Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Hairball

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Hairball
Hope Keith sings lead on a song (or two) on the new album.
One of the reasons the Blue and Lonesome covers album suffered was because there were no vocals from Keith - not even backup vocals.

oh wow i didn't even consider the possibility of keith not getting his two songs

that would be a real bummer for me if the new album lacks at least two keith numbers

Yes it would be a bummer for most Stones fans.
Hoping for at least one...

and more than that it would mean one less new song from the album in the set since i assume keith would do at least one of the two each night in his set

Keef will do one of his new songs - hopefully it’s a rocker and then he can break out Thru & Thru!!!

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Hairball

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Hairball

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Hairball
Hope Keith sings lead on a song (or two) on the new album.
One of the reasons the Blue and Lonesome covers album suffered was because there were no vocals from Keith - not even backup vocals.

oh wow i didn't even consider the possibility of keith not getting his two songs

that would be a real bummer for me if the new album lacks at least two keith numbers

Yes it would be a bummer for most Stones fans.
Hoping for at least one...

and more than that it would mean one less new song from the album in the set since i assume keith would do at least one of the two each night in his set

Keith's set is part of the overall set in general, and a new Stones song with Keith on lead vocals is still a Stones song, so not sure how it would be one less song from the album...

because in a mostly warhorse laden 19 song set there's little room to squeeze in the new songs off the album

so maybe two new songs in the first half and then one of keith's new songs in his set (of which i would assume he gets to pick what he plays and not mick) and if there is no keith songs on the new album then he'll just play happy and btmr or something like that and we'll just have those two new songs off the album instead of three

because we know there not gonna drop any warhorses that's for sure

So what you're saying is if there isn't a new Keith song on the album, then there will be one less song played from the new album since he will have nothing new to add to his set. Makes sense.
The way I initially read your post was if Keith plays one of his new (Stones) songs in the set, there will be one less new tune played in the entire set which didn't seem to make sense.
Anyhow, as I initially wrote - hope Keith sings lead on a song (or two) on the new album.

On a related note, what are the odds of this thread hitting 700 pages before a new album is finished?
At the rate it's been going lately, I'd say chances are very good...maybe even 800 pages.

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

One of the reasons the Blue and Lonesome covers album suffered was because there were no vocals from Keith - not even backup vocals.


What are ya talkin about ....???
There's no real Keith blues song with the Stones

And not much in the backing vocals on blues songs either ....
There's probably something else but Empty Heart ... Brand New Car



ROCKMAN

We gotta get an over/under going about this, Hairball!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-10-27 09:24 by Topi.

Quote
Hairball
Hope Keith sings lead on a song (or two) on the new album.
One of the reasons the Blue and Lonesome covers album suffered was because there were no vocals from Keith - not even backup vocals.

I hope not. One of the qualities on Blue an Lonesome was that there were no Kieth-vocal tracks. Such a relief.

He should have done "Happy" as a blues version.

Quote
Hairball
Hope Keith sings lead on a song (or two) on the new album.
One of the reasons the Blue and Lonesome covers album suffered was because there were no vocals from Keith - not even backup vocals.

If the songs aren't poor like Infamy, Losing my Touch or This Place is Empty.

What I learn here is that it must be a "bummer for most Stones fans" to listen STICKY FINGERS, since there is no Keith solo tune.

Seemingly since there is no point any longer in bitching about the lack of new album, it is time to bitch about the possible content of the album (and seemingly good old bitching about the set lists is nicely connected here)..

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-10-27 11:30 by Doxa.

It'd serve us right if the new album turned out to be ten alternative mixes of Gomper !



[... though some of the more eccentric in our number might actually love that ]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-10-27 11:47 by Spud.

I don't care if Ronnie sings all the tunes, with Matt on harmony vocals, as long as we'll get the new album!

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I don't care if Ronnie sings all the tunes, with Matt on harmony vocals, as long as we'll get the new album!

Naturally all the songs should be crafted by Clifford/Jordan team. Mick could play the drums and Keith electric piano. Guitars Jordan and Jones. Chuck could play the bass.

Finally something different for change...

- Doxa

Well Keith did comment a year [or two ?] ago that folks might be surprised by the new stuff they were doing .

Quote
Doxa
What I learn here is that it must be a "bummer for most Stones fans" to listen STICKY FINGERS, since there is no Keith solo tune.

Seemingly since there is no point any longer in bitching about the lack of new album, it is time to bitch about the possible content of the album (and seemingly good old bitching about the set lists is nicely connected here)..

- Doxa

ha ha good point

but i think you know what i mean

every album (except blue & lonesome) since dirty work has featured two or more keith songs even the forty licks sessions produced two (though not on the same release)

seems pretty likely there will be two or more

that being said i'll be grateful for whatever they give us

they haven't made a album yet i don't love

Quote
Hairball

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Hairball

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Hairball

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Hairball
Hope Keith sings lead on a song (or two) on the new album.
One of the reasons the Blue and Lonesome covers album suffered was because there were no vocals from Keith - not even backup vocals.

oh wow i didn't even consider the possibility of keith not getting his two songs

that would be a real bummer for me if the new album lacks at least two keith numbers

Yes it would be a bummer for most Stones fans.
Hoping for at least one...

and more than that it would mean one less new song from the album in the set since i assume keith would do at least one of the two each night in his set

Keith's set is part of the overall set in general, and a new Stones song with Keith on lead vocals is still a Stones song, so not sure how it would be one less song from the album...

because in a mostly warhorse laden 19 song set there's little room to squeeze in the new songs off the album

so maybe two new songs in the first half and then one of keith's new songs in his set (of which i would assume he gets to pick what he plays and not mick) and if there is no keith songs on the new album then he'll just play happy and btmr or something like that and we'll just have those two new songs off the album instead of three

because we know there not gonna drop any warhorses that's for sure

So what you're saying is if there isn't a new Keith song on the album, then there will be one less song played from the new album since he will have nothing new to add to his set. Makes sense.
The way I initially read your post was if Keith plays one of his new (Stones) songs in the set, there will be one less new tune played in the entire set which didn't seem to make sense.
Anyhow, as I initially wrote - hope Keith sings lead on a song (or two) on the new album.

On a related note, what are the odds of this thread hitting 700 pages before a new album is finished?
At the rate it's been going lately, I'd say chances are very good...maybe even 800 pages.

yes i could see how you could reach that conclusion

sorry

as for this thread

if the band keeps dropping hints and or a few singles here and there 800 doesn't seem impossible to me

Quote
VoodooLounge13
...
4. That no matter its quality we all just be happy that we have a new Stones album to listen to without bitching about this or that track!
...

Yeah, let's do the bitching now, that'll save us time later on! I'll start with: They could have left off that lame reggae track ...

Quote
Spud
It'd serve us right if the new album turned out to be ten alternative mixes of Gomper !

[... though some of the more eccentric in our number might actually love that ]

If they really must bring out a new album (and I am inclined to think I'd rather they didn't), I would indeed prefer a album in which they go crazy instead of the predictable 3 filler rockers, 1 filler reggae, 2 filler Jagger attempts at something contemporary plus 2 ballads, one country song, and then Keith doing something jazzy-after-hours-me-and-my-whiskey thing (and I love some of his past songs in that variety).
If they have anything left to say, which I doubt, both musically as culturally, it must be that in their old age, having gone through so much, they come face to face with death and go and do something outworldly weird to fool the devil one more time. For this to happen, they should throw all their "new songs" so far into the bin, lock themselves up in a country-house in the middle of nowhere and listen to Diamanda Galas, Robert Johnson, Virgin Prunes, Captain Beefheart and Vicki Bennett (aka People Like Us) and Lee Perry for two months in a row and then make an album so ridiculous, so absurd, so whacko, that it would take decades before the world would recognize it as a masterpiece or as absolute nonsense.
Anything else would be a waste of time.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Hairball
Hope Keith sings lead on a song (or two) on the new album.
One of the reasons the Blue and Lonesome covers album suffered was because there were no vocals from Keith - not even backup vocals.

oh wow i didn't even consider the possibility of keith not getting his two songs

that would be a real bummer for me if the new album lacks at least two keith numbers

Yes it would be a bummer for most Stones fans.
Hoping for at least one...

No it would not. I think most fans just want something solid....and B & L DID NOT suffer because of no KR vocal track.....who in their right mind ever said that other than you?

Quote
matxil

Quote
Spud
It'd serve us right if the new album turned out to be ten alternative mixes of Gomper !

[... though some of the more eccentric in our number might actually love that ]

If they really must bring out a new album (and I am inclined to think I'd rather they didn't), I would indeed prefer a album in which they go crazy instead of the predictable 3 filler rockers, 1 filler reggae, 2 filler Jagger attempts at something contemporary plus 2 ballads, one country song, and then Keith doing something jazzy-after-hours-me-and-my-whiskey thing (and I love some of his past songs in that variety).
If they have anything left to say, which I doubt, both musically as culturally, it must be that in their old age, having gone through so much, they come face to face with death and go and do something outworldly weird to fool the devil one more time. For this to happen, they should throw all their "new songs" so far into the bin, lock themselves up in a country-house in the middle of nowhere and listen to Diamanda Galas, Robert Johnson, Virgin Prunes, Captain Beefheart and Vicki Bennett (aka People Like Us) and Lee Perry for two months in a row and then make an album so ridiculous, so absurd, so whacko, that it would take decades before the world would recognize it as a masterpiece or as absolute nonsense.
Anything else would be a waste of time.

A pretty good and realistic description what the new album might be like (if some kind of miracle do not happen). But then again, I think you have to be grateful for them passing the idea of releasing a new album for so long. In worst scenario they might have had released a couple of those kind of throwaway albums during the last 17 years (like many of their still alive contemporaries have done). Now if they release such a waste of time only once in about 20 years, we probably could stomach it and forgive them, despite of them not having anything musically or culturally left to say?

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-10-27 14:21 by Doxa.

Quote
Rip This

Quote
Hairball

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Hairball
Hope Keith sings lead on a song (or two) on the new album.
One of the reasons the Blue and Lonesome covers album suffered was because there were no vocals from Keith - not even backup vocals.

oh wow i didn't even consider the possibility of keith not getting his two songs

that would be a real bummer for me if the new album lacks at least two keith numbers

Yes it would be a bummer for most Stones fans.
Hoping for at least one...

No it would not. I think most fans just want something solid....and B & L DID NOT suffer because of no KR vocal track.....who in their right mind ever said that other than you?

It's a nice to have not a have to have; depends on the song. Example, You Got The Silver or BTMMR definitely yes. Infamy, no thank you.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I don't care if Ronnie sings all the tunes, with Matt on harmony vocals, as long as we'll get the new album!

For more than a quarter of a century, I've really liked Bard a great deal and always respected his opinions. Then I read the post above.

Quote
Spud
Well Keith did comment a year [or two ?] ago that folks might be surprised by the new stuff they were doing .

Didn't Keith say folks might be surprised that they were doing new stuff?

Quote
Spud
Well Keith did comment a year [or two ?] ago that folks might be surprised by the new stuff they were doing .

I think he also said that the new stuff was more soul-tinged. That sounds exciting, imo.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Spud
Well Keith did comment a year [or two ?] ago that folks might be surprised by the new stuff they were doing .

I think he also said that the new stuff was more soul-tinged. That sounds exciting, imo.

Yes it would be .

The Soul covers have always been amongst their best grooves.

[ Edited to add :- They usually work live too ...which would also auger well .]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-10-27 16:44 by Spud.

Do like Springsteen and put out a soul covers album!

Quote
Rocky Dijon

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I don't care if Ronnie sings all the tunes, with Matt on harmony vocals, as long as we'll get the new album!

For more than a quarter of a century, I've really liked Bard a great deal and always respected his opinions. Then I read the post above.

Lol

Quote
Rocky Dijon

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I don't care if Ronnie sings all the tunes, with Matt on harmony vocals, as long as we'll get the new album!

For more than a quarter of a century, I've really liked Bard a great deal and always respected his opinions. Then I read the post above.

Haha I was also thinking that does he really see the vocals such a minor thing in Rolling Stones sound that some half-arse singer like Ronnie Wood could do them? The Stones without Jagger's voice would be like them without Keith on guitar or Charlie Watts on drums... Hmm...wait a minute..

- Doxa

Wondering if Don Was will still be involved - it seems to have been a couple of years now since we heard anything from him regarding this "new" Stones album.

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

Quote
KRiffhard

Quote
Hairball
Hope Keith sings lead on a song (or two) on the new album.
One of the reasons the Blue and Lonesome covers album suffered was because there were no vocals from Keith - not even backup vocals.

If the songs aren't poor like Infamy, Losing my Touch or This Place is Empty.

I really like Losing my Touch and This Place is Empty, while Infamy might be his worst tune ever.

That said, pick any one or two songs from Crosseyed Heart, and they would undoubtedly elevate a new Stones album.
Robbed Blind, Illusion, Suspicious, Amnesia, etc., etc., etc. - they're all classics imo, and goes without saying they'd fit right in.
In fact there's not a single bad tune on that album (even the covers are great), and you can bet Keith has plenty more where they all came from.
He could have another You Got the Silver or Happy up his sleeve for all we know, and hopefully one (or two) of them will be included in the new album!

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

Quote
Rocky Dijon

Quote
Spud
Well Keith did comment a year [or two ?] ago that folks might be surprised by the new stuff they were doing .

Didn't Keith say folks might be surprised that they were doing new stuff?

He replaced open G with open D on one song?

More seriously, I do remember that quote and I wasn't sure then whether it's a revelation or a threat ... On the other hand, Keef's idea of a surprise possibly doesn't quite match ours.

officialkeef New sounds on the horizon!

[www.instagram.com]