For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
ProfessorWolf
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
Quote
Rocky Dijon
This is all silliness. An album had ten tracks because that's what fit the format for vinyl, comfortably. A CD had 15 tracks because the CD-R created a value awareness of what the format could deliver in terms of running time. It's a collection of songs. Everyone has favorites and least favorites. During the streaming era, it's easier than ever to sample and only stream what you like and ignore the rest. If I buy every album by an artist, I also buy the non-album tracks. I prefer they all be lumped together. It doesn't make me cry that the album is now bloated and uneven. In the current era, it's likely it will be 12 tracks and you'll need to pick up vinyl, Target CD, Japanese import, and streaming exclusives to get all the tracks.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
Rocky Dijon
This is all silliness. An album had ten tracks because that's what fit the format for vinyl, comfortably. A CD had 15 tracks because the CD-R created a value awareness of what the format could deliver in terms of running time. It's a collection of songs. Everyone has favorites and least favorites. During the streaming era, it's easier than ever to sample and only stream what you like and ignore the rest. If I buy every album by an artist, I also buy the non-album tracks. I prefer they all be lumped together. It doesn't make me cry that the album is now bloated and uneven. In the current era, it's likely it will be 12 tracks and you'll need to pick up vinyl, Target CD, Japanese import, and streaming exclusives to get all the tracks.
OK, I totally hear that logic. However, as an artistic statement, and as a listening experience, 40 minutes or so has proven to be a really good way for someone to delve into a musician's music for the moment in time they created it. I hear what you're saying that it was due to the limitations of the format. However before 12" vinyl, they used to group shellac into 'albums' (as you know, hence the term 'album' for records) because people didn't just want the song, they wanted more. It just so happens that a 12" vinyl record was more or less perfect for that listening experience. And for an artist, to get a great 10 songs or so wasn't easy, but for a few truly great bands.
Going to 75 minutes with CD led to a lot of uninteresting material released, with some exceptions because bands felt they had to fill up the disc. (EDIT - because - at the time - CDs were really expensive compared to vinyl/cassettes, so I believe it was at least partly to justify this new higher cost of the new format - "LOOK, YOU GET MORE!").
Yes we can accomplish all of this through playlists. What I want is the bands best songs, as a true artistic statement...if they're not able to or no longer want to do that, then why release an 'album' at all? Just release songs as they write and record them digitally?
And maybe that's the best way to have their music out more often so we don't have to wait until they have collected a bunch that sound good to their ears?
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
ProfessorWolf
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
Dunno about that. Some of the greatest bands/musicians in history have only ever released one double album...if it was easy to have so much great material I think you'd see more.
Blonde on Blonde, The White Album, Exile on Main Street, A Bigger Bang.
Which of those is not like the others?
So if you have enough material for a great double album, go for it, but if not, for the love of god edit it! Then release all the 'not-quite-up-to-snuff' material, if the diehards REALLY want it, as an 'odd and sods', 'Sucking in the 70s/RARITIES' type release.
Quote
VoodooLounge13Quote
treaclefingersQuote
ProfessorWolf
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
Dunno about that. Some of the greatest bands/musicians in history have only ever released one double album...if it was easy to have so much great material I think you'd see more.
Blonde on Blonde, The White Album, Exile on Main Street, A Bigger Bang.
Which of those is not like the others?
So if you have enough material for a great double album, go for it, but if not, for the love of god edit it! Then release all the 'not-quite-up-to-snuff' material, if the diehards REALLY want it, as an 'odd and sods', 'Sucking in the 70s/RARITIES' type release.
While I'll admit ABB does not belong in that list, I've always felt that The White Album was highly overrated and bloated. It would have been a monumentally phenomenal single LP. There's a lot that could be cut off of it.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
ProfessorWolf
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
Dunno about that. Some of the greatest bands/musicians in history have only ever released one double album...if it was easy to have so much great material I think you'd see more.
Blonde on Blonde, The White Album, Exile on Main Street, A Bigger Bang.
Which of those is not like the others?
So if you have enough material for a great double album, go for it, but if not, for the love of god edit it! Then release all the 'not-quite-up-to-snuff' material, if the diehards REALLY want it, as an 'odd and sods', 'Sucking in the 70s/RARITIES' type release.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
Rocky Dijon
This is all silliness. An album had ten tracks because that's what fit the format for vinyl, comfortably. A CD had 15 tracks because the CD-R created a value awareness of what the format could deliver in terms of running time. It's a collection of songs. Everyone has favorites and least favorites. During the streaming era, it's easier than ever to sample and only stream what you like and ignore the rest. If I buy every album by an artist, I also buy the non-album tracks. I prefer they all be lumped together. It doesn't make me cry that the album is now bloated and uneven. In the current era, it's likely it will be 12 tracks and you'll need to pick up vinyl, Target CD, Japanese import, and streaming exclusives to get all the tracks.
OK, I totally hear that logic. However, as an artistic statement, and as a listening experience, 40 minutes or so has proven to be a really good way for someone to delve into a musician's music for the moment in time they created it. I hear what you're saying that it was due to the limitations of the format. However before 12" vinyl, they used to group shellac into 'albums' (as you know, hence the term 'album' for records) because people didn't just want the song, they wanted more. It just so happens that a 12" vinyl record was more or less perfect for that listening experience. And for an artist, to get a great 10 songs or so wasn't easy, but for a few truly great bands.
Going to 75 minutes with CD led to a lot of uninteresting material released, with some exceptions because bands felt they had to fill up the disc. (EDIT - because - at the time - CDs were really expensive compared to vinyl/cassettes, so I believe it was at least partly to justify this new higher cost of the new format - "LOOK, YOU GET MORE!").
Yes we can accomplish all of this through playlists. What I want is the bands best songs, as a true artistic statement...if they're not able to or no longer want to do that, then why release an 'album' at all? Just release songs as they write and record them digitally?
And maybe that's the best way to have their music out more often so we don't have to wait until they have collected a bunch that sound good to their ears?
Quote
WitnessQuote
treaclefingersQuote
Rocky Dijon
This is all silliness. An album had ten tracks because that's what fit the format for vinyl, comfortably. A CD had 15 tracks because the CD-R created a value awareness of what the format could deliver in terms of running time. It's a collection of songs. Everyone has favorites and least favorites. During the streaming era, it's easier than ever to sample and only stream what you like and ignore the rest. If I buy every album by an artist, I also buy the non-album tracks. I prefer they all be lumped together. It doesn't make me cry that the album is now bloated and uneven. In the current era, it's likely it will be 12 tracks and you'll need to pick up vinyl, Target CD, Japanese import, and streaming exclusives to get all the tracks.
OK, I totally hear that logic. However, as an artistic statement, and as a listening experience, 40 minutes or so has proven to be a really good way for someone to delve into a musician's music for the moment in time they created it. I hear what you're saying that it was due to the limitations of the format. However before 12" vinyl, they used to group shellac into 'albums' (as you know, hence the term 'album' for records) because people didn't just want the song, they wanted more. It just so happens that a 12" vinyl record was more or less perfect for that listening experience. And for an artist, to get a great 10 songs or so wasn't easy, but for a few truly great bands.
Going to 75 minutes with CD led to a lot of uninteresting material released, with some exceptions because bands felt they had to fill up the disc. (EDIT - because - at the time - CDs were really expensive compared to vinyl/cassettes, so I believe it was at least partly to justify this new higher cost of the new format - "LOOK, YOU GET MORE!").
Yes we can accomplish all of this through playlists. What I want is the bands best songs, as a true artistic statement...if they're not able to or no longer want to do that, then why release an 'album' at all? Just release songs as they write and record them digitally?
And maybe that's the best way to have their music out more often so we don't have to wait until they have collected a bunch that sound good to their ears?
There are some difficulties.
Stonesfans are from several rock generations and have become widely diverse in tastes and opinions.
Rock music is past its defining phase and easily continued innovative state.
The Rolling Stones themselves have had their thread of development, during which they continually explored music, cut off. I suggest in the middle of the '80s.
As a consequence of all this, what is quality or even artistic statements in the context of creating Rolling Stones music now or during the later decades, will be much contested. There are quite opposite evaluations regarding which songs are, let us say, good or not so good. Such an observation must have some importance for these exchanges of views.
Quote
gotdablouse
"bulletproof" ? Not sure about that, when they released a 10 track LP it was every 1 to 2 years vs 8 or 18 (and counting) so inspiration being equal there would be more "fillers" back in the day, except for the "best" albums.
As for releasing songs here and there, it would make sense in a way but I'm not sure that's a good idea. Look at Sheryl Crow who said "Threads" was her last album...but that she would still be releasing new music. I think she's actually released a couple of tracks since but unless you're a die-hard what are the chances you'll be able to keep track ? Who remembers GAG, EL, LIAGT or ES outside of here ? Well LIAGT likely a bit more ;-)
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
WitnessQuote
treaclefingersQuote
Rocky Dijon
This is all silliness. An album had ten tracks because that's what fit the format for vinyl, comfortably. A CD had 15 tracks because the CD-R created a value awareness of what the format could deliver in terms of running time. It's a collection of songs. Everyone has favorites and least favorites. During the streaming era, it's easier than ever to sample and only stream what you like and ignore the rest. If I buy every album by an artist, I also buy the non-album tracks. I prefer they all be lumped together. It doesn't make me cry that the album is now bloated and uneven. In the current era, it's likely it will be 12 tracks and you'll need to pick up vinyl, Target CD, Japanese import, and streaming exclusives to get all the tracks.
OK, I totally hear that logic. However, as an artistic statement, and as a listening experience, 40 minutes or so has proven to be a really good way for someone to delve into a musician's music for the moment in time they created it. I hear what you're saying that it was due to the limitations of the format. However before 12" vinyl, they used to group shellac into 'albums' (as you know, hence the term 'album' for records) because people didn't just want the song, they wanted more. It just so happens that a 12" vinyl record was more or less perfect for that listening experience. And for an artist, to get a great 10 songs or so wasn't easy, but for a few truly great bands.
Going to 75 minutes with CD led to a lot of uninteresting material released, with some exceptions because bands felt they had to fill up the disc. (EDIT - because - at the time - CDs were really expensive compared to vinyl/cassettes, so I believe it was at least partly to justify this new higher cost of the new format - "LOOK, YOU GET MORE!").
Yes we can accomplish all of this through playlists. What I want is the bands best songs, as a true artistic statement...if they're not able to or no longer want to do that, then why release an 'album' at all? Just release songs as they write and record them digitally?
And maybe that's the best way to have their music out more often so we don't have to wait until they have collected a bunch that sound good to their ears?
There are some difficulties.
Stonesfans are from several rock generations and have become widely diverse in tastes and opinions.
Rock music is past its defining phase and easily continued innovative state.
The Rolling Stones themselves have had their thread of development, during which they continually explored music, cut off. I suggest in the middle of the '80s.
As a consequence of all this, what is quality or even artistic statements in the context of creating Rolling Stones music now or during the later decades, will be much contested. There are quite opposite evaluations regarding which songs are, let us say, good or not so good. Such an observation must have some importance for these exchanges of views.
Well we're going to have our opinions, but I'm not trusting on your or my or consensus opinion for what the album should be. What I'm saying is that I've followed and trusted this bands judgement for over 40 years of my life...I don't want to see their albums as 'everything but the kitchen sink' releases.
Give us the best songs THEY like and are proud of in an album. If they want to release everything else to pacify the diehards (like Voodoo...and ok, me too) do that separately like Sucking In The 70s, or Rarities, or the Beatles 90s vault clear out.
It's taken them this long to put out an album, we hear, because they can't agree on the songs, or they're not happy with them. That's great in a way because it means they care. So I'll obviously be happy with anything, but I'd rather get a 10 or 11 track bulletproof Some Girls, Emotional Rescue, Tattoo YOu, Undercover than a 15-16 song extravaganza like Voodoo, B2B or ABB.
Quote
ProfessorWolfQuote
treaclefingersQuote
ProfessorWolf
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
Dunno about that. Some of the greatest bands/musicians in history have only ever released one double album...if it was easy to have so much great material I think you'd see more.
Blonde on Blonde, The White Album, Exile on Main Street, A Bigger Bang.
Which of those is not like the others?
So if you have enough material for a great double album, go for it, but if not, for the love of god edit it! Then release all the 'not-quite-up-to-snuff' material, if the diehards REALLY want it, as an 'odd and sods', 'Sucking in the 70s/RARITIES' type release.
it's not about them releasing a fantastic album at this point to me it's about its been nearly 2 decades and this is very likely the end and i want as much great and filler as they'll allow
i don't understand why someone at this point wouldn't just want everything they can give since it's not gonna happen again
really and ep?
i say give us the best tracks in a basic 10 song lp and a super deluxe with 30 more tracks that's should make everyone happy
right?
Quote
VoodooLounge13Quote
ProfessorWolfQuote
treaclefingersQuote
ProfessorWolf
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
Dunno about that. Some of the greatest bands/musicians in history have only ever released one double album...if it was easy to have so much great material I think you'd see more.
Blonde on Blonde, The White Album, Exile on Main Street, A Bigger Bang.
Which of those is not like the others?
So if you have enough material for a great double album, go for it, but if not, for the love of god edit it! Then release all the 'not-quite-up-to-snuff' material, if the diehards REALLY want it, as an 'odd and sods', 'Sucking in the 70s/RARITIES' type release.
it's not about them releasing a fantastic album at this point to me it's about its been nearly 2 decades and this is very likely the end and i want as much great and filler as they'll allow
i don't understand why someone at this point wouldn't just want everything they can give since it's not gonna happen again
really and ep?
i say give us the best tracks in a basic 10 song lp and a super deluxe with 30 more tracks that's should make everyone happy
right?
I think the Professor is schooling us all. Mick and Keef please take note! I'd line up for both options, as well as 3 or 4 colored, multi-coloured variants!!!! And an 8-track for Rockee!!!!
I told you! We need a super deluxe of it!!!!Quote
VoodooLounge13
And Fkin A, I'm listening to Bridges right now, and I stand by my belief that this is a friggin modern-day classic. Absolutely luuuuuuuuuuv this album!!!!
Quote
donvisI told you! We need a super deluxe of it!!!!Quote
VoodooLounge13
And Fkin A, I'm listening to Bridges right now, and I stand by my belief that this is a friggin modern-day classic. Absolutely luuuuuuuuuuv this album!!!!
Quote
keefmick
You are all aware that while we discuss the pros and cons of album formatting and express our personal preferences behind the scenes they don't give a rat's behind about our personal preferences, right?
Quote
retired_dog
You are all aware that while we discuss the pros and cons of album formatting and express our personal preferences behind the scenes all the major decisions concerning the new album have most likely been already made, right?
Quote
ProfessorWolfQuote
retired_dog
You are all aware that while we discuss the pros and cons of album formatting and express our personal preferences behind the scenes all the major decisions concerning the new album have most likely been already made, right?
well duh
but the one us whose most on the mark about what actually gets released wins the million dollar cash prize
Quote
VoodooLounge13Quote
donvisI told you! We need a super deluxe of it!!!!Quote
VoodooLounge13
And Fkin A, I'm listening to Bridges right now, and I stand by my belief that this is a friggin modern-day classic. Absolutely luuuuuuuuuuv this album!!!!
To be fair, I didn’t need much convincing as Bridges has always been one of my favorite albums of theirs. It’s probably in my Top 10 of their albums.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
keefmick
You are all aware that while we discuss the pros and cons of album formatting and express our personal preferences behind the scenes they don't give a rat's behind about our personal preferences, right?
Yes, we're aware. Mick sent me a terse text about all of this, this morning.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
keefmick
You are all aware that while we discuss the pros and cons of album formatting and express our personal preferences behind the scenes they don't give a rat's behind about our personal preferences, right?
Yes, we're aware. Mick sent me a terse text about all of this, this morning.
Quote
retired_dogQuote
treaclefingersQuote
keefmick
You are all aware that while we discuss the pros and cons of album formatting and express our personal preferences behind the scenes they don't give a rat's behind about our personal preferences, right?
Yes, we're aware. Mick sent me a terse text about all of this, this morning.
I've always assumed that certain discussions here upset our heroes, but this is downright frightening. I'll try to contact Mick today to calm things down... Will get back to you asap!