New message from Keith:

"There's some new music on it's way..."



[twitter.com]

Have been listening to a lot of "recent" (VL + B2B + Lost Licks) outtakes recently.

Most of the songs that didn't make the final set published on the album have at least one equivalent song in style that was published. Which one is better or worse is a matter of taste, but this is not the point.

What strikes me is how many songs they have cut that are far away form the stereotyped stones' format we all expect, and how almost all of these have been discarded.

Voodoo is extremely conventional, so are the released Licks tracks. Bridges has Juiced. Bang has Rain falls down that is somehow newish in their canon (not in Jagger's though). Doom and Gloom and Ghost Town are somehow diverse.

Prisoners of a formula when it comes to choose what gets published?

Tend to think so

C

Quote
KRiffhard

Quote
JordyLicks96

I'd cut 2 songs from B2B (Might As Well Get Juiced, Thief In The Night):

[...]

Run Time [51:49]

I'd do the same for VL & ABB. Make them shorter. I'd love for the new album to be 12 songs, 45-50 minutes with 2-3 songs as bonus tracks for various releases.

This is the perfect BTB
Without the usless and boring Thief in the Night.
[...]

For me, it's quite the opposite. If there's one thing I really love about B2B is "Thief In The Night". Much better than any other song on the album.
If I would make a better B2B, I would only keep Thief In The Night, Saint Of Me, Out Of Control and Anyway You Look At It. A mini-lp or an ep, or whatever.
And then they could have gone on making more solo-albums, each to their own taste and beliefs.

Quote
liddas
Have been listening to a lot of "recent" (VL + B2B + Lost Licks) outtakes recently.

Most of the songs that didn't make the final set published on the album have at least one equivalent song in style that was published. Which one is better or worse is a matter of taste, but this is not the point.

What strikes me is how many songs they have cut that are far away form the stereotyped stones' format we all expect, and how almost all of these have been discarded.

Voodoo is extremely conventional, so are the released Licks tracks. Bridges has Juiced. Bang has Rain falls down that is somehow newish in their canon (not in Jagger's though). Doom and Gloom and Ghost Town are somehow diverse.

Prisoners of a formula when it comes to choose what gets published?

Tend to think so

C

I agree, but Sweethearts Together, New Faces, Moon Is Up and Thru And Thru are hardly conventional.

Quote
Jimmy C
Keith just posted on social media a belated Happy New Year to everyone and said new music is coming. And hopefully fingers crossed they will see everyone this year.

Doesn't Keith has people to take care of this? I mean, in time and not two weeks later ...)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-11 20:42 by doitywoik.

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
Jimmy C
Keith just posted on social media a belated Happy New Year to everyone and said new music is coming. And hopefully fingers crossed they will see everyone this year.

Doesn't Keith has people to take care of this? I mean, in time and not two weeks later ...)

He forgot to fax his people on it earlier.

~"Love is Strong"~

Quote
angee

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
Jimmy C
Keith just posted on social media a belated Happy New Year to everyone and said new music is coming. And hopefully fingers crossed they will see everyone this year.

Doesn't Keith has people to take care of this? I mean, in time and not two weeks later ...)

He forgot to fax his people on it earlier.

Maybe the landline was down and the fax didn't work.

surely he knows a Jamaican Lines man ...



ROCKMAN

Quote
Rockman
surely he knows a Jamaican Lines man ...

Now that I'm pretty sure of, too!

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
liddas
Have been listening to a lot of "recent" (VL + B2B + Lost Licks) outtakes recently.

Most of the songs that didn't make the final set published on the album have at least one equivalent song in style that was published. Which one is better or worse is a matter of taste, but this is not the point.

What strikes me is how many songs they have cut that are far away form the stereotyped stones' format we all expect, and how almost all of these have been discarded.

Voodoo is extremely conventional, so are the released Licks tracks. Bridges has Juiced. Bang has Rain falls down that is somehow newish in their canon (not in Jagger's though). Doom and Gloom and Ghost Town are somehow diverse.

Prisoners of a formula when it comes to choose what gets published?

Tend to think so

C

I agree, but Sweethearts Together, New Faces, Moon Is Up and Thru And Thru are hardly conventional.

New Faces and Sweethearts take you back to the pop ballads they penned in the sixties, to usually end up on somebody else's record.

Quote
Rockman
surely he knows a Jamaican Lines man ...

Does he know a Wichita Lineman?

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
liddas
Have been listening to a lot of "recent" (VL + B2B + Lost Licks) outtakes recently.

Most of the songs that didn't make the final set published on the album have at least one equivalent song in style that was published. Which one is better or worse is a matter of taste, but this is not the point.

What strikes me is how many songs they have cut that are far away form the stereotyped stones' format we all expect, and how almost all of these have been discarded.

Voodoo is extremely conventional, so are the released Licks tracks. Bridges has Juiced. Bang has Rain falls down that is somehow newish in their canon (not in Jagger's though). Doom and Gloom and Ghost Town are somehow diverse.

Prisoners of a formula when it comes to choose what gets published?

Tend to think so

C

I agree, but Sweethearts Together, New Faces, Moon Is Up and Thru And Thru are hardly conventional.

…or good. Well apart from Thru and Thru. That’s ok.

Rod

OK , they're not "classic Stones" songs ....

...but I've always liked those soft quirky ballads they knock out from time to time.

They sometimes reveal some not very often evident English folk influences.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-12 12:57 by Spud.

so where are the negative dudes that are certain to turn KR words....and claim that somehow he doesn't seem very enthusiastic about the new music



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-12 14:49 by Rip This.

Stop stirring the pot, Rip This. We're busy talking about how bad Stones albums of the last thirty years have sucked.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Gunface is the only track I would have cut off the album. Horrible track.

I'd additionally remove Already Over Me and Always Suffering.

Every album since Steel Wheels would have benefited from some judicious editing.

Sure we can 'edit' ourselves but in terms of standing the 'test of time' having records out there will lesser content just diminishes the later catalogue unnecessarily.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Gunface is the only track I would have cut off the album. Horrible track.

I'd additionally remove Already Over Me and Always Suffering.

Every album since Steel Wheels would have benefited from some judicious editing.

Sure we can 'edit' ourselves but in terms of standing the 'test of time' having records out there will lesser content just diminishes the later catalogue unnecessarily.

The only problem is that probably not two people here on IORR would cut the very same tracks so how could we demand from the band doing the "right" track selection decisions?

Furthermore, if we think in terms of "standing the test of time" in general one needs to think outside our hardcore fan base box, what could ultimately lead to tough decisions not all people here would like. For example, for the general public 3 Keith lead vocal tracks are probably a bit hard to stomach...

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Gunface is the only track I would have cut off the album. Horrible track.

I'd additionally remove Already Over Me and Always Suffering.

Every album since Steel Wheels would have benefited from some judicious editing.

Sure we can 'edit' ourselves but in terms of standing the 'test of time' having records out there will lesser content just diminishes the later catalogue unnecessarily.

The only problem is that probably not two people here on IORR would cut the very same tracks so how could we demand from the band doing the "right" track selection decisions?

Furthermore, if we think in terms of "standing the test of time" in general one needs to think outside our hardcore fan base box, what could ultimately lead to tough decisions not all people here would like. For example, for the general public 3 Keith lead vocal tracks are probably a bit hard to stomach...

you're probably right.
Sometimes it makes sense not to go for what nowadays is considered to be a full album length (60+ minutes) and instead release a bunch of good songs on a 40min album (cutting down Bigger Bang to ten (or even less) songs would've been an improvent)

Quote
slewan

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Gunface is the only track I would have cut off the album. Horrible track.

I'd additionally remove Already Over Me and Always Suffering.

Every album since Steel Wheels would have benefited from some judicious editing.

Sure we can 'edit' ourselves but in terms of standing the 'test of time' having records out there will lesser content just diminishes the later catalogue unnecessarily.

The only problem is that probably not two people here on IORR would cut the very same tracks so how could we demand from the band doing the "right" track selection decisions?

Furthermore, if we think in terms of "standing the test of time" in general one needs to think outside our hardcore fan base box, what could ultimately lead to tough decisions not all people here would like. For example, for the general public 3 Keith lead vocal tracks are probably a bit hard to stomach...

you're probably right.
Sometimes it makes sense not to go for what nowadays is considered to be a full album length (60+ minutes) and instead release a bunch of good songs on a 40min album (cutting down Bigger Bang to ten (or even less) songs would've been an improvent)

\

While I agree (ironically) that we won't all agree on which songs to choose, thankfully we're not in that position and I'd be comfortable that the band could make those decisions...it's resulted in some of my favourite albums of all time and I think it's worth the 'risk'.

Quote
slewan

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Gunface is the only track I would have cut off the album. Horrible track.

I'd additionally remove Already Over Me and Always Suffering.

Every album since Steel Wheels would have benefited from some judicious editing.

Sure we can 'edit' ourselves but in terms of standing the 'test of time' having records out there will lesser content just diminishes the later catalogue unnecessarily.

The only problem is that probably not two people here on IORR would cut the very same tracks so how could we demand from the band doing the "right" track selection decisions?

Furthermore, if we think in terms of "standing the test of time" in general one needs to think outside our hardcore fan base box, what could ultimately lead to tough decisions not all people here would like. For example, for the general public 3 Keith lead vocal tracks are probably a bit hard to stomach...

you're probably right.
Sometimes it makes sense not to go for what nowadays is considered to be a full album length (60+ minutes) and instead release a bunch of good songs on a 40min album (cutting down Bigger Bang to ten (or even less) songs would've been an improvent)

\

While I agree (ironically) that we won't all agree on which songs to choose, thankfully we're not in that position and I'd be comfortable that the band could make those decisions...it's resulted in some of my favourite albums of all time and I think it's worth the 'risk'.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
slewan

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Gunface is the only track I would have cut off the album. Horrible track.

I'd additionally remove Already Over Me and Always Suffering.

Every album since Steel Wheels would have benefited from some judicious editing.

Sure we can 'edit' ourselves but in terms of standing the 'test of time' having records out there will lesser content just diminishes the later catalogue unnecessarily.

The only problem is that probably not two people here on IORR would cut the very same tracks so how could we demand from the band doing the "right" track selection decisions?

Furthermore, if we think in terms of "standing the test of time" in general one needs to think outside our hardcore fan base box, what could ultimately lead to tough decisions not all people here would like. For example, for the general public 3 Keith lead vocal tracks are probably a bit hard to stomach...

you're probably right.
Sometimes it makes sense not to go for what nowadays is considered to be a full album length (60+ minutes) and instead release a bunch of good songs on a 40min album (cutting down Bigger Bang to ten (or even less) songs would've been an improvent)

\

While I agree (ironically) that we won't all agree on which songs to choose, thankfully we're not in that position and I'd be comfortable that the band could make those decisions...it's resulted in some of my favourite albums of all time and I think it's worth the 'risk'.

Another thing is how theoretical an ideal album (you know, the whole thing being coherent, not too many fillers, etc) is for die-hards who, pragmatically speaking, would die for any release by this band. You know, any leaked studio sketch will do. Our objective judgment to evaluate that this or that track shouldn't'been released is questionable...

Let's be honest. If Mick and Keith would ask from us, 'hey, would you prefer the album to consist of 12 great tracks or those plus 8 not so great tracks?'. How many us would take the first option, knowing that those 8 tracks would be lost for good? Probably the principle of 'quantity over quality' is for us 'curiosity over quality'...

I hope I made myself clear why I claim this issue being not that practical but theoretical for us die-hards... Besides that of speculating afterwards what tracks should not have made, say, BRIDGES TO BABYLON for it being a 'better' album is a part of fun. Like speculating how much stronger, say, BLACK AND BLUE had been if there'd been, say, "Worried About You" and "Slave...

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-12 21:02 by Doxa.

Someone had mentioned a while back somewhere in this lengthy thread (almost 600 pages now!!!) that maybe the best route for the band to have taken was to continue to release singles.
Might have been around the time that Ghost Town was released, and it could have been the right thing to do satisfy some of us fans, not to mention poor album sales in general these days.
That said, I'd think most of us would want a unique album of original new Stones material (of any length) vs. the band spitting out the occasional single....especially given the fact they've been talking about this for eons!!!
I have a feeling it will be worth the wait...18 years...can't imagine being a young fan and not knowing what it's like to experience a new original Stones release - the wait might be almost over! Maybe. Hopefully!

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

Quote
Hairball

Someone had mentioned a while back somewhere in this lengthy thread (almost 600 pages now!!!) that maybe the best route for the band to have taken was to continue to release singles.

It was Keith, end of August 2020: "If this thing [pandemic lockdown] goes on much longer we might try to put out another track. Work differently, instead of making an 'album' album ... just release tracks." - [iorr.org] .

Quote
Hairball
Someone had mentioned a while back somewhere in this lengthy thread (almost 600 pages now!!!) that maybe the best route for the band to have taken was to continue to release singles.
Might have been around the time that Ghost Town was released, and it could have been the right thing to do satisfy some of us fans, not to mention poor album sales in general these days.
That said, I'd think most of us would want a unique album of original new Stones material (of any length) vs. the band spitting out the occasional single....especially given the fact they've been talking about this for eons!!!
I have a feeling it will be worth the wait...18 years...can't imagine being a young fan and not knowing what it's like to experience a new original Stones release - the wait might be almost over! Maybe. Hopefully!

Yeah hopefully the wait is almost over. I'm really looking forward for the album, I can tell you that it will be my first time witnessing a new stones album with a new tour to promote it, since A Bigger Bang came out when i was 4yo lol. I really can't wait for it.
I think the next thing we can expect is some teasers or a new interview with one of the guys. We'll see

Quote
Doxa

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
slewan

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Gunface is the only track I would have cut off the album. Horrible track.

I'd additionally remove Already Over Me and Always Suffering.

Every album since Steel Wheels would have benefited from some judicious editing.

Sure we can 'edit' ourselves but in terms of standing the 'test of time' having records out there will lesser content just diminishes the later catalogue unnecessarily.

The only problem is that probably not two people here on IORR would cut the very same tracks so how could we demand from the band doing the "right" track selection decisions?

Furthermore, if we think in terms of "standing the test of time" in general one needs to think outside our hardcore fan base box, what could ultimately lead to tough decisions not all people here would like. For example, for the general public 3 Keith lead vocal tracks are probably a bit hard to stomach...

you're probably right.
Sometimes it makes sense not to go for what nowadays is considered to be a full album length (60+ minutes) and instead release a bunch of good songs on a 40min album (cutting down Bigger Bang to ten (or even less) songs would've been an improvent)

\

While I agree (ironically) that we won't all agree on which songs to choose, thankfully we're not in that position and I'd be comfortable that the band could make those decisions...it's resulted in some of my favourite albums of all time and I think it's worth the 'risk'.

Another thing is how theoretical an ideal album (you know, the whole thing being coherent, not too many fillers, etc) is for die-hards who, pragmatically speaking, would die for any release by this band. You know, any leaked studio sketch will do. Our objective judgment to evaluate that this or that track shouldn't'been released is questionable...

Let's be honest. If Mick and Keith would ask from us, 'hey, would you prefer the album to consist of 12 great tracks or those plus 8 not so great tracks?'. How many us would take the first option, knowing that those 8 tracks would be lost for good? Probably the principle of 'quantity over quality' is for us 'curiosity over quality'...

I hope I made myself clear why I claim this issue being not that practical but theoretical for us die-hards... Besides that of speculating afterwards what tracks should not have made, say, BRIDGES TO BABYLON for it being a 'better' album is a part of fun. Like speculating how much stronger, say, BLACK AND BLUE had been if there'd been, say, "Worried About You" and "Slave...

- Doxa

For me, I'd disagree. I didn't love Bridges but for a few songs when it was released, and because of that it still isn't an album I ever reach out for. Even without Worried About You and Slave, Black and Blue is a great album I do listen to. But here you've picked one with only 8 songs, feels a bit light, in which they really should/could have added a couple of additional tracks.

If there are that many songs sitting about, then release them as 'albums', 10 or 11 songs per. They pick their top 10...that's an album. Then release the next 10 (and fiddle with/write new material in the meantime), as a new album.

Otherwise, forget the whole album concept and just release singles or songs as have been suggested, as they come up with them. It will take me awhile to get used to but I'd be happy to get regular singles or EP's from them I'm sure.

All of this with the understanding that they are 80, and haven't been able to do this for 18 years...longer if we take a more normal length of time between albums. BUT, if they have all this material...then release only the best cuts and leave the rest for an odds & sods clearout later on.

Quote
Rockman
surely he knows a Jamaican Lines man ...

They have them in the Turks And Caicos?

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Gunface is the only track I would have cut off the album. Horrible track.

I'd additionally remove Already Over Me and Always Suffering.

Every album since Steel Wheels would have benefited from some judicious editing.

Sure we can 'edit' ourselves but in terms of standing the 'test of time' having records out there will lesser content just diminishes the later catalogue unnecessarily.

The only problem is that probably not two people here on IORR would cut the very same tracks so how could we demand from the band doing the "right" track selection decisions?

Furthermore, if we think in terms of "standing the test of time" in general one needs to think outside our hardcore fan base box, what could ultimately lead to tough decisions not all people here would like. For example, for the general public 3 Keith lead vocal tracks are probably a bit hard to stomach...

His best 3 are on BRIDGES! The three he's done since have not been anywhere near as good or memorable for good reasons.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Doxa

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
slewan

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Gunface is the only track I would have cut off the album. Horrible track.

I'd additionally remove Already Over Me and Always Suffering.

Every album since Steel Wheels would have benefited from some judicious editing.

Sure we can 'edit' ourselves but in terms of standing the 'test of time' having records out there will lesser content just diminishes the later catalogue unnecessarily.

The only problem is that probably not two people here on IORR would cut the very same tracks so how could we demand from the band doing the "right" track selection decisions?

Furthermore, if we think in terms of "standing the test of time" in general one needs to think outside our hardcore fan base box, what could ultimately lead to tough decisions not all people here would like. For example, for the general public 3 Keith lead vocal tracks are probably a bit hard to stomach...

you're probably right.
Sometimes it makes sense not to go for what nowadays is considered to be a full album length (60+ minutes) and instead release a bunch of good songs on a 40min album (cutting down Bigger Bang to ten (or even less) songs would've been an improvent)

\

While I agree (ironically) that we won't all agree on which songs to choose, thankfully we're not in that position and I'd be comfortable that the band could make those decisions...it's resulted in some of my favourite albums of all time and I think it's worth the 'risk'.

Another thing is how theoretical an ideal album (you know, the whole thing being coherent, not too many fillers, etc) is for die-hards who, pragmatically speaking, would die for any release by this band. You know, any leaked studio sketch will do. Our objective judgment to evaluate that this or that track shouldn't'been released is questionable...

Let's be honest. If Mick and Keith would ask from us, 'hey, would you prefer the album to consist of 12 great tracks or those plus 8 not so great tracks?'. How many us would take the first option, knowing that those 8 tracks would be lost for good? Probably the principle of 'quantity over quality' is for us 'curiosity over quality'...

I hope I made myself clear why I claim this issue being not that practical but theoretical for us die-hards... Besides that of speculating afterwards what tracks should not have made, say, BRIDGES TO BABYLON for it being a 'better' album is a part of fun. Like speculating how much stronger, say, BLACK AND BLUE had been if there'd been, say, "Worried About You" and "Slave...

- Doxa

For me, I'd disagree. I didn't love Bridges but for a few songs when it was released, and because of that it still isn't an album I ever reach out for. Even without Worried About You and Slave, Black and Blue is a great album I do listen to. But here you've picked one with only 8 songs, feels a bit light, in which they really should/could have added a couple of additional tracks.

It's running time is longer than SOME GIRS, which has two more songs on it!

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Doxa

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
slewan

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Gunface is the only track I would have cut off the album. Horrible track.

I'd additionally remove Already Over Me and Always Suffering.

Every album since Steel Wheels would have benefited from some judicious editing.

Sure we can 'edit' ourselves but in terms of standing the 'test of time' having records out there will lesser content just diminishes the later catalogue unnecessarily.

The only problem is that probably not two people here on IORR would cut the very same tracks so how could we demand from the band doing the "right" track selection decisions?

Furthermore, if we think in terms of "standing the test of time" in general one needs to think outside our hardcore fan base box, what could ultimately lead to tough decisions not all people here would like. For example, for the general public 3 Keith lead vocal tracks are probably a bit hard to stomach...

you're probably right.
Sometimes it makes sense not to go for what nowadays is considered to be a full album length (60+ minutes) and instead release a bunch of good songs on a 40min album (cutting down Bigger Bang to ten (or even less) songs would've been an improvent)

\

While I agree (ironically) that we won't all agree on which songs to choose, thankfully we're not in that position and I'd be comfortable that the band could make those decisions...it's resulted in some of my favourite albums of all time and I think it's worth the 'risk'.

Another thing is how theoretical an ideal album (you know, the whole thing being coherent, not too many fillers, etc) is for die-hards who, pragmatically speaking, would die for any release by this band. You know, any leaked studio sketch will do. Our objective judgment to evaluate that this or that track shouldn't'been released is questionable...

Let's be honest. If Mick and Keith would ask from us, 'hey, would you prefer the album to consist of 12 great tracks or those plus 8 not so great tracks?'. How many us would take the first option, knowing that those 8 tracks would be lost for good? Probably the principle of 'quantity over quality' is for us 'curiosity over quality'...

I hope I made myself clear why I claim this issue being not that practical but theoretical for us die-hards... Besides that of speculating afterwards what tracks should not have made, say, BRIDGES TO BABYLON for it being a 'better' album is a part of fun. Like speculating how much stronger, say, BLACK AND BLUE had been if there'd been, say, "Worried About You" and "Slave...

- Doxa

For me, I'd disagree. I didn't love Bridges but for a few songs when it was released, and because of that it still isn't an album I ever reach out for. Even without Worried About You and Slave, Black and Blue is a great album I do listen to. But here you've picked one with only 8 songs, feels a bit light, in which they really should/could have added a couple of additional tracks.

It's running time is longer than SOME GIRS, which has two more songs on it!

This isn't about number skippy...you can't question my feelings dammit!

i'd add more songs not take em' away

have them polish up and finish some of the outtakes and turn each of those albums into double (cd) albums



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-13 07:31 by ProfessorWolf.