For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Big Al
No, I absolutely do believe that we’ll be gifted with a new studio album: it’s just a question of when, exactly. I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if it’s suddenly announced out of nowhere. It’d create an immediate buzz, too.
Quote
treaclefingers
(Ronnie ...) ...and let's not forget about the setlists. Totally prolific there.
Quote
Hairball
It's probably not matter of fact regarding solo or Stones, but just a generic statement that Mick is working on music in general.
Or maybe something was lost in translation..., i.e. Mick is working alone on new music vs. Mick is working on a solo album.
Quote
Hairball
@doitywoik - I believe that was a reference to Ronnie's colorfully gaudy scribbled setlists he draws for each show, and which he's been selling overpriced copies of lately...
Quote
doitywoik
Anyway, if he really stated in an interview that he came to Sicily because he plans to record a new solo album there, we will certainly learn about it here on IORR sooner or later.
Quote
doitywoikQuote
Hairball
@doitywoik - I believe that was a reference to Ronnie's colorfully gaudy scribbled setlists he draws for each show, and which he's been selling overpriced copies of lately...
You're right of course! There's their division of work on the road: Mick and maybe Chuck come up with the setlists and Ronnie paints them (while Keith is trying to remember the opening chords of SMU...)
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
WitnessQuote
paulywaulQuote
powerage78
Lack of inspiration, no real motivation while time waits for no one, priority to concerts, what else to explain the absence of a new album since 2005...
Sums it up perfectly really, especially the "no real motivation" bit !
The priority since 2012 has been on live shows, and all was going well in that respect until COVID f***ed it all up. Personally, I'll fall over backwards if this "supposed" new album ever actually makes an appearance before we all expire. Them, us, the polar icecap, the entire planet, the universe ...
Not lack of inspiration per se. Not total lack of motivation. But scarcity in incentives given them to work out thoroughly their song ideas in the studio and perfect them. That scarcity of incentives is a result of the reception to the music they have released over the later decades, leading to a vicious circle between creation and reception for their music. The first fatal instance of this circle I have repeatedly claimed was about the reception to UNDERCOVER. Maybe, though, maybe their latest single was a break through from the said longlasting circle.
UNDERCOVER was an odd time for the Stones. MTV had become king in music promotion and they opted to not tour, which was probably a wise choice seeing that they previous year they had just finished the TATTOO YOU tour, and focused on making their most ambitious videos ever. The album lacked what previous albums had had - a bonafide hit single. As memorable as Undercover Of The Night is, U doesn't have a Brown Sugar/Miss You/Start Me Up-esque track.
UOTN, with its modern effects and sounds, had the four on the floor beat but it wasn't slinky like Miss You or Emotional Rescue and lyrically it wasn't exactly... encompassing. I dig the song but it's not a great single.
She Was Hot and Too Much Blood were left field and right field singles, with She Was Hot being a more traditional rocker and Too Much Blood being the most different single they'd ever released. Maybe too different.
What would've probably been a good move: tour REWIND, play 2 or 3 from U.
Quote
WitnessQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
WitnessQuote
paulywaulQuote
powerage78
Lack of inspiration, no real motivation while time waits for no one, priority to concerts, what else to explain the absence of a new album since 2005...
Sums it up perfectly really, especially the "no real motivation" bit !
The priority since 2012 has been on live shows, and all was going well in that respect until COVID f***ed it all up. Personally, I'll fall over backwards if this "supposed" new album ever actually makes an appearance before we all expire. Them, us, the polar icecap, the entire planet, the universe ...
Not lack of inspiration per se. Not total lack of motivation. But scarcity in incentives given them to work out thoroughly their song ideas in the studio and perfect them. That scarcity of incentives is a result of the reception to the music they have released over the later decades, leading to a vicious circle between creation and reception for their music. The first fatal instance of this circle I have repeatedly claimed was about the reception to UNDERCOVER. Maybe, though, maybe their latest single was a break through from the said longlasting circle.
UNDERCOVER was an odd time for the Stones. MTV had become king in music promotion and they opted to not tour, which was probably a wise choice seeing that they previous year they had just finished the TATTOO YOU tour, and focused on making their most ambitious videos ever. The album lacked what previous albums had had - a bonafide hit single. As memorable as Undercover Of The Night is, U doesn't have a Brown Sugar/Miss You/Start Me Up-esque track.
UOTN, with its modern effects and sounds, had the four on the floor beat but it wasn't slinky like Miss You or Emotional Rescue and lyrically it wasn't exactly... encompassing. I dig the song but it's not a great single.
She Was Hot and Too Much Blood were left field and right field singles, with She Was Hot being a more traditional rocker and Too Much Blood being the most different single they'd ever released. Maybe too different.
What would've probably been a good move: tour REWIND, play 2 or 3 from U.
Seen in another perspective: In its time LET IT BLEED and STICKY FINGERS were quite easily approchable albums. In contrast, BEGGARS BANQUET and EXILE ON MAIN STREET were rather less easily approchable at once. They had to grow on you. Seldom mentionned as an objection to them. UNDERCOVER was in that sense more like the latter two albums. Maybe fewer listeners were willing to give UNDERCOVER that time.
Quote
KRiffhard
...and time goes by!!
16 years since A Bigger Bang!
It's very difficult to pubblish a dozen new songs
Quote
KRiffhard
...and time goes by!!
16 years since A Bigger Bang!
It's very difficult to pubblish a dozen new songs
Quote
Tell that to Paul McCartney. Since 2006, he's released 4 albums of completely new material, one cover album, 2 classical(!) albums, one 'super group' album, and has launched his own (arguably better than the Stones) Archives line. All while touring like mad.
Or if we want someone not exactly on the same level as the Stones, let's look at Bruce Springsteen. Since 2006, he's released 6 albums of (primarily) new material* (each one reaching 1-3 on the charts) and one cover album. This isn't even touching the live releases (archive and contemporary shows) he's done.
Quote
BeforeTheyMakeMeRunQuote
KRiffhard
...and time goes by!!
16 years since A Bigger Bang!
It's very difficult to pubblish a dozen new songs
Tell that to Paul McCartney. Since 2006, he's released 4 albums of completely new material, one cover album, 2 classical(!) albums, one 'super group' album, and has launched his own (arguably better than the Stones) Archives line. All while touring like mad.
Or if we want someone not exactly on the same level as the Stones, let's look at Bruce Springsteen. Since 2006, he's released 6 albums of (primarily) new material* (each one reaching 1-3 on the charts) and one cover album. This isn't even touching the live releases (archive and contemporary shows) he's done.
If it sounds like I'm bullying the Stones, I guess I kinda am. I think this all boils down to one thing: If the Stones really wanted to release an album, they could have at any moment in the past 16 years. Apparently, they got close to doing it in 2015/2016, but they gave us a blues cover album because they were rusty. Understandable that they wouldn't want to release something subpar that could irreparably ruin their legacy. But don't act like a new album is coming 'any day now'-- it's been 'any day now' for a while.
I honestly don't think we'll get a new Stones album while they all are alive and at least able to do the press circuit if they wish. I fear these may end up being like the FFSO we just saw liberated last month-- sitting on a hard drive until someone finds them and liberates them.
By all means, I seriously hope I'm wrong. I want more Stones music. I just am a little jaded at this point.
Quote
georgelicksQuote
Tell that to Paul McCartney. Since 2006, he's released 4 albums of completely new material, one cover album, 2 classical(!) albums, one 'super group' album, and has launched his own (arguably better than the Stones) Archives line. All while touring like mad.
Or if we want someone not exactly on the same level as the Stones, let's look at Bruce Springsteen. Since 2006, he's released 6 albums of (primarily) new material* (each one reaching 1-3 on the charts) and one cover album. This isn't even touching the live releases (archive and contemporary shows) he's done.
Paul's latest album went 2-37-90 out of the charts after 3 weeks, after the die hards got the album no one cared about it less than a month after the release.
Bruce's album survived another week at least: 2-18-41-83-out, but after a month no one cared about it even with a national TV performance.
You must love the music too much to put out albums that no one care less than a month after the release, acts that had albums in the top 40 during months or even years in the past.
It looks like Mick is not interested, not with the Stones and much less as solo, in his mind the best way to protect the Stones legacy is not release more albums.
Quote
georgelicksQuote
Tell that to Paul McCartney. Since 2006, he's released 4 albums of completely new material, one cover album, 2 classical(!) albums, one 'super group' album, and has launched his own (arguably better than the Stones) Archives line. All while touring like mad.
Or if we want someone not exactly on the same level as the Stones, let's look at Bruce Springsteen. Since 2006, he's released 6 albums of (primarily) new material* (each one reaching 1-3 on the charts) and one cover album. This isn't even touching the live releases (archive and contemporary shows) he's done.
Paul's latest album went 2-37-90 out of the charts after 3 weeks, after the die hards got the album no one cared about it less than a month after the release.
Bruce's album survived another week at least: 2-18-41-83-out, but after a month no one cared about it even with a national TV performance.
You must love the music too much to put out albums that no one care less than a month after the release, acts that had albums in the top 40 during months or even years in the past.
It looks like Mick is not interested, not with the Stones and much less as solo, in his mind the best way to protect the Stones legacy is not release more albums.
Quote
Doxa
Well, according to another thread (Mick in Italy), Italian Press is claiming that Mick is making a solo album at the moment in Sicily...
- Doxa
Quote
georgelicksQuote
Tell that to Paul McCartney. Since 2006, he's released 4 albums of completely new material, one cover album, 2 classical(!) albums, one 'super group' album, and has launched his own (arguably better than the Stones) Archives line. All while touring like mad.
Or if we want someone not exactly on the same level as the Stones, let's look at Bruce Springsteen. Since 2006, he's released 6 albums of (primarily) new material* (each one reaching 1-3 on the charts) and one cover album. This isn't even touching the live releases (archive and contemporary shows) he's done.
Paul's latest album went 2-37-90 out of the charts after 3 weeks, after the die hards got the album no one cared about it less than a month after the release.
Bruce's album survived another week at least: 2-18-41-83-out, but after a month no one cared about it even with a national TV performance.
You must love the music too much to put out albums that no one care less than a month after the release, acts that had albums in the top 40 during months or even years in the past.
It looks like Mick is not interested, not with the Stones and much less as solo, in his mind the best way to protect the Stones legacy is not release more albums.
Quote
dennycranium
While I'm enjoying the latest drop FFSO, not a single standout track, for me anyways.
Quote
dennycranium
I remember all of us clamoring for the unreleased 40 licks tracks. When we finally got some? Meh...
While I'm enjoying the latest drop FFSO, not a single standout track, for me anyways. I liked hearing the B2B versions with KR on vocals.
I'm really enjoying the Might As Well Get Juiced version. I can see why Keith was upset with the overly produced album version...
Quote
jahisnotdeadQuote
dennycranium
While I'm enjoying the latest drop FFSO, not a single standout track, for me anyways.
Wow. I truly feel for any Stones fan that can't find one thing to get jazzed about among all those songs.