For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Rocky Dijon
My problem with A BIGGER BANG was that it didn't feel complete until I added three more tracks. All my Stones albums incorporate B-sides. That said, I would have started the album off with Rain Fall Down and then swung right into Dangerous Beauty. I did think the running order was off considerably.
Quote
Big Al
Putting the, somewhat, concise Blue & Lonesome to one side, the last few Stones albums were released during the height of the CD-age, whereby, seemingly, every act was hellbent on filling the format to the brim with music. During the 90’s, it was far from uncommon to get albums with running-times of 50+ minutes. Many now, in retrospect, view this as a little excessive. After all, these would have the have been double-LP’s during the vinyl-age. Voodoo Lounge, Bridges to Babylon and A Bigger Bang are all lengthy releases. What I’m getting at is this: do you think they’ll feel an urge to douse us with a lengthy, 90’s reminiscent record, or will we get a trimmed-down, more of a classic-length album. Say, 10-12 tracks, with a 40–45-minute running-time. What would you prefer?
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
Big Al
Putting the, somewhat, concise Blue & Lonesome to one side, the last few Stones albums were released during the height of the CD-age, whereby, seemingly, every act was hellbent on filling the format to the brim with music. During the 90’s, it was far from uncommon to get albums with running-times of 50+ minutes. Many now, in retrospect, view this as a little excessive. After all, these would have the have been double-LP’s during the vinyl-age. Voodoo Lounge, Bridges to Babylon and A Bigger Bang are all lengthy releases. What I’m getting at is this: do you think they’ll feel an urge to douse us with a lengthy, 90’s reminiscent record, or will we get a trimmed-down, more of a classic-length album. Say, 10-12 tracks, with a 40–45-minute running-time. What would you prefer?
The Cult just released an 8 track 35 minute LP that was focused on quality.
It's amazing.
So... more SOME GIRLS than VOODOO LOUNGE.
A BIGGER BANG could've been so much better just by eliminating Streets Of Love, Oh No Not You Again, Sweet Neo Con and Infamy.
Quote
VoodooLounge13
They do have some great B-Sides, and I think a lot of it is because they're just loose, playing without the tension, Oh, this has gotta be great, because to them it's just a throw-away track. All those Blues B-Sides from Steel Wheels, I love em all!! Man, they would have made the foundation for a great organic blues album!!! I think they try too hard sometimes and get in their own heads at times. It can be simple and magnificent.
Oh no not you again is my favorite track of the album. When they played it at juillard it blew me away. Great track.Quote
KRiffhardQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
Big Al
Putting the, somewhat, concise Blue & Lonesome to one side, the last few Stones albums were released during the height of the CD-age, whereby, seemingly, every act was hellbent on filling the format to the brim with music. During the 90’s, it was far from uncommon to get albums with running-times of 50+ minutes. Many now, in retrospect, view this as a little excessive. After all, these would have the have been double-LP’s during the vinyl-age. Voodoo Lounge, Bridges to Babylon and A Bigger Bang are all lengthy releases. What I’m getting at is this: do you think they’ll feel an urge to douse us with a lengthy, 90’s reminiscent record, or will we get a trimmed-down, more of a classic-length album. Say, 10-12 tracks, with a 40–45-minute running-time. What would you prefer?
The Cult just released an 8 track 35 minute LP that was focused on quality.
It's amazing.
So... more SOME GIRLS than VOODOO LOUNGE.
A BIGGER BANG could've been so much better just by eliminating Streets Of Love, Oh No Not You Again, Sweet Neo Con and Infamy.
...and This place is empty, Let me down slow, Driving Too Fast, Dangerous Beauty, Look What the cat dragged in...
What a poor album.
Quote
Spud
It's a better album than most give it credit for...but it's let down by the clumsy "brick wall" mastering .
Quote
Spud
It's a better album than most give it credit for...but it's let down by the clumsy "brick wall" mastering .
Quote
Roll73Quote
Spud
It's a better album than most give it credit for...but it's let down by the clumsy "brick wall" mastering .
It's the one and only Stones album that I literally never put on. Not helped by the mastering for sure but (imo of course) the songs are just not up to par. I liked Rough Justice when it was released but I can happily live without it now.
Really hope that they can deliver something at least half decent for what I'm guessing would be their last studio album (of originals anyway - would love to hear a follow up to Blue and Lonesome)
Quote
SomeGuy
Regarding ABB I could do without She Saw Me Coming, Dangerous Beauty, Look What The Cat Dragged In, Driving Too Fast and Infamy. Thus, the album that would remain is about 47 minutes long, but there's Under The Radar and Don't Wanna Go Home too.
Blue & Lonesome Pt II would be nice, but still, a covers album wouldn't be a proper, new album, although the same could be argued to a certain extent about the first three albums, which are among my favourites anyway.
Regardless, I would gladly have a new record, even if it would only have about twenty five minutes worth of enjoyable songs (although personally I sincerely hope that the Bridges To Babylon experience won't be repeated).
Quote
Rockman
Maybe they were just cutting a new Rice Krispies commercial
Quote
Rockman
Maybe they were just cutting a new Rice Krispies commercial
Quote
VoodooLounge13
So there’s been no news all week of the band in NYC this week. I can’t believe that an album’s worth of tracks - even just touch-ups or added bits - could be done in a single week’s time. Could it??
Quote
VoodooLounge13
So there’s been no news all week of the band in NYC this week. I can’t believe that an album’s worth of tracks - even just touch-ups or added bits - could be done in a single week’s time. Could it??
Quote
VoodooLounge13
I liked it enough when it came out. Listened to it for 6 months straight!!! No breaks nothing else. 8 years between albums was an eternity. I was starving for new songs!!! I was only following along with the chop the recent releases down to 45-ish minutes. That’s the only one I can trim down. Voodoo I’d just drop Mean Disposition and go back to Thru & Thru as the closer. And Bridges swap AYLAI for Juiced and there ya have it.
Quote
VoodooLounge13
I liked it enough when it came out. Listened to it for 6 months straight!!! No breaks nothing else. 8 years between albums was an eternity. I was starving for new songs!!! I was only following along with the chop the recent releases down to 45-ish minutes. That’s the only one I can trim down. Voodoo I’d just drop Mean Disposition and go back to Thru & Thru as the closer. And Bridges swap AYLAI for Juiced and there ya have it.
Quote
MadMetaphoricalMax
My prediction is that this thread will hit 666 pages and THEN we'll get a new album, the album to end all Stones albums .... so the faster we get there the better...