For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
That would be amazing!Quote
SpudQuote
DiegoGlimmerStones
[www.kshe95.com]
...Don Was, who has been co-producing the Stones since 1994’s Voodoo Lounge, told us that over the course of the new album sessions, a tremendous amount of material has been tracked by the band. According to him, Jagger and Richards simply haven’t created the album they want to release yet: “We continue to start songs and it’s such a varied group of songs. We probably have 40 and depending on the 10 we choose to finish, the character of the album will be determined; right now, it could go any way. And there’s some really good stuff in there. And there’s a sense that making a ‘good album’ is not good enough — it’s gotta be great. So, I think when we feel we’ve got 10 things that are great an album’ll come out.”
[www.kshe95.com]
40 tracks eh ?
can't decide ? So release four albums
Quote
doitywoik
Welcome back, Ian!Quote
IanBillen
The session in which D&G .. and OMS were recorded for Grrrr .. evidently had something else or some material that is also on par for the next record.
I guess Mick came with a bag of songs (and Keith had to snatch one from his solo album).Quote
IanBillen
they do not just want a good record .. or just another real good record ... they want to make this one great.
Aw, they say that all the time, before each album. Imagine Mick or Keith saying, "We agreed that this time we'll only make a mediocre one" - no way!
Quote
ukcal
Oh Crap!....Townsend is also saying the songs are on the new WHO album to
be released mid november....so what you say!
Its the xmas market ie B&L did the same....and can anyone agree or disagree
that the market does not want a stones and who album at the same time.
ukcal
Quote
Stoneage
Forget great. That is behind them. And in today's streaming landscape albums aren't what they used to be. I would settle with good. And interesting. And a big radio hit wouldn't hurt.
Quote
Stoneage
Forget great. That is behind them.
Quote
HairballQuote
doitywoik
Welcome back, Ian!Quote
IanBillen
The session in which D&G .. and OMS were recorded for Grrrr .. evidently had something else or some material that is also on par for the next record.
I guess Mick came with a bag of songs (and Keith had to snatch one from his solo album).Quote
IanBillen
they do not just want a good record .. or just another real good record ... they want to make this one great.
Aw, they say that all the time, before each album. Imagine Mick or Keith saying, "We agreed that this time we'll only make a mediocre one" - no way!
And for perspective, I'm sure Mick thought Getta Grip/England Lost were great tunes. (lol)
So just because Mick thinks something is "great" doesn't necessarily mean it is, and probably 99.9% of the worlds population would disagree with the so-called "greatness" of those tunes.
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
IanBillen
So .. technically they started this album in 2012 .... if they are counting (which it seems they are .. prolly due to a song or songs coming from that session which is in the mix for the next record). The session in which D&G .. and OMS were recorded for Grrrr .. evidently had something else or some material that is also on par for the next record.
Technically, This album has been seven years in the making so far .. (though long breaks have occurred at many segments during).
I am certain they have >>loads<< of material ... however .. as was noted .. some of it has to be darn good material to matter or count as anything!
Now.. with that said ..here is to hoping they recon-vein this late fall to finish it up by earlier next year. My guess is a earlier Spring Release.
I'm sure there are songs they've been writing for years, but D&G and OMS were the only two songs worked on during the 2012 sessions. I don't consider an album in the making until the whole band starts recording it in the studio. That would be in December 2015.
It appears you need to learn a bit more about The Rolling Stones from 1969-1983.
Quote
LazarusSmithQuote
HairballQuote
doitywoik
Welcome back, Ian!Quote
IanBillen
The session in which D&G .. and OMS were recorded for Grrrr .. evidently had something else or some material that is also on par for the next record.
I guess Mick came with a bag of songs (and Keith had to snatch one from his solo album).Quote
IanBillen
they do not just want a good record .. or just another real good record ... they want to make this one great.
Aw, they say that all the time, before each album. Imagine Mick or Keith saying, "We agreed that this time we'll only make a mediocre one" - no way!
And for perspective, I'm sure Mick thought Getta Grip/England Lost were great tunes. (lol)
So just because Mick thinks something is "great" doesn't necessarily mean it is, and probably 99.9% of the worlds population would disagree with the so-called "greatness" of those tunes.
And for further perspective, the only thing more anemic than "Gotta Get a Grip"'s streaming numbers are the numbers for Keith's "Trouble" single (5 million compared to 1.7 million.) These guys can't get arrested outside the band!
Quote
ukcal
....and can anyone agree or disagree
that the market does not want a stones and who album at the same time.
Quote
HairballQuote
LazarusSmith
And for further perspective, the only thing more anemic than "Gotta Get a Grip"'s streaming numbers are the numbers for Keith's "Trouble" single (5 million compared to 1.7 million.) These guys can't get arrested outside the band!
The main difference between the two is Trouble is a thousand times better of a song unless you base quality on streaming numbers.
There's even a good possibility Getta Grip might have been a decent tune (at least listenable) had Keith decided to be involved - but as we know he vetoed the idea altogether.
Quote
doitywoikQuote
HairballQuote
LazarusSmith
And for further perspective, the only thing more anemic than "Gotta Get a Grip"'s streaming numbers are the numbers for Keith's "Trouble" single (5 million compared to 1.7 million.) These guys can't get arrested outside the band!
The main difference between the two is Trouble is a thousand times better of a song unless you base quality on streaming numbers.
There's even a good possibility Getta Grip might have been a decent tune (at least listenable) had Keith decided to be involved - but as we know he vetoed the idea altogether.
To my taste, neither is a great song. I acknowledge that Mick tried to come up with something new or different from the usual formula, and I understand that Keith refused it for not being Stones material. I'm not sure what Keith could have added to Grip apart from some riffing, which IMO would not have saved the song or made it any better. Trouble has certainly developed quite a bit since the Paris sessions but Keith still didn't manage to come up with a proper intro or riff. Not sure Mick could have added much apart from different lyrics. Trouble is certainly more stonesy than Grip but in the context of a Stones album it would have rather been among the second-rate songs.
If 5 million people decided to stream Grip then that's the way it is. (And I have no clue who to compare today's streaming to airplay or sales of singles e.g. in the 70s or 80s). Keith's tune maybe had less streams but Keith had album sales. And however meagre they may have been as compared to album sales in the 70s, every local band in my area would dream of having such sales once in their lifetime.
Regarding a "mature" new Stones album, something "along the vibes" of CH might be an option, though not necessarily what Mick wants.
Quote
JordyLicks96
They don't want to put out just a "good album." They want it to be "great" and I have all the faith that they're going to do just that.
Quote
JordyLicks96Quote
IanBillen
So .. technically they started this album in 2012 .... if they are counting (which it seems they are .. prolly due to a song or songs coming from that session which is in the mix for the next record). The session in which D&G .. and OMS were recorded for Grrrr .. evidently had something else or some material that is also on par for the next record.
Technically, This album has been seven years in the making so far .. (though long breaks have occurred at many segments during).
I am certain they have >>loads<< of material ... however .. as was noted .. some of it has to be darn good material to matter or count as anything!
Now.. with that said ..here is to hoping they recon-vein this late fall to finish it up by earlier next year. My guess is a earlier Spring Release.
I'm sure there are songs they've been writing for years, but D&G and OMS were the only two songs worked on during the 2012 sessions. I don't consider an album in the making until the whole band starts recording it in the studio. That would be in December 2015. So it's been in the making for almost 4 years now. Plus, there's rumour that they've looked at songs to work on going back to the STEEL WHEELS sessions.
I think with 40 songs, there should be one more session at the end of this year, maybe the band records another 3-5 songs and than they pick the 10 they wanna release on the album. It's going to get to a point where it's quite ridiculous they can't find 10 "GREAT" songs out of 40-45 songs recorded.
Quote
Hairball
Hi Ian .
I thought it was mentioned by a source somewhere in this 369 page thread that they had some leftovers dating back to Steel Wheels that they might be attempting to dust off and give a new coat of paint?
Is this incorrect? Whatever the case, nearly 15 years since a new albums of originals is quite unbelievable and even despicable...it better be GREAT!!!
Quote
NikkeiQuote
ukcal
Oh Crap!....Townsend is also saying the songs are on the new WHO album to
be released mid november....so what you say!
Its the xmas market ie B&L did the same....and can anyone agree or disagree
that the market does not want a stones and who album at the same time.
ukcal
The market has become close to irrelevant. Releasing records before christmas is the last marketing tool they have left and basically that effect is down to non-fans buying the record for fans who end up with multiple copies.
Quote
JordyLicks96Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
IanBillen
So .. technically they started this album in 2012 .... if they are counting (which it seems they are .. prolly due to a song or songs coming from that session which is in the mix for the next record). The session in which D&G .. and OMS were recorded for Grrrr .. evidently had something else or some material that is also on par for the next record.
Technically, This album has been seven years in the making so far .. (though long breaks have occurred at many segments during).
I am certain they have >>loads<< of material ... however .. as was noted .. some of it has to be darn good material to matter or count as anything!
Now.. with that said ..here is to hoping they recon-vein this late fall to finish it up by earlier next year. My guess is a earlier Spring Release.
I'm sure there are songs they've been writing for years, but D&G and OMS were the only two songs worked on during the 2012 sessions. I don't consider an album in the making until the whole band starts recording it in the studio. That would be in December 2015.
It appears you need to learn a bit more about The Rolling Stones from 1969-1983.
I know plenty my friend. I know songs began life in sessions for other albums. EXILE didn't start it's own sessions until July 1971. I know the album had a bunch of tracks started in 1969-70. You're missing my point. The Stones didn't actually start this new album until December 2015. Of course these songs have been around probably written years ago. They can use songs from way back in '89, but that doesn't mean this album started its life in '89.
So the album has not been in the making for 7 years. The band didn't agree to start the new album in 2012. That 5 day session in Aug. 2012 was for 2 songs specifically for a compilation album. They agreed to start tracking new songs for a new album in December 2015.
Do you see my point? No need to get sarcastic, because this 23 year old can out knowledge you about The Rolling Stones any day of the week.
Quote
Hairball
Hi Ian .
I thought it was mentioned by a source somewhere in this 369 page thread that they had some leftovers dating back to Steel Wheels that they might be attempting to dust off and give a new coat of paint?
Is this incorrect? Whatever the case, nearly 15 years since a new albums of originals is quite unbelievable and even despicable...it better be GREAT!!!
Quote
GasLightStreet
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
IanBillen
So .. technically they started this album in 2012 .... if they are counting (which it seems they are .. prolly due to a song or songs coming from that session which is in the mix for the next record). The session in which D&G .. and OMS were recorded for Grrrr .. evidently had something else or some material that is also on par for the next record.
Technically, This album has been seven years in the making so far .. (though long breaks have occurred at many segments during).
I am certain they have >>loads<< of material ... however .. as was noted .. some of it has to be darn good material to matter or count as anything!
Now.. with that said ..here is to hoping they recon-vein this late fall to finish it up by earlier next year. My guess is a earlier Spring Release.
I'm sure there are songs they've been writing for years, but D&G and OMS were the only two songs worked on during the 2012 sessions. I don't consider an album in the making until the whole band starts recording it in the studio. That would be in December 2015.
It appears you need to learn a bit more about The Rolling Stones from 1969-1983.
I know plenty my friend. I know songs began life in sessions for other albums. EXILE didn't start it's own sessions until July 1971. I know the album had a bunch of tracks started in 1969-70. You're missing my point. The Stones didn't actually start this new album until December 2015. Of course these songs have been around probably written years ago. They can use songs from way back in '89, but that doesn't mean this album started its life in '89.
So the album has not been in the making for 7 years. The band didn't agree to start the new album in 2012. That 5 day session in Aug. 2012 was for 2 songs specifically for a compilation album. They agreed to start tracking new songs for a new album in December 2015.
Do you see my point? No need to get sarcastic, because this 23 year old can out knowledge you about The Rolling Stones any day of the week.
Oh. HA HA. I see! Now you're being picky!
Oh and your last little bit there, good luck with that. Not that it matters, because it doesn't.
Sure, the Stones went to record for EOMS in 1971... but the work goes back to 1969... and a good bit of what was recorded in 1971 wasn't used. They have lots of albums when they've done that. Led Zeppelin and The Beatles did the same thing often.
Quote
JordyLicks96Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
IanBillen
So .. technically they started this album in 2012 .... if they are counting (which it seems they are .. prolly due to a song or songs coming from that session which is in the mix for the next record). The session in which D&G .. and OMS were recorded for Grrrr .. evidently had something else or some material that is also on par for the next record.
Technically, This album has been seven years in the making so far .. (though long breaks have occurred at many segments during).
I am certain they have >>loads<< of material ... however .. as was noted .. some of it has to be darn good material to matter or count as anything!
Now.. with that said ..here is to hoping they recon-vein this late fall to finish it up by earlier next year. My guess is a earlier Spring Release.
I'm sure there are songs they've been writing for years, but D&G and OMS were the only two songs worked on during the 2012 sessions. I don't consider an album in the making until the whole band starts recording it in the studio. That would be in December 2015.
It appears you need to learn a bit more about The Rolling Stones from 1969-1983.
I know plenty my friend. I know songs began life in sessions for other albums. EXILE didn't start it's own sessions until July 1971. I know the album had a bunch of tracks started in 1969-70. You're missing my point. The Stones didn't actually start this new album until December 2015. Of course these songs have been around probably written years ago. They can use songs from way back in '89, but that doesn't mean this album started its life in '89.
So the album has not been in the making for 7 years. The band didn't agree to start the new album in 2012. That 5 day session in Aug. 2012 was for 2 songs specifically for a compilation album. They agreed to start tracking new songs for a new album in December 2015.
Do you see my point? No need to get sarcastic, because this 23 year old can out knowledge you about The Rolling Stones any day of the week.
Oh. HA HA. I see! Now you're being picky!
Oh and your last little bit there, good luck with that. Not that it matters, because it doesn't.
Sure, the Stones went to record for EOMS in 1971... but the work goes back to 1969... and a good bit of what was recorded in 1971 wasn't used. They have lots of albums when they've done that. Led Zeppelin and The Beatles did the same thing often.
I'm just saying that telling someone to "learn a bit more" like that is kind of obnoxious. Just bc the work goes back to 1969, doesn't mean the EXILE sessions started in 1969. That's my point that you're missing by trying to be a know it all. This new album's sessions started in December 2015, so it has not been 7 years in the making, even if a song on said new album was written in 2012. I can't explain that any further and if you can't understand that than oh well.
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
IanBillen
So .. technically they started this album in 2012 .... if they are counting (which it seems they are .. prolly due to a song or songs coming from that session which is in the mix for the next record). The session in which D&G .. and OMS were recorded for Grrrr .. evidently had something else or some material that is also on par for the next record.
Technically, This album has been seven years in the making so far .. (though long breaks have occurred at many segments during).
I am certain they have >>loads<< of material ... however .. as was noted .. some of it has to be darn good material to matter or count as anything!
Now.. with that said ..here is to hoping they recon-vein this late fall to finish it up by earlier next year. My guess is a earlier Spring Release.
I'm sure there are songs they've been writing for years, but D&G and OMS were the only two songs worked on during the 2012 sessions. I don't consider an album in the making until the whole band starts recording it in the studio. That would be in December 2015.
It appears you need to learn a bit more about The Rolling Stones from 1969-1983.
I know plenty my friend. I know songs began life in sessions for other albums. EXILE didn't start it's own sessions until July 1971. I know the album had a bunch of tracks started in 1969-70. You're missing my point. The Stones didn't actually start this new album until December 2015. Of course these songs have been around probably written years ago. They can use songs from way back in '89, but that doesn't mean this album started its life in '89.
So the album has not been in the making for 7 years. The band didn't agree to start the new album in 2012. That 5 day session in Aug. 2012 was for 2 songs specifically for a compilation album. They agreed to start tracking new songs for a new album in December 2015.
Do you see my point? No need to get sarcastic, because this 23 year old can out knowledge you about The Rolling Stones any day of the week.
Oh. HA HA. I see! Now you're being picky!
Oh and your last little bit there, good luck with that. Not that it matters, because it doesn't.
Sure, the Stones went to record for EOMS in 1971... but the work goes back to 1969... and a good bit of what was recorded in 1971 wasn't used. They have lots of albums when they've done that. Led Zeppelin and The Beatles did the same thing often.
I'm just saying that telling someone to "learn a bit more" like that is kind of obnoxious. Just bc the work goes back to 1969, doesn't mean the EXILE sessions started in 1969. That's my point that you're missing by trying to be a know it all. This new album's sessions started in December 2015, so it has not been 7 years in the making, even if a song on said new album was written in 2012. I can't explain that any further and if you can't understand that than oh well.
I see. You kind of came off that way so that's why I said what I said. It was kind of in jest.
Well, you're right in one aspect - but the work does include previous work. So, "in earnest", sure, but not overall. If you look at how long they worked on this new album, if it ever comes out, it may total, say, 33 days. Over X amount of years.
Not exactly toiling away, eh?
SOME GIRLS... months of recording over 2 years. EMOTIONAL RESCUE was similar. Probably the only time they ever truly made aim like that, as previous albums were all over the place time wise. I know they did similar earlier but perhaps not as focused.
Don't be so defensive - it's all good.
Quote
JordyLicks96Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JordyLicks96Quote
IanBillen
So .. technically they started this album in 2012 .... if they are counting (which it seems they are .. prolly due to a song or songs coming from that session which is in the mix for the next record). The session in which D&G .. and OMS were recorded for Grrrr .. evidently had something else or some material that is also on par for the next record.
Technically, This album has been seven years in the making so far .. (though long breaks have occurred at many segments during).
I am certain they have >>loads<< of material ... however .. as was noted .. some of it has to be darn good material to matter or count as anything!
Now.. with that said ..here is to hoping they recon-vein this late fall to finish it up by earlier next year. My guess is a earlier Spring Release.
I'm sure there are songs they've been writing for years, but D&G and OMS were the only two songs worked on during the 2012 sessions. I don't consider an album in the making until the whole band starts recording it in the studio. That would be in December 2015.
It appears you need to learn a bit more about The Rolling Stones from 1969-1983.
I know plenty my friend. I know songs began life in sessions for other albums. EXILE didn't start it's own sessions until July 1971. I know the album had a bunch of tracks started in 1969-70. You're missing my point. The Stones didn't actually start this new album until December 2015. Of course these songs have been around probably written years ago. They can use songs from way back in '89, but that doesn't mean this album started its life in '89.
So the album has not been in the making for 7 years. The band didn't agree to start the new album in 2012. That 5 day session in Aug. 2012 was for 2 songs specifically for a compilation album. They agreed to start tracking new songs for a new album in December 2015.
Do you see my point? No need to get sarcastic, because this 23 year old can out knowledge you about The Rolling Stones any day of the week.
Oh. HA HA. I see! Now you're being picky!
Oh and your last little bit there, good luck with that. Not that it matters, because it doesn't.
Sure, the Stones went to record for EOMS in 1971... but the work goes back to 1969... and a good bit of what was recorded in 1971 wasn't used. They have lots of albums when they've done that. Led Zeppelin and The Beatles did the same thing often.
I'm just saying that telling someone to "learn a bit more" like that is kind of obnoxious. Just bc the work goes back to 1969, doesn't mean the EXILE sessions started in 1969. That's my point that you're missing by trying to be a know it all. This new album's sessions started in December 2015, so it has not been 7 years in the making, even if a song on said new album was written in 2012. I can't explain that any further and if you can't understand that than oh well.
I see. You kind of came off that way so that's why I said what I said. It was kind of in jest.
Well, you're right in one aspect - but the work does include previous work. So, "in earnest", sure, but not overall. If you look at how long they worked on this new album, if it ever comes out, it may total, say, 33 days. Over X amount of years.
Not exactly toiling away, eh?
SOME GIRLS... months of recording over 2 years. EMOTIONAL RESCUE was similar. Probably the only time they ever truly made aim like that, as previous albums were all over the place time wise. I know they did similar earlier but perhaps not as focused.
Don't be so defensive - it's all good.
That's my bad. I can get very stubborn at times when I'm trying to explain something (runs in my family lol) My apologies my friend.
Quote
Hairball
The main difference between the two is [b
Trouble is a thousand times better of a song unless you base quality on streaming numbers.
Quote
bitusa2012
- just so there's SOMETHING new to hear
Quote
bitusa2012
and for them to play.