Quote
Doxa

Quote
bye bye johnny

Quote
Doxa
I really like to see that article, since I can't recall ever seeing it.

[www.dailymail.co.uk]

Yeah, there it is, thanks! Ian was right. That was "renewed deal" from 2017. I wonder if the success of BLUE & LONESOME inspired UMG to throw more money on the table to make sure the Stones, England's newest hit album makers, after all, are going to finish that album of originals. But then again, I wonder what might have happened to that deal - or that 2 million pounds - when they 'renewed' the deal again last year.

- Doxa

The common inaccuracies in reports like this and usual promo exaggerations lead us to think more complicated than the truth most likely is:

The renewed deal includes back catalog items as usual plus merchandising and other subjects (tape archival matters for example). It includes -like I already mentioned above- particular paragraphs how a new studio album will be dealt with when they actually come up with one: Release through Universal, extra advance payment (in addition to back catalog and other subjects) and possibly higher licensing fees per album compared to back catalog items. Plus more agreements on promotion/marketing of the new album. That's all.

Now if there really is an agreement about an additional/separate advance payment for a new studio album, the question is when the payment is due. There are many possible dates - immediately after signing of the contract, start of studio work, delivery of the finished master tapes - whatever. It's also possible that a number of payment dates have been arranged when the advance has to be paid in parts.

The exact contract details are not known, and this fact alone leads to different interpretations here: If the agreed advance has been paid already in full (or a large part of the total amount), Universal could indeed put some pressure on the Stones, in particular if there were contractual deadlines involved. That's more or less Ian's interpretation.

I go with insider's reports that Universal is still cool, calm and collected and don't expect the album anytime soon - what would indicate that they haven't paid the advance yet, at least not in full. If the agreed payment date is the delivery of the finished masters, there could be no pressure at all. The Stones deliver - or they don't. Even the time when they deliver the masters is purely up to them. Considering their age and working method in recent years, this is the most likely scenario and the only one that sums up.

Quote
GasLightStreet
UMG isn't Apple.

What money, if any, they're throwing at the Stones is chump change. Apple paid U2 somewhere around $100 million just to be able to license their album for A MONTH.

Promotone. What a goofy name for... discogs.com says it like this:

Promotone B.V.
Profile:
Unspecified company entity used by The Rolling Stones since the 70s. Please note this is not a label.

Parent Label:
Rolling Stones Records

[www.discogs.com]

It's simply a company that owns the recordings of The Rolling Stones. BV is equivalent to the English LTD or American LLC.

____________________________________


Correct. I stated all that .. and so did the person I was debating all this with. Thanks for the research though... always good to have. People act like Im making this stuff up or that I don't know what I'm talking about at times lol.

My theory is based on the information at hand or that has been channeled down (not that every bit or every story of it is 110% accurate .. but SOMETHING or SOME PART probably is). Just going by the info we have and what makes sense in the real world ... not in some kind of Rolling Stones fantasy land ..


Rock on.


Ian



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-01 00:08 by IanBillen.

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Doxa

Quote
bye bye johnny

Quote
Doxa
I really like to see that article, since I can't recall ever seeing it.

[www.dailymail.co.uk]

Yeah, there it is, thanks! Ian was right. That was "renewed deal" from 2017. I wonder if the success of BLUE & LONESOME inspired UMG to throw more money on the table to make sure the Stones, England's newest hit album makers, after all, are going to finish that album of originals. But then again, I wonder what might have happened to that deal - or that 2 million pounds - when they 'renewed' the deal again last year.

- Doxa

The common inaccuracies in reports like this and usual promo exaggerations lead us to think more complicated than the truth most likely is:

The renewed deal includes back catalog items as usual plus merchandising and other subjects (tape archival matters for example). It includes -like I already mentioned above- particular paragraphs how a new studio album will be dealt with when they actually come up with one: Release through Universal, extra advance payment (in addition to back catalog and other subjects) and possibly higher licensing fees per album compared to back catalog items. Plus more agreements on promotion/marketing of the new album. That's all.

Now if there really is an agreement about an additional/separate advance payment for a new studio album, the question is when the payment is due. There are many possible dates - immediately after signing of the contract, start of studio work, delivery of the finished master tapes - whatever. It's also possible that a number of payment dates have been arranged when the advance has to be paid in parts.

The exact contract details are not known, and this fact alone leads to different interpretations here: If the agreed advance has been paid already in full (or a large part of the total amount), Universal could indeed put some pressure on the Stones, in particular if there were contractual deadlines involved. That's more or less Ian's interpretation.

I go with insider's reports that Universal is still cool, calm and collected and don't expect the album anytime soon - what would indicate that they haven't paid the advance yet, at least not in full. If the agreed payment date is the delivery of the finished masters, there could be no pressure at all. The Stones deliver - or they don't. Even the time when they deliver the masters is purely up to them. Considering their age and working method in recent years, this is the most likely scenario and the only one that sums up.

_______________________________________


I would bet that Universal either stated they would prefer the album some time later this year or at least want some kind of time frame as to when it will be complete. I would guess they asked for it if they did not already have one or both of those stipulations in their contract for it. That is my idea of the 'pressure' everyone mentioned not myself .. (I bet they did .. and seriously as Mick said .. can ya blame them if they did?).


That's my theory.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-01 00:14 by IanBillen.

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Doxa

Quote
bye bye johnny

Quote
Doxa
I really like to see that article, since I can't recall ever seeing it.

[www.dailymail.co.uk]

Yeah, there it is, thanks! Ian was right. That was "renewed deal" from 2017. I wonder if the success of BLUE & LONESOME inspired UMG to throw more money on the table to make sure the Stones, England's newest hit album makers, after all, are going to finish that album of originals. But then again, I wonder what might have happened to that deal - or that 2 million pounds - when they 'renewed' the deal again last year.

- Doxa

The common inaccuracies in reports like this and usual promo exaggerations lead us to think more complicated than the truth most likely is:

The renewed deal includes back catalog items as usual plus merchandising and other subjects (tape archival matters for example). It includes -like I already mentioned above- particular paragraphs how a new studio album will be dealt with when they actually come up with one: Release through Universal, extra advance payment (in addition to back catalog and other subjects) and possibly higher licensing fees per album compared to back catalog items. Plus more agreements on promotion/marketing of the new album. That's all.

Now if there really is an agreement about an additional/separate advance payment for a new studio album, the question is when the payment is due. There are many possible dates - immediately after signing of the contract, start of studio work, delivery of the finished master tapes - whatever. It's also possible that a number of payment dates have been arranged when the advance has to be paid in parts.

The exact contract details are not known, and this fact alone leads to different interpretations here: If the agreed advance has been paid already in full (or a large part of the total amount), Universal could indeed put some pressure on the Stones, in particular if there were contractual deadlines involved. That's more or less Ian's interpretation.

I go with insider's reports that Universal is still cool, calm and collected and don't expect the album anytime soon - what would indicate that they haven't paid the advance yet, at least not in full. If the agreed payment date is the delivery of the finished masters, there could be no pressure at all. The Stones deliver - or they don't. Even the time when they deliver the masters is purely up to them. Considering their age and working method in recent years, this is the most likely scenario and the only one that sums up.

___________________________________________


Well then we disagree on a few minor things.. I think the 2017 deal included an album that had a time frame or date to be completed. Remember .. the article states not for future recordings .. etc. it states specifically for one album .. that being this one.

I don't think they are breathing down the Stones neck .. but I do think they are anxious and did let The Stones know this in one or more ways (most likely recently). I also think they want an answer on when it will be complete (they need to know this too to market nothing else around this window). Look ... They were anxious three years ago according to Mick with no contract .. Now three years later with a contract including for this (or including) this one particular album .. I want you to consider this ... How would Universal/UMG be less anxious now WITH a contract for said record taken two years ago ... than they were three years ago with no contract on the record?

With respect .. but no other way to say it .. 'Do the math' there. It makes sense. Remember... UMG is a business .. Rolling Stones or no Rolling Stones .. it ain't that easy and The Rolling Stones have more leniency than others but they are still a business (sadly .. in a sense... I understand) and so is UMG.


That's my thought and my opinion.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-01 04:58 by IanBillen.

No matter what the UMG or UMe deal is or what Promotone is doing or The Rolling Stones are doing, the results will be what they'll be, which at this point is nothing.

If the internet had been around in 1974 when they started working on BLACK AND BLUE it would probably be similar to now - what are they doing, why is it taking so long, they're not going to release an album, word is they've recorded 40 songs (or whatever it was), who's in the band and on and on and on - they're going on tour before finishing the album!??

This decade, we find things out... and it's one giant freak out. THEY HIT A WALL!

That comment about one day in the studio, not the entire session, turned into a tsunami of bullshit HERE - no where else.

Speaking of the Wall, hard to believe how long ago that happened and still no new album of originals - especially considering how much they've talked about it in the press the last few years.
Kind of interesting to read the original article again after all this time.

From the BBC, 7 October 2016.

The Rolling Stones 'hit a wall' making new music, says Don Was

WALL

The Rolling Stones' new album of blues covers was created after attempts to record new material faltered, producer Don Was has told the BBC.

"We'd gone in the studio to start cutting some new songs," said Was, who has worked with the band since 1994.

"Around day three we just hit a wall... and Keith suggested that, to cleanse the creative palette, we played Blue and Lonesome, the Little Walter song.

"Fortunately we ran the tape and it was just awesome."

He told BBC Radio 6 Music: "The whole mood of the room changed dramatically in those three-and-a-half minutes. So we said, 'let's do another one', and 'let's do another one'.

"They just called songs off that they knew and loved. It was very spontaneous. And by the end of the day we had six."

The result is Blue and Lonesome, the band's first studio album since 2005's A Bigger Bang.

In total, 12 tracks were recorded over three days at London's British Grove Studios. They are all covers of songs by classic bluesmen, including Howlin' Wolf (Commit a Crime), Little Walter (I Gotta Go) and Jimmy Reed (Little Rain).

"They really know this music well," Was told Matt Everitt. "Most of the songs that are on there are songs they played when they first started out, playing pubs in Richmond, so it's kind of second nature to them.

"They do not play karaoke versions. They found their own way to interpret the blues."

Rock legend Eric Clapton also appears on two tracks, Little Johnny Taylor's Everybody Knows About My Good Thing and Otis Rush's I Can't Quit You Baby.

"Eric Clapton was recording next door," explained Was. "He just walked over and he had the same reaction as everyone else did. His jaw just dropped.

"Picture the Rolling Stones just set up in a circle in one room [and] the amplifiers are blaring.

"It reminded him of when he was a teenager, going to see the Stones playing in Richmond. He was just in awe, so he just grabbed one of Keith's guitars and started playing. It was quite a thing."

Blue and Lonesome will be released in December, while the first single Just Your Fool is available from Friday 7 October, to fans who pre-order the record.

Was added that the Stones had not abandoned plans to complete an album of new material.

"Both Keith and Mick have some great new songs," he told Matt Everitt. "They're far from done."

___________________________________________________

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



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-01 06:03 by Hairball.

Quote
Hairball
Speaking of the Wall, hard to believe how long ago that happened and still no new album of originals - especially considering how much they've talked about it in the press the last few years.
Kind of interesting to read the original article again after all this time.

From the BBC, 7 October 2016.

The Rolling Stones 'hit a wall' making new music, says Don Was

WALL

The Rolling Stones' new album of blues covers was created after attempts to record new material faltered, producer Don Was has told the BBC.

"We'd gone in the studio to start cutting some new songs," said Was, who has worked with the band since 1994.

"Around day three we just hit a wall... and Keith suggested that, to cleanse the creative palette, we played Blue and Lonesome, the Little Walter song.

"Fortunately we ran the tape and it was just awesome."

He told BBC Radio 6 Music: "The whole mood of the room changed dramatically in those three-and-a-half minutes. So we said, 'let's do another one', and 'let's do another one'.

"They just called songs off that they knew and loved. It was very spontaneous. And by the end of the day we had six."

The result is Blue and Lonesome, the band's first studio album since 2005's A Bigger Bang.

In total, 12 tracks were recorded over three days at London's British Grove Studios. They are all covers of songs by classic bluesmen, including Howlin' Wolf (Commit a Crime), Little Walter (I Gotta Go) and Jimmy Reed (Little Rain).

"They really know this music well," Was told Matt Everitt. "Most of the songs that are on there are songs they played when they first started out, playing pubs in Richmond, so it's kind of second nature to them.

"They do not play karaoke versions. They found their own way to interpret the blues."

Rock legend Eric Clapton also appears on two tracks, Little Johnny Taylor's Everybody Knows About My Good Thing and Otis Rush's I Can't Quit You Baby.

"Eric Clapton was recording next door," explained Was. "He just walked over and he had the same reaction as everyone else did. His jaw just dropped.

"Picture the Rolling Stones just set up in a circle in one room [and] the amplifiers are blaring.

"It reminded him of when he was a teenager, going to see the Stones playing in Richmond. He was just in awe, so he just grabbed one of Keith's guitars and started playing. It was quite a thing."

Blue and Lonesome will be released in December, while the first single Just Your Fool is available from Friday 7 October, to fans who pre-order the record.

Was added that the Stones had not abandoned plans to complete an album of new material.

"Both Keith and Mick have some great new songs," he told Matt Everitt. "They're far from done."

___________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________


That's not even the the first session according to Charlie .. they did one before the December 2015 session. This is basically four years ago now that the conception of this album came about / began ...


They may of hit a wall on something ..

Yet .. We continue to bang our heads against one over this album ....ha! :/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-01 07:50 by IanBillen.

Quote
GasLightStreet
No matter what the UMG or UMe deal is or what Promotone is doing or The Rolling Stones are doing, the results will be what they'll be, which at this point is nothing.

If the internet had been around in 1974 when they started working on BLACK AND BLUE it would probably be similar to now - what are they doing, why is it taking so long, they're not going to release an album, word is they've recorded 40 songs (or whatever it was), who's in the band and on and on and on - they're going on tour before finishing the album!??

This decade, we find things out... and it's one giant freak out. THEY HIT A WALL!

That comment about one day in the studio, not the entire session, turned into a tsunami of bullshit HERE - no where else.

_________________________________________________


Ima tellin ya!! Yeeeesh. Not only did they hit a wall in trying to write a song .. Keith forgot how to play guitar and Mick didn't even realize he was the lead singer ... they have never been the same since that session

Quote
GasLightStreet
I can't see why a vinyl enthusiast would buy it on vinyl if it's a digital recording, which it probably is, other than knowing it can't be brickwalled.

Good question, especially since all vinyls today are sourced from 24bit/96kHz digital masters. I never saw the point in buying an analog copy of a digital source. If the digital masters for vinyl releases are less brickewalled than the masters for CDs or other digital release forms, one should rather ask why CDs etc. don't get proper mixes. Original vinyls, OK (if in proper condition).

Many new vinyl releases have dedicated vinyl masters, not digital.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Many new vinyl releases have dedicated vinyl masters, not digital.

No... the master recordings, 24 track etc, are Pro Tools. So it doesn't matter.

I wouldn't copmpletely rule out the possibility that a few artists/groups, who can afford it and know their material well enough not to waste miles of tape in endless sessions may still record and master fully on analogue tape, but they are certainly few but not many. I also read (albeit years ago) that some take a hybrid approach and record the basic tracks of drums and bass on analogue tape because they feel that analogue tape compression gives them the right punch. But nowadays there will be hardly any production without ProTools or the like involved.

New vinyl reissues of records from the 60s 70s or 80s are generally based on 24/96 (or higher) digital transfers of an analogue source, plus various mastering procedures. That they sometimes sound "better" than the corresponding CDs rather has to do with different (usually, less brickwalled) mastering. It is often claimed that in principle - CDs even have the greater dynamic range. The dynamic range of a - conventional - LP is said to correspond to ca. 12bit as opposed to 16bit in CDs (sorry, I don't have the source at hand). But I have no idea how things stand w.r.t. properly cut LPs with high-quality vinyl. LPs from the 80s often sound bad because they saved money on the vinyl and took up to 300 copies from one matrix. So if you were unlucky, a newly bought LP already sounded like having survived 20 drunken parties.

Especially considering re-re-re...-releases of 50 to 60 years old records, it would in most cases not make much sense to produce an analogue remaster from already deteriorating original master tapes. Also, in the end you add just more hiss to a (often already hissy) analogue source that already lost in fidelity anyway. Also, analogue 2-track masters are at times sourced from tracks that are in itself nth generation because of intermediate mixing down two or more tracks to one, or form multiple tape erasure or oberdubs, etc. (Going by what I read, Fleetwood Mac appear to be a case at hand.)

Depending on the tape material used and the care taken in the original recording (and/or mixing) process, 50 year old tapes can either be still playable and sound good, or have to be baked to be playable, and when the pigment layers are already coming off the cards are stacked against you anyway. If the original 2-track mixdown is found wanting, nowadays there is the possibility to recreate (or change) the mix from the individual original tracks (in case the multitrack masters are still available, and perhaps also the notes of the original recording engineers). Sometimes this avenue is taken, sometimes only the two-track masters are subject to digital wizardry.

I'm also not so sure about the original Stones masters from the 70s. I can hear some tape hiss already e.g. on my vinyl copy of Some Girls (bought when the album came out). Also the pre-94 (Virgin) CDs were quite hissy. Now this can either be due to originally already hissy master tapes, or from the fact that early CDs often were not sourced from the original 2-track masters but from 2nd or 3rd (or more) generation copies distributed to pressing plants (especially pressing plants abroad), and also from the fact that the analogue sources of early CDs were often digitized kind of on autopilot, with not much care being taken, and engineers that were trained on analogue equipment still only had to learn how to deal with digitized recordings (and likewise with digital recording). Also, nowadays offending hiss is often (tried to be) filtered out, which likely also happened with later editions of Stones CDs.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-03 03:11 by doitywoik.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Many new vinyl releases have dedicated vinyl masters, not digital.

No... the master recordings, 24 track etc, are Pro Tools. So it doesn't matter.

It is a difference, as there are tape recorders involved.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Many new vinyl releases have dedicated vinyl masters, not digital.

For the RS' Studio Albums Vinyl Collection 1971-2016 got Mastering-Engineer Miles Showell (Abbey Road Studios) an archive hard disk by the RS management. On this disk were two separate sets of high resolution flat transfers from the master tapes for each album where the source was analogue tape (two or three of the later albums are digital recordings and these were digitally dubbed at their original sample rate to the hard disk). The two archive transfers were DSD and also 24 bit 192 kHz PCM (a few were 24 bit 176.4 kHz). Miles Showell was told to listen to both and to choose whichever one he felt was the best to use. In most cases the DSD transfer won, but not always. - [iorr.org] .


The original analogue tapes for the 2016 'Rolling Stones in Mono' Box-set were all transferred into DSD and then remastered: [TheAudiophileMan.com] - [iorr.org] .



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-02 12:10 by Irix.

Quote
Irix

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Many new vinyl releases have dedicated vinyl masters, not digital.

For the RS' Studio Albums Vinyl Collection 1971-2016 got Mastering-Engineer Miles Showell (Abbey Road Studios) an archive hard disk by the RS management. On this disk were two separate sets of high resolution flat transfers from the master tapes for each album where the source was analogue tape (two or three of the later albums are digital recordings and these were digitally dubbed at their original sample rate to the hard disk). The two archive transfers were DSD and also 24 bit 192 kHz PCM (a few were 24 bit 176.4 kHz). Miles Showell was told to listen to both and to choose whichever one he felt was the best to use. In most cases the DSD transfer won, but not always. - [iorr.org] .

I was referring to today's vinyl albums in general, not Stones album packages like this one

* (double post by mistake)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-03 03:12 by doitywoik.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Many new vinyl releases have dedicated vinyl masters, not digital.

No... the master recordings, 24 track etc, are Pro Tools. So it doesn't matter.

It is a difference, as there are tape recorders involved.

You mean IF there are tape recorders involved. It's nice to do it all to tape, but some record bottoms to tape, upload to Pro Tools, wipe the tapes, record new, and overdub/edit/mix from there on PT. It does have the warmness, just not all of it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-03 19:35 by GasLightStreet.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Many new vinyl releases have dedicated vinyl masters, not digital.

No... the master recordings, 24 track etc, are Pro Tools. So it doesn't matter.

It is a difference, as there are tape recorders involved.

You mean IF there are tape recorders involved. It's nice to do it all to tape, but some record bottoms to tape, upload to Pro Tools, wip the tapes, record new, and overdub/edit/mix from there on PT. It does have the warmness, just not all of it.

________________________________



.......... And then there are some that use CLASP ... >> All the audible depth and richness of two inch analogue tape used in conjunction with the benefits of a DAW / Pro Tools (at the same time).

I'm disappointed this post isn't moving faster. It's only 342 pages about nothing at this point. We'll never break the record at this rate. God forbid there's ever a new album.

Quote
Irix

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Many new vinyl releases have dedicated vinyl masters, not digital.

For the RS' Studio Albums Vinyl Collection 1971-2016 got Mastering-Engineer Miles Showell (Abbey Road Studios) an archive hard disk by the RS management. On this disk were two separate sets of high resolution flat transfers from the master tapes for each album where the source was analogue tape (two or three of the later albums are digital recordings and these were digitally dubbed at their original sample rate to the hard disk). The two archive transfers were DSD and also 24 bit 192 kHz PCM (a few were 24 bit 176.4 kHz). Miles Showell was told to listen to both and to choose whichever one he felt was the best to use. In most cases the DSD transfer won, but not always. - [iorr.org] .


The original analogue tapes for the 2016 'Rolling Stones in Mono' Box-set were all transferred into DSD and then remastered: [TheAudiophileMan.com] - [iorr.org] .

It's not so much the technology as the skills of the engineer [and the decision he/she takes] which determine how good a sound we get from the record.

I still think that excessive digital compression , optimising results for low quality and portable digital playback devices is the biggest problem.

Miles Showell proves that if you listen to his remaster of ABB.

A Digital recording from the outset...but now mastered with much less compression . Sounds like a different record...and much the better for it.

The other albums in this box sound better than previous digital remasters too...largely for the same reasons ...but for the older albums they can't match original pressings from the original analogue masters.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-03 13:08 by Spud.

....Just to add

The irony is that vinyl as a format has a much more limited dynamic range but since digital has been the norm we have seen more compression of levels than ever...

....to the point where dynamic range is no longer the difference in level between soft and loud . It's now just the difference between loud and louder !



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-03 14:20 by Spud.

Dear All,
regarding the subject of Analog vs Digital, being the first, FAR MORE, superior than the latest, I hereby share a link regarding the AAA ("All Analog" process of making recors (LP´s) and it´s superiority when compared to digital.

http://pure-analogue.com/]All Analog[/url]

You won't get an argument from me about that.

I'm analogue thru n tru ...

...But the reality is that we aren't going to get much analogue product any more .

The frustrating thing for me is that digital these days can sound pretty good... but we almost always ruin the results in the mastering .

Regarding the record company putting on pressure on the Stones: What would that be good for? This major company has countless artists that sell way better than the Stones these days, the company won´t get in any trouble if there´s no Stones-album. The older Stones-albums plus several compilations are still selling (not big numbers each but there are many of them). And if the new album (a bubble anyway imo) is only "licensed" to the company they are not in the position to define a deadline. That´s what I think, things of course might be more complicated in reality... The point is that besides a number of fans no one is really interested in that imaginary album... and even a lot of fans do not care too much. The overdubs that might have been recorded could be overdubs for a live-albums, who knows. There is not even the tiniest hint how one of the new songs sound like, rocker or ballad or whatever. No one seems to have heard any of that new stuff. The statements are more than vague and often are made by some anonymous "spokesperson". Very strange.

Even without having a new album completed by the Stones, I think UMG benefits simply by having the band's name associated with them.
It probably helps when negotiating contracts with other bands and artists ie "we signed the Stones", and thus use that in their favor.
In an odd twist, as long as the two are linked by contract, UMG might even be better off without the new Stones album!

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

Quote
HMS

There is not even the tiniest hint how one of the new songs sound like, rocker or ballad or whatever.

Charlie said early 2018 the new songs are between "Stax and Motown" - [www.YouTube.com] - (Pos. 3:45) ....

Quote
marquess
Dear All,
regarding the subject of Analog vs Digital, being the first, FAR MORE, superior than the latest, I hereby share a link regarding the AAA ("All Analog" process of making recors (LP´s) and it´s superiority when compared to digital.

http://pure-analogue.com/]All Analog[/url]

________________________________________


Interesting stuff. A while ago I wrote an article concerning why recordings do not always sound as they did in the past. It deals mostly with the technical aspects of the recording process. You can check it out here on my website: My Article About The Sound of Newer vs Recordings of Yesteryear



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-04 04:59 by IanBillen.

A mate caught up with Don Was

Basically
No new Stones album before Xmas
They have recorded loads of tracks but not one track is finished yet
Stuff they are working on is great

Quote
Deathgod
A mate caught up with Don Was

Basically
No new Stones album before Xmas
They have recorded loads of tracks but not one track is finished yet
Stuff they are working on is great

Thanks Deathgod - that pretty much confirms what georgelicks has been saying.

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.

There's more studio time booked during late November and December, maybe the final sessions.

Could be finished by 2020 or 2021, or at this rate maybe even 2022 or 2023.
Looking forward to hearing something new some day, but meanwhile there's an upcoming tour to look forward to!

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

Quote
Deathgod
A mate caught up with Don Was

Basically
No new Stones album before Xmas
They have recorded loads of tracks but not one track is finished yet
Stuff they are working on is great

_________________________________________



Awesome to know .. although it is more a confirmation of what was noted here (as Hairball has mentioned). At least we know they have loads of material and hopefully the whole 'writers block' / not much new material can be put to bed.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-04 05:06 by IanBillen.