Quote
GasLightStreet
They worked on BLACK AND BLUE the month they started rehearsing for their 1975 tour. They didn't get back to it until October, with their last show being in early August. They finished work on the album in December.

STEEL WHEELS was April-June, rehearsals in mid-July through August.

So they have worked on LPs right before a tour but it generally is not the case.

Quote
ukcal
Any one got any links to the real Tattoo You story, as I'm sure after all the stories about using outtakes etc, that it was Mick and session musicians that finish the lp, any truth in that?

The 81/82 tour rocked with Keith and ronnie on backing vocals, and some how they played plenty of new songs (8/9) from SG, ER and TTY....now we would be happy with one!

Quote
KRiffhard

Quote
ukcal
Any one got any links to the real Tattoo You story, as I'm sure after all the stories about using outtakes etc, that it was Mick and session musicians that finish the lp, any truth in that?

The 81/82 tour rocked with Keith and ronnie on backing vocals, and some how they played plenty of new songs (8/9) from SG, ER and TTY....now we would be happy with one!

[www.soundonsound.com]

Quote
GasLightStreet
They worked on BLACK AND BLUE the month they started rehearsing for their 1975 tour. They didn't get back to it until October, with their last show being in early August. They finished work on the album in December.

STEEL WHEELS was April-June, rehearsals in mid-July through August.

So they have worked on LPs right before a tour but it generally is not the case.

Quote
Ian Billen
Thank you for the input and this is interesting however I mentioned that they
never worked on an album right before a tour in which there was no release
of that album during the tour.

Quote
Ian Billen
Strange they did it again at this stage of their game?

Quote
Ian Billen
I think UMG inquired about said album in which The Stones took the hint or perhaps it is in their contract to complete it in 2019 so they were making up for lost time as the article stated (if the article is legit).

This is my opinion. Until I hear otherwise .. it won't change.

Quote
georgelicks
There's nothing new to report when the album won't be released until 2020 at least, according to some sources the album is about 50/60% done, at least the 18-20 songs the band is working on/off during the last 3+ years, they want to keep working on it until its done right.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Ian Billen
Thank you for the input and this is interesting however I mentioned that they
never worked on an album right before a tour in which there was no release
of that album during the tour.

And never before has a band member had heart surgery delaying the tour by a couple of months giving other band members some extra time to work in the studio.
What else are they going to do...tune their guitars and twiddle their thumbs until rehearsals? And when said member has fully recovered, maybe he's feeling the itch to get back to work!

Quote
Ian Billen
Strange they did it again at this stage of their game?

No, nothing strange about it when you consider the unique circumstances which has never happened before.

Quote
Ian Billen
I think UMG inquired about said album in which The Stones took the hint or perhaps it is in their contract to complete it in 2019 so they were making up for lost time as the article stated (if the article is legit).

This is my opinion. Until I hear otherwise .. it won't change.

Who you gonna believe, an anonymous "spokesperson" from a non-existent article, or good old georgelicks?
And lets imagine for a minute that this supposed spokesperson and/or quote was legit. Wouldn't they be speaking to Billboard or Rolling Stone magazine vs. the Daily Mail?
You know, something that's sort of based in reality vs. something that's mostly based in imaginary gossip? But believe what you will, while I'll stick with the known facts.

Quote
georgelicks
There's nothing new to report when the album won't be released until 2020 at least, according to some sources the album is about 50/60% done, at least the 18-20 songs the band is working on/off during the last 3+ years, they want to keep working on it until its done right.

Happy Memorial Day Ian.

Quote
Doxa

Sorry but I don't believe anything of what you say; it might apply to some band in Pittsbourg but not for the Stones. All of this talk about 'contract obligatory new album of originals' (been here for years) is just a fanboy talk, based on non-facts, but on false and wishfull interpretations of their record deals (based on past). There is no "record contract for some millions based on this album" - I don't know from where that myth derived from. The same goes for those supposed investments by UMG. But there is a (yet another) deal of ten years with UMG (renewed last year), which involves much more and is much bigger than that. Believe me or not, but The Rolling Stones, with that catologue and brand, is not a 'normal band' when you go to make deals with distributors/record companies.

All I can understand with this "they owe an album, they are obliged to do it due to the contract" etc. is that it is just projection from personal needs/wishes going too far. Like: they need to do it, because I want to them to do that, and I need some outer justification for that. No, there is not one. It is just up to them. There is no law, there is no contract, there is nothing to force them to do it. If they call it quits tomorrow, no one can do anything. And they won't be owing anything to anyone.

I really can't understand why it is so hard to understand or accept. Why not just enjoy that they are up to it for the sake of its own. Because they want to do it.

- Doxa

Quote
IanBillen
I was under the impression they were all in the studio together?

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
GasLightStreet
They worked on BLACK AND BLUE the month they started rehearsing for their 1975 tour. They didn't get back to it until October, with their last show being in early August. They finished work on the album in December.

STEEL WHEELS was April-June, rehearsals in mid-July through August.

So they have worked on LPs right before a tour but it generally is not the case.

Thank you for the input and this is interesting however I mentioned that they
never worked on an album right before a tour in which there was no release
of that album during the tour.

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
KRiffhard

Quote
ukcal
Any one got any links to the real Tattoo You story, as I'm sure after all the stories about using outtakes etc, that it was Mick and session musicians that finish the lp, any truth in that?

The 81/82 tour rocked with Keith and ronnie on backing vocals, and some how they played plenty of new songs (8/9) from SG, ER and TTY....now we would be happy with one!

[www.soundonsound.com]

That's a great read.
But I don't think Kimsey quite answers ukcal's question. When Kimsey found the basic tracks for 'Slave' and 'Tops', etc, how close were they to completion and what did he have to do to round them off? Vocals, yes. Mick did those. But is it a matter of splicing together different takes? Did additional overdubs have to be made? It's been commented on these boards that a lot of Keith's magic consists of layering several guitar lines onto a track. Did Mick himself add or replace some of the guitar parts, especially on Side 2 ballads? On Start Me Up, Bill's bass is huge -- was that on the basic track or did they bring him in to play along to the guitar track? I have many questions like that.
But I love this type of story and discussion. I think eventually future generations will be more interested in the sound the Stones created and not so much interested in the drug busts and girlfriends/wives and fashions.

Quote
ukcal
Thanks for the reply guys, I always thought it was Keith on bass for Start me up, just from listening to it, it kinda echos the riff rather than a simple bass line, wish Daryl would listen to it

Quote
marquess
No news about the new LP...?

Quote
marquess
No news about the new LP...?

Quote
Hairball
I have a feeling there will be a NO FILTER LIVE album/DVD happening not long after the tour is over maybe just in time for Christmas - including multiple formats and editions.

*Also, would be nice if they did an official live stream of one of the upcoming shows - even if it's a pay-per-view where they could make more money. I might be willing to pay $10 for that.

Quote
marquess
No news about the new LP...?

Quote
Doxa

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
Doxa

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
Rokyfan

Quote
IanBillen
Perhaps Universal finally said .. ok boys .. let's go .. get to it.


Maybe in so many words they figured The Stones have had enough breaks .. ya-all do everything else .. get to that album you guys took out a contract with us for (in so many kind official words channeling down the pipeline to them).


I would bet that is the real reason they got right back to it (even this close right before a tour).

So you think the young suits at Universal have laid down the law?

I think the Stones do what they want, period. And their lawyers are smart enough so that it is reflected in any contract with Universal. They will do what they want when they want. That's just my guess.

I'd like to be in the room when keith is told "you guys have had enough breaks."

________________________________________________


Well that's not exactly what I meant .. I don't think they 'laid down the law' .. so much. I don't think they said 'get working on it or we are going to cancel or sue'. I simply think they started to funnel some word down the pipeline on requesting status updates .. material ... etc. In other words.. they probably eloquently sent requests or inquiries to put a little pressure on The Stones in an eloquent way is what I think happened. The execs probably figured .. at this age anything can happen .. Mick just had heart surgery ... let's start this ball rolling sooner better than later. I think The Stones 'took the hint' is how the situation went down if it to be the case.

That would make the most sense if it is the case based on who they are, their situation ... etc (which is a sort of special situation .. but I think Universal said .. look .. special time is over .. so then .. what's the latest on this album fellas? .. and guess what .. I don't blame them. Certainly glad someone did!

Yeah, I am sure, The guy had just a heart procedure. And the next thing the record company will do is: 'You! Do that album before you die!'

The Rolling Stones is not any normal band or artist being any servant of any record company or fanbase having whatever expectations. You try that career of 57 years, win and define everything is needed and more, what is to be a 'band' or an 'artist' in this professional business of heavy weights, and then teach your daddy how to @#$%&.

- Doxa

___________________________________________


Right .. and the guy is going on a stadium tour .. In their (the record companies) eyes .. If he is well enough to go on yet another stadium tour .. he is well enough to deliver the album. They get no kickback from the tour .. so they are being left hanging and I think they are getting tired of it (w/o being like Uncle Vinny).


A record company is a business .. They have a contract for some millions based on this album ... Doesn't matter what they done in the past .. what truly matters to them is the bottom line. If we are tired of not enough progress on the album ... I KNOW they are tired of it. They have muuucho dollars invested in it.


Try getting a record contract and passing off year after year with no product. See how that goes for ya ... Whether you are The Rolling Stones or not .. there comes a point and time when people want paid and a product they hired lawyers to draw up.

Sorry but I don't believe anything of what you say; it might apply to some band in Pittsbourg but not for the Stones. All of this talk about 'contract obligatory new album of originals' (been here for years) is just a fanboy talk, based on non-facts, but on false and wishfull interpretations of their record deals (based on past). There is no "record contract for some millions based on this album" - I don't know from where that myth derived from. The same goes for those supposed investments by UMG. But there is a (yet another) deal of ten years with UMG (renewed last year), which involves much more and is much bigger than that. Believe me or not, but The Rolling Stones, with that catologue and brand, is not a 'normal band' when you go to make deals with distributors/record companies.

All I can understand with this "they owe an album, they are obliged to do it due to the contract" etc. is that it is just projection from personal needs/wishes going too far. Like: they need to do it, because I want to them to do that, and I need some outer justification for that. No, there is not one. It is just up to them. There is no law, there is no contract, there is nothing to force them to do it. If they call it quits tomorrow, no one can do anything. And they won't be owing anything to anyone.

I really can't understand why it is so hard to understand or accept. Why not just enjoy that they are up to it for the sake of its own. Because they want to do it.

- Doxa

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Doxa

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
Doxa

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
Rokyfan

Quote
IanBillen
Perhaps Universal finally said .. ok boys .. let's go .. get to it.


Maybe in so many words they figured The Stones have had enough breaks .. ya-all do everything else .. get to that album you guys took out a contract with us for (in so many kind official words channeling down the pipeline to them).


I would bet that is the real reason they got right back to it (even this close right before a tour).

So you think the young suits at Universal have laid down the law?

I think the Stones do what they want, period. And their lawyers are smart enough so that it is reflected in any contract with Universal. They will do what they want when they want. That's just my guess.

I'd like to be in the room when keith is told "you guys have had enough breaks."

________________________________________________


Well that's not exactly what I meant .. I don't think they 'laid down the law' .. so much. I don't think they said 'get working on it or we are going to cancel or sue'. I simply think they started to funnel some word down the pipeline on requesting status updates .. material ... etc. In other words.. they probably eloquently sent requests or inquiries to put a little pressure on The Stones in an eloquent way is what I think happened. The execs probably figured .. at this age anything can happen .. Mick just had heart surgery ... let's start this ball rolling sooner better than later. I think The Stones 'took the hint' is how the situation went down if it to be the case.

That would make the most sense if it is the case based on who they are, their situation ... etc (which is a sort of special situation .. but I think Universal said .. look .. special time is over .. so then .. what's the latest on this album fellas? .. and guess what .. I don't blame them. Certainly glad someone did!

Yeah, I am sure, The guy had just a heart procedure. And the next thing the record company will do is: 'You! Do that album before you die!'

The Rolling Stones is not any normal band or artist being any servant of any record company or fanbase having whatever expectations. You try that career of 57 years, win and define everything is needed and more, what is to be a 'band' or an 'artist' in this professional business of heavy weights, and then teach your daddy how to @#$%&.

- Doxa

___________________________________________


Right .. and the guy is going on a stadium tour .. In their (the record companies) eyes .. If he is well enough to go on yet another stadium tour .. he is well enough to deliver the album. They get no kickback from the tour .. so they are being left hanging and I think they are getting tired of it (w/o being like Uncle Vinny).


A record company is a business .. They have a contract for some millions based on this album ... Doesn't matter what they done in the past .. what truly matters to them is the bottom line. If we are tired of not enough progress on the album ... I KNOW they are tired of it. They have muuucho dollars invested in it.


Try getting a record contract and passing off year after year with no product. See how that goes for ya ... Whether you are The Rolling Stones or not .. there comes a point and time when people want paid and a product they hired lawyers to draw up.

Sorry but I don't believe anything of what you say; it might apply to some band in Pittsbourg but not for the Stones. All of this talk about 'contract obligatory new album of originals' (been here for years) is just a fanboy talk, based on non-facts, but on false and wishfull interpretations of their record deals (based on past). There is no "record contract for some millions based on this album" - I don't know from where that myth derived from. The same goes for those supposed investments by UMG. But there is a (yet another) deal of ten years with UMG (renewed last year), which involves much more and is much bigger than that. Believe me or not, but The Rolling Stones, with that catologue and brand, is not a 'normal band' when you go to make deals with distributors/record companies.

All I can understand with this "they owe an album, they are obliged to do it due to the contract" etc. is that it is just projection from personal needs/wishes going too far. Like: they need to do it, because I want to them to do that, and I need some outer justification for that. No, there is not one. It is just up to them. There is no law, there is no contract, there is nothing to force them to do it. If they call it quits tomorrow, no one can do anything. And they won't be owing anything to anyone.

I really can't understand why it is so hard to understand or accept. Why not just enjoy that they are up to it for the sake of its own. Because they want to do it.

- Doxa

Doxa,

I told this guy more or less exactly the same already. No luck. He just goes on with his endless ramblings about record deals he simply knows nothing about and how the Stones are forced to record new material by contract clauses he also knows nothing about. He does not even understand the concept that the Stones deal with Universal is not even a record deal in the traditional sense, but a licensing deal that includes all kinds of different subjects. Universal is not their record company that pays all the studio bills and therefore could press the band to finally deliver the end product. Their "record company" is Promotone which pays all the bills, therefore owns all the rights and simply licenses the product to Universal for a contractually agreed time span. The Stones are free to do whatever they want - record a new album or discard the project altogether. All they would lose are their licensing fees for this album, and I have serious doubts that they would amount to a sum that they could earn with just a single concert (or maybe two).

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Doxa

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
Doxa

Quote
IanBillen

Quote
Rokyfan

Quote
IanBillen
Perhaps Universal finally said .. ok boys .. let's go .. get to it.


Maybe in so many words they figured The Stones have had enough breaks .. ya-all do everything else .. get to that album you guys took out a contract with us for (in so many kind official words channeling down the pipeline to them).


I would bet that is the real reason they got right back to it (even this close right before a tour).

So you think the young suits at Universal have laid down the law?

I think the Stones do what they want, period. And their lawyers are smart enough so that it is reflected in any contract with Universal. They will do what they want when they want. That's just my guess.

I'd like to be in the room when keith is told "you guys have had enough breaks."

________________________________________________


Well that's not exactly what I meant .. I don't think they 'laid down the law' .. so much. I don't think they said 'get working on it or we are going to cancel or sue'. I simply think they started to funnel some word down the pipeline on requesting status updates .. material ... etc. In other words.. they probably eloquently sent requests or inquiries to put a little pressure on The Stones in an eloquent way is what I think happened. The execs probably figured .. at this age anything can happen .. Mick just had heart surgery ... let's start this ball rolling sooner better than later. I think The Stones 'took the hint' is how the situation went down if it to be the case.

That would make the most sense if it is the case based on who they are, their situation ... etc (which is a sort of special situation .. but I think Universal said .. look .. special time is over .. so then .. what's the latest on this album fellas? .. and guess what .. I don't blame them. Certainly glad someone did!

Yeah, I am sure, The guy had just a heart procedure. And the next thing the record company will do is: 'You! Do that album before you die!'

The Rolling Stones is not any normal band or artist being any servant of any record company or fanbase having whatever expectations. You try that career of 57 years, win and define everything is needed and more, what is to be a 'band' or an 'artist' in this professional business of heavy weights, and then teach your daddy how to @#$%&.

- Doxa

___________________________________________


Right .. and the guy is going on a stadium tour .. In their (the record companies) eyes .. If he is well enough to go on yet another stadium tour .. he is well enough to deliver the album. They get no kickback from the tour .. so they are being left hanging and I think they are getting tired of it (w/o being like Uncle Vinny).


A record company is a business .. They have a contract for some millions based on this album ... Doesn't matter what they done in the past .. what truly matters to them is the bottom line. If we are tired of not enough progress on the album ... I KNOW they are tired of it. They have muuucho dollars invested in it.


Try getting a record contract and passing off year after year with no product. See how that goes for ya ... Whether you are The Rolling Stones or not .. there comes a point and time when people want paid and a product they hired lawyers to draw up.

Sorry but I don't believe anything of what you say; it might apply to some band in Pittsbourg but not for the Stones. All of this talk about 'contract obligatory new album of originals' (been here for years) is just a fanboy talk, based on non-facts, but on false and wishfull interpretations of their record deals (based on past). There is no "record contract for some millions based on this album" - I don't know from where that myth derived from. The same goes for those supposed investments by UMG. But there is a (yet another) deal of ten years with UMG (renewed last year), which involves much more and is much bigger than that. Believe me or not, but The Rolling Stones, with that catologue and brand, is not a 'normal band' when you go to make deals with distributors/record companies.

All I can understand with this "they owe an album, they are obliged to do it due to the contract" etc. is that it is just projection from personal needs/wishes going too far. Like: they need to do it, because I want to them to do that, and I need some outer justification for that. No, there is not one. It is just up to them. There is no law, there is no contract, there is nothing to force them to do it. If they call it quits tomorrow, no one can do anything. And they won't be owing anything to anyone.

I really can't understand why it is so hard to understand or accept. Why not just enjoy that they are up to it for the sake of its own. Because they want to do it.

- Doxa

Doxa,

I told this guy more or less exactly the same already. No luck. He just goes on with his endless ramblings about record deals he simply knows nothing about and how the Stones are forced to record new material by contract clauses he also knows nothing about. He does not even understand the concept that the Stones deal with Universal is not even a record deal in the traditional sense, but a licensing deal that includes all kinds of different subjects. Universal is not their record company that pays all the studio bills and therefore could press the band to finally deliver the end product. Their "record company" is Promotone which pays all the bills, therefore owns all the rights and simply licenses the product to Universal for a contractually agreed time span. The Stones are free to do whatever they want - record a new album or discard the project altogether. All they would lose are their licensing fees for this album, and I have serious doubts that they would amount to a sum that they could earn with just a single concert (or maybe two).