The Stones are far beyond a point where they could be presssed by whomever, be it record company or fans.

We would be more successful with a Class Action Lawsuit based on extreme and unusual mental cruelty.

Quote
Bungo
We would be more successful with a Class Action Lawsuit based on extreme and unusual mental cruelty.

Based on lack of new material, or based on the last 35+ years of lackluster albums?
Or maybe based on Getta Grip/England Lost? Or Superheavy? Freejack? Alfie? Let's Work?
Or all of the above?

Mick Jagger- "Let's Work" on Countdown 1989




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

I can't believe there's 171 pages on nothing. All this fretting and hoping and honestly, do you think they'll be more than a couple songs you'll ever listen to twice? Rough Justice and I can't think of another one from Bigger Bang. Doom and Gloom. Maybe we'll get a good single and perhaps something else interesting.

Quote
24FPS
I can't believe there's 171 pages on nothing. All this fretting and hoping and honestly, do you think they'll be more than a couple songs you'll ever listen to twice? Rough Justice and I can't think of another one from Bigger Bang. Doom and Gloom. Maybe we'll get a good single and perhaps something else interesting.

That's because the Stones are quite successful in making many fans believe they're still an active, creative, music-producing band instead of the still highly successful nostalgia brand in the concert business they really are.

Quote
IanBillen
In reference to all the A Bigger Bang Chatter (even though this thread is supposed to be about a new album to come .. .. ... .. as Bv told us 10,000 times).



I thought ABB was quite solid ... ballsy ... and in your face. Sure.. it was simplistic (but that is what was called for at the time. We / the public WANTED something stripped down and bare bones with no apologies and that is exactly what we got .. EOS ...end of story.

ABB rocks straight through .. It isn't meant to be deep .. or calculated. It was supposed to be sort of an updated throw-back to Some Girls and some of the stuff from the 80's that simply were bare bones, straight forward rock ..(ABB was even humorous in parts such as Some Girls). We didn't get horns ... not much harmonica at all ... Not back-ground singers ... Just electric guitars .. straight ahead 'rock' and Jagger spitting out lyrics with minimal production ...nothing fancy. It was supposed to be 'just them'. It was a hard hitting album in tone and it nailed it for what it was at the time. Not every release ... or era .. or every chapter.. or all albums need to have all this expansiveness or depth.

Nobody wanted that at the time anyway .. I distinctly remember we wanted something bare bones .. and in your face.. something that just rocks. We got just that and frankly .. it was damn good for being what it was! They wrote it and recorded it in a stripped down fashion without much emphasis on getting in 'deep'. It worked. So that was the story on ABB. .... What is so hard about 'getting that'?

Now we are into a new chapter.. totally (well .. maybe three chapters down the road .. minus a few albums that should of came in between hehe). This time something different than ABB .. something different is called for .. Not sure exactly what it is .. but we will know when we get it.


Nuff said

An interesting take on A BIGGER BANG - and also a good reminder how much the perceptions of the album and the nature of it has been changed since its heyday.

What I recall from those times is that the very idea of just Mick and Keith in some basement or garage (or whatever the location of the place was in Mick's French castle) working the whole thing from a scratch together (with some Don Was or whoever) was such a romantic or even ideal scenario. Isn't something like that what is also very much hoped for the new album? 'If Mick and Keith would just sit down together and the magic will happen..' Also the idea of the album being 'bare bones' - The Stones 'naked' without extra people or too much hassling and gimmicking productionwise was also a kind of old 'fan dream come true'. Yeah, a kind of 'back to SOME GIRLS approach' (never thought that way but yeah, there is some truth there). Didn't it all sounded great in a theory back then (like it would now if those same premises would hold now)?

Okay, after the first thrill the album didn't turn out to be any great success artistically among us IORRian 'keyboard warriors' - and basically all any other people rather quickly forgot the whole album, including the artists themselves.

Several excuses or explanations has been provided for its artistic 'failure'.

Firstly, it didn't start from a scratch - this has been especially argued the 'blame any failure on Mick' people here. It was basically all those infamous 'Mick's demos' Keith just needed to cope with and ending up giving a rather minimal contribution to them. The most extremists see it just a Jagger solo album. I don't know how much there is factual base for this interpretation. How much those songs were actually totally written and recorded earlier by Jagger and how much Mick and Keith actually interchanged ideas - how much Keith's ideas and suggestions changed the nature of 'Jagger songs' and how much he brought on the table. Isn't, for example, "Rought Justice' basically a 'Richards song'? Anyway, be the percentage of Jagger vs. Richards songs - or their personal contribution within each - whatever, I don't think there is any more ideal situation for those two to do something together as they did in those sessions (if Jagger is the supposed bad control freak there - dominating even that kind of intimate sessions - Richards can only blame himself - he cannot have a better opportunity to have a 'say'). It is not realistic to expect anything more from a Jagger/Richards colloboration.

Secondly, the album lacked the 'band feel'. The idea of just Jagger and Richards making the backing tracks and the rest (mostly Charlie and Wood, that is) over-dubbing their parts later didn't translate as a 'traditional' Stones 'groove' (or whatever it is). There is a certain point in this claim. For example, compared to the mentioned SOME GIRLS album, it doesn't sound such a distinguished, coherent group effort. But then again, The Stones have managed to accomplish incredible songs in the past despite some key players - even Mick or Keith not to name Watts, Wyman, Jones, Taylor - missing the sessions for backing tracks (or even the finished versions). We could verify this by just studying a bit the incredible Big Four era.

Thirdly, the album was, after all, screwed up behind the desk. If nothing else, but by brickwalling the final product big time. Or they chose the wrong (two) songs to be left out from the proper album. Or something like that.

I don't actually have big opinions about any of these explanations, be them good and valid or not, but I think the bigger moral of the supposed 'failure' of A BIGGER BANG is that The Glimmer Twins alone (and working tightly together) do not guarantee a great Rolling Stones album. So the problem lies much deeper than any of those three explanations might suggest (which makes me see them more like excuses). We probably have had our suspicions about that earlier, but A BIGGER BANG manifasted that big time. All the conditions were there almost ideal - 'Mick and Keith together and everything else based on that foundation of the joined vision of those two men' - but still the result turned out to be. let's face it, rather mediocre.

---

For me - let's have a bit bigger picture here - actually it was the third test by the Stones to see if they could able to come up with something memorable again. If we leave out the 'buddy-buddy', post WWWIII reunion album STEEL WHEELS (Mick and Keith coming up with the songs together and all of them recording them damn quickly Stones-wise), VOODOO LOUNGE, with the help of their new producer Don Was, was a serious try to make a Stones album 'like they used to' - spending much time by the whole band mostly - in a studio and taking all the time needed. People seem to have mixed feelings about the results these days - but I don't see neither Mick or Keith being too proud about the outcome. Jagger was seemingly pleased with the sales, but that's about it. "You Got Me Rocking" indeed. To my ears VOODOO LOUNGE is musically and artistically qualitiwise rather close relative to A BIGGER BANG - both relying rather textbook-like on their typical sound and musical vocabulary, but both distant cries from the quality of their best works.

So the next album was done differently, mostly just putting a Mick and Keith solo album together - a forced marriage, so to say. Again, people seem to have mixed feelings about BRIDGES TO BABYLON, but probably it is nowadays rated a bit above the rest of modern era albums. Usually the favourite individual songs are picked up from this album (as, for example, I do). Jagger seems to be fond of "Out of Control" (reflecting the workability in a concert), and Keith even mentions some song from it in LIFE, but I don't see them being too proud of it either. Should they?

So, to sum this up, three different experiments to come up with something memorable:

(1) VOODOO LOUNGE: an 'old style' Stones album by the effort of the whole band working together.
(2) BRIDGES TO BABYLON: Jagger and Richards doing their stuff separatively
(3) A BIGGER BANG: Jagger and Richards making a solo (duet) album together, the rest just adding their pieces later.

Surely there are nice numbers here and there - and none is not any 'bad' album, but basically just rather forgetable - but I don't think there is much difference in quality between the albums. In many ways they musically even sound pretty much the same (yeah, BRIDGES a bit more 'experimental'). And something in me says that there might exist the biggest reason why they haven't been very profilic for the last quarter half century or so - and especially after A BIGGER BANG (which I think was a very serious try to work out something 'magical' by just the Twins face to face). They probably are rather awere that the 'magic' is no longer there, no matter what they do - or how they do it.

I don't think none of these albums are some half-assed efforts, like them intentionally releasing second-rate material. No, I think they put them all their energy and ability and creative power they got at the time (in which we need to remember the age and the lack of true hunger factor). Like always. Which brings us to some comments or hopes mentioned in regards to the upcoming album. I don't think there is a sudden switch button available for them now - that 'hey, this is going to be our last album - let's make a great album this time'. Mick and Keith's songs doesn't suddenly improve from mediocrity to brilliance by a sheer power of will (decision). Or by how much time they put on recording them by with whatever combo or method. If it would be that easy.... But the creativity just doesn't work that way...

But a romantic fool like me always believes in miracles...

- Doxa



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 01:58 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

So, to sum this up, three different experiments :

(1) VOODOO LOUNGE: Stones
(2) BRIDGES TO BABYLON: Jagger and Richards
(3) A BIGGER BANG: Jagger and Richards

But a romantic fool like me always believes in miracles...

- Doxa

Three very good half-great albums, each better than anything released by
any other recording artist in that particular year

And you already got your first miracle Blue & Lonesome, a work of
astonishing creativity by an extremely tight unit. Composing is but a facet
of creativity

the stones created a whole new world starting in 1962, even though
they were only doing covers



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 02:09 by rev20.

Quote
Rocky Dijon

Quote
Hairball
As for the acclaim, I thought it was a #1 in various places around the world? And sold quite a few by today's standards? And for a classic rock band to achieve any success in the context of today's musical climate is an achievement in itself. I think georgelicks was posting all of the chart success, etc. as it happened, and it seemed it made much more of an impact than simply falling "under the radar", but I could be wrong.

It did top the charts many places. I was limiting my remarks to the States. That said, even the chart showing Stateside was impressive relatively speaking. The thing is, as you say, "in this musical climate," a Top 10 or #1 placement doesn't take much. The charts are almost meaningless when the units sold are so abysmal.

I didn't mean to pick on you, Hairball, and I realize it likely came off that way. I meant what I said about the industry being a rapidly shrinking body of water. Almost every artist disappears off the grid way too soon.

__________________________________________



Don't pick on Hairball... he's a good kat. Anyone who has a problem with Hairball has a problem with me .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 02:03 by IanBillen.

Quote
rev20


And you already got your first miracle Blue & Lonesome, a work of
astonishing creativity. Composing is but a facet of creativity

the stones created a whole new world starting in 1962, even though
they were only doing covers

With that I agree wholeheartily! I was among those who thought the idea of The Stones doing a pure blues cover album sounded good in a theory but not so good in practise. I was afraid it turning a way too one-dimensional, even dull as a whole. To make blues actually exciting isn't so easy task at all. But I was totally wrong - the album was an incredible musical statement. Miracles do happen! Probably when you the least expect them...

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 02:13 by Doxa.

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
Rocky Dijon

Quote
Hairball
As for the acclaim, I thought it was a #1 in various places around the world? And sold quite a few by today's standards? And for a classic rock band to achieve any success in the context of today's musical climate is an achievement in itself. I think georgelicks was posting all of the chart success, etc. as it happened, and it seemed it made much more of an impact than simply falling "under the radar", but I could be wrong.

It did top the charts many places. I was limiting my remarks to the States. That said, even the chart showing Stateside was impressive relatively speaking. The thing is, as you say, "in this musical climate," a Top 10 or #1 placement doesn't take much. The charts are almost meaningless when the units sold are so abysmal.

I didn't mean to pick on you, Hairball, and I realize it likely came off that way. I meant what I said about the industry being a rapidly shrinking body of water. Almost every artist disappears off the grid way too soon.

__________________________________________



Don't pick on Hairball... he's a good kat. Anyone who has a problem with Hairball has a problem with me .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

Lol no worries Ian...- Rocky and I are good...all is good in *Stonesland!

*Similar to Disneyland with various characters including Mickey, Minnie, Donald Duck, Pluto, Jiminy Cricket, Snow White, the Seven Dwarfs, and even Goofy!!!




And can't forget about all the pirates...and Peter Pan...and Tinkerbell...lol

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

Quote
Doxa

Quote
rev20


And you already got your first miracle Blue & Lonesome, a work of
astonishing creativity. Composing is but a facet of creativity

the stones created a whole new world starting in 1962, even though
they were only doing covers

With that I agree wholeheartily! I was among those who thought the idea of The Stones doing a pure blues cover album sounded good in a theory but not so good in practise. I was afraid it turning a way too one-dimensional, even dull as a whole. To make blues actually exciting isn't so easy task at all. But I was totally wrong - the album was an incredible musical statement. Miracles do happen! Probably when you the least expect them...

- Doxa

And to that Doxa all I can say is: I was exactly the same. A big skeptic
about a blues album, but they pulled it off bigly. At the time, such a
counter-intuitive move from a marketing perspective, but in retrospect,
a brilliant escape from the cage that insane expectations had placed them in.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
Rocky Dijon

Quote
Hairball
As for the acclaim, I thought it was a #1 in various places around the world? And sold quite a few by today's standards? And for a classic rock band to achieve any success in the context of today's musical climate is an achievement in itself. I think georgelicks was posting all of the chart success, etc. as it happened, and it seemed it made much more of an impact than simply falling "under the radar", but I could be wrong.

It did top the charts many places. I was limiting my remarks to the States. That said, even the chart showing Stateside was impressive relatively speaking. The thing is, as you say, "in this musical climate," a Top 10 or #1 placement doesn't take much. The charts are almost meaningless when the units sold are so abysmal.

I didn't mean to pick on you, Hairball, and I realize it likely came off that way. I meant what I said about the industry being a rapidly shrinking body of water. Almost every artist disappears off the grid way too soon.

__________________________________________



Don't pick on Hairball... he's a good kat. Anyone who has a problem with Hairball has a problem with me .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

Lol no worries Ian...- Rocky and I are good...all is good in *Stonesland!

*Similar to Disneyland with various characters including Mickey, Minnie, Donald Duck, Pluto, Jiminy Cricket, Snow White, the Seven Dwarfs, and even Goofy!!!




And can't forget about all the pirates...and Peter Pan...and Tinkerbell...lol

_________________________



I kno .


But speaking of Disney .. Would I be considered 'Goofy'?.. Fw*****k .. ha

Quote
rev20

Quote
Doxa

So, to sum this up, three different experiments :

(1) VOODOO LOUNGE: Stones
(2) BRIDGES TO BABYLON: Jagger and Richards
(3) A BIGGER BANG: Jagger and Richards

But a romantic fool like me always believes in miracles...

- Doxa

Three very good half-great albums, each better than anything released by
any other recording artist in that particular year

I need to comment still that even I don't seemingly respect those albums as much you do, there is always something in Stones doings that I simply cannot resist. It is a kind of subjective affection or interest for all Stones stuff. The blind 'fanboy' in me, which comes from way past. After that, or on that base, I start to be more critical or 'objective' about them. But it is like moving into another universe in where 'the good, the bad and the ugly' starts to exist - heart replaced by mind, a fanboy turning into a music critic, the private person listening music turning into this public character called Doxa writing about it in IORR. But still, I basically find even their worst artistic failures somehow fascinating. If nothing else, more stimulating material to tell some more stories about them...

Actually the term 'to like' is pretty hard for me to define... There are so many levels in it or it refers to such a different things..

Do I sound scizophrenic?

- Doxa

Doxa I am certainly not saying that anybody needs to like those albums
as much as I do

But the challenge I have put out there before is to look at, say,
Billboard's top 200 albums for that year and tell me which of those
albums you still think now was better that what the Stones put out

i've done this maybe four times and no one has ever come up with anything

you can certainly still not like very much what the Stones did that year,
but if you don't have something else that has endured better for you,
that still says something important i think

Quote
rev20
Doxa I am certainly not saying that anybody needs to like those albums
as much as I do

But the challenge I have put out there before is to look at, say,
Billboard's top 200 albums for that year and tell me which of those
albums you still think now was better that what the Stones put out

i've done this maybe four times and no one has ever come up with anything

ok, don't think charts equals to quality so I dont know the billboard positions of those that comes to my mind.

of course it is a matter of personal taste but, trying to keep some objectivity, I do thinks these album are better than the stones'(and I still listen them a lot)

in 1994: Jeff Buckley's Grace, Pavement's Crooked Rain Crooked Rain (my fav of them, their most "stonesy" album), Portishead's Dummy, Beck's Mellow Gold, Pearl Jam's Vitalogy, Liz Phair's Whip Smart, (some say but i dont: Oasis' Definitely Maybe)

in 1997: Blur's Self titled, Chemical Bros' Dig your own jole, Bjork's Homogenic, Pavement's Brighten the corners, Elliott Smith's Either Or, Sleater Kinney's Dig me out and (some say) Radiohead's Ok Computer

in 2005: Sufjan Steven' Illinoise, Anthony & The Johnsons' I am a bird now, Sleater Kinney's The Woods, White Stripes' Get Behind me satan, maybe even Springsteen's Devil'and dust

maumau, i think its very cool how much music you like and listen to.
i only know to some extent about a third of what you've listed and none
of it has stuck with me, mostly because the artists have not stuck with me.
i tend to be artist-oriented and attracted to those making both great
music and impacting the culture overall, setting positive trends and
having compelling personalities

except for single tracks, not albums, which can come out of anywhere for me,
from any era or genre, and be totally obscure.

i'm just guessing of course, but i'll bet if i was at your place and you
were playing your favorite cuts for me from any of those albums, that i could
appreciate them and hear what you hear and probably some of them would become
favorite cuts for me too

but i'm pretty sure you are an unusual hardcore Stones fan in having such
active and broad appetites in music, and to not need and perhaps not even enjoy
all the hype and drama that comes with big-name artists like the Stones



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 05:37 by rev20.

Quote
Doxa

---

So, to sum this up, three different experiments to come up with something memorable:

(1) VOODOO LOUNGE: an 'old style' Stones album by the effort of the whole band working together.
(2) BRIDGES TO BABYLON: Jagger and Richards doing their stuff separatively
(3) A BIGGER BANG: Jagger and Richards making a solo (duet) album together, the rest just adding their pieces later.

Surely there are nice numbers here and there - and none is not any 'bad' album, but basically just rather forgetable - but I don't think there is much difference in quality between the albums. In many ways they musically even sound pretty much the same (yeah, BRIDGES a bit more 'experimental'). And something in me says that there might exist the biggest reason why they haven't been very profilic for the last quarter half century or so - and especially after A BIGGER BANG (which I think was a very serious try to work out something 'magical' by just the Twins face to face). They probably are rather awere that the 'magic' is no longer there, no matter what they do - or how they do it.

I don't think none of these albums are some half-assed efforts, like them intentionally releasing second-rate material. No, I think they put them all their energy and ability and creative power they got at the time (in which we need to remember the age and the lack of true hunger factor). Like always. Which brings us to some comments or hopes mentioned in regards to the upcoming album. I don't think there is a sudden switch button available for them now - that 'hey, this is going to be our last album - let's make a great album this time'. Mick and Keith's songs doesn't suddenly improve from mediocrity to brilliance by a sheer power of will (decision). Or by how much time they put on recording them by with whatever combo or method. If it would be that easy.... But the creativity just doesn't work that way...

But a romantic fool like me always believes in miracles...

- Doxa

While I largely agree with your thoughts, I'd like to add to the whole picture the fact that in the first half of the 90's, both Mick and Keith released solo albums that included song material that would have graced Voodoo Lounge and, a bit later, Bridges. Think of Hate It When You Leave, Wandering Spirit, Don't Tear Me Up, Evening Gown, Out Of Focus - stuff like this would have helped to propel either VL and/or Bridges out of the realms of mediocrity, and things like New Faces sounding like Angel In My Heart's little sister or Suck On The Jugular's backing track being almost identital to a certain remix of Sweet Thing on a Jagger solo single only added to my impression that the 90's Stones albums did not suffer from a lack of suitable material, but from keeping their best songs for their solo albums.

A couple of years later, the well obviously went a bit dry. But even ABB could have been saved to a certain extent with the inclusion of Under The Radar, Jagger's "Blue" (why this is hidden as a b-side track of a Jagger solo single is beyond me), Old Habits Die Hard instead of Streets Of Love, a better, warmer/less harsh production and the exclusion of some just forgettable material, and in case they would have wanted to keep the album's lenght as it was, filling the gap with a cover or two, I'll Go Crazy or whatever. They had great covers on their albums in the 60's and 70's, why can't they do it now if they're in need of one or two songs to round up an album? I mean, even in the 90's Jagger covering Bill Wither's Use Me did his Wandering Spirit album no harm (in fact I liked it a lot!).

To sum it up, we could have had (probably even considerably) better albums in VL, Bridges and ABB. The material was there.

What's happening now with the new album is a different thing altogether. Could be that they simply lost their focus and the album never appears. Could also very well be that behind the scenes, they're cooking something great.

Like you, I love to believe in miracles...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 05:35 by retired_dog.