Quote
retired_dog

Quote
gotdablouse
Hopefully not pre-2015 outtakes since they didn't think they had enough good material to release an album...Technically to be an "outtake" (or rather "unreleased song") it would have to date back to before the latest album, i.e. 2005...

Charlie did seem to think they had enough material for a new album since he was surprised it hadn't been released yet during an interview with Ronnie to promote one of the many Stones side projects, sometime around 2018 ?

Over the years, I already mentioned a couple of times in this thread that for the "new album", apart from new material, also outtakes from previous recording sessions dating back as far as "Steel Wheels" were considered. Of course, plans can change, but now it looks like the inside information I got already years ago turns out to be quite accurate.

Concerning your worries that pre-2015 outtakes were not good enough to release a full album - well, they obviously don't make up the full "new album" entirely, which will most likely consist of new tracks with Steve, "recent" tracks that were recorded with Charlie before his death plus some (2,3 ?) older outtakes. Would not bother me at all, they obviously want this album - their last - to be as good as possible - whatever it takes, and if it needs some pearls from the archives (like "Still In Love", "Giving It Up", "For Your Precious Love" for example), so be it.

Might have been their last album sessions, but I'm not sure it will be their last album.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-22 17:45 by DandelionPowderman.

Last album? Hell no. They got another 60 live albums planned spanning the years 1994 to present.

Quote
Hairball
If made up of tunes from the last three decades, there's the risk of it being an incohesive hodgepodge/mish-mash that lacks unity as an album.

That kind of sounds like Exile to me!!!

Quote
VoodooLounge13

Quote
Hairball
If made up of tunes from the last three decades, there's the risk of it being an incohesive hodgepodge/mish-mash that lacks unity as an album.

That kind of sounds like Exile to me!!!

Basically I don't care when a song, or the idea for it, originated as long as I like the final outcome, but Hairball does have a point here - especially if they just added overdubs etc. to pre-existing recordings from that period. If everything was recorded anew the effect might be mildened.

Especially Exile sounds very cohesive to me. An effect like Hairball alludes to would have arisen if Exile also had song like Mother's Little Helper or Paint It Black in addition. That would be incohesive.

Not taking away from Hairball's valid point, the difference with the 1960s comparison is pop music changed dramatically in a short period of time. That isn't the same situation the band is in at this late period in their career. The material may suffer from the change in drummer or producer just as it may suffer from the differences between the way Mick writes and the way Keith writes.

Quote
Bashlets
We probably will never know. As long as the songs are good I will be more than happy. Really don’t care if the origins of something started in 1972. It’s still their song.

Well we'll know if there's stuff that was on FFSO, would be <1997, or on the 2002 sessions ;-) With the 100+ songs Mick must have written since it seems pretty unlikely, besides there was no "killer" track on there that would warrant using it.

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio

If the starting point is STEEL WHEELS sessions, I don't think there is a danger of the album being incohesive in terms of music coming from different eras. Basically the band hasn't change one bit from those sessions. For example, they could easily use backing tracks from there, do whatever finishing touches, and that will be alright. The result would sound as current or old-fashionable like any Stones recording since then.

- Doxa

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Not taking away from Hairball's valid point, the difference with the 1960s comparison is pop music changed dramatically in a short period of time. That isn't the same situation the band is in at this late period in their career. The material may suffer from the change in drummer or producer just as it may suffer from the differences between the way Mick writes and the way Keith writes.

Likewise true, of course. Basically I can't believe that they have any smash songs in the can for 30+ years that never made it onto an album but had to give way to fillers. I could rather imagine that they have a number of sketches or parts of songs they found promising enough for reconsideration. Unless they can be identified on some session boot or so, or unless one of the boys says in an interview when a particular song (or the idea thereof) actually originated, we will possibly never find out which of the new songs come in this category.

Personally I find it hard to estimate how Mick and Keith may have developed as writers since 2005, there is too little evidence to go by. There are only three new Stones tracks that have been released since then (D&G, OMS, LIAGT), half a handful of Mick solo tracks which possibly would never have been Stones material, and Keith's CH, much of which doesn't sound like Stones material either.

If they are (or meanwhile, were?) using different producers on the album, that may well result in a certain unevenness, independently of songwriting.

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Not taking away from Hairball's valid point, the difference with the 1960s comparison is pop music changed dramatically in a short period of time. That isn't the same situation the band is in at this late period in their career. The material may suffer from the change in drummer or producer just as it may suffer from the differences between the way Mick writes and the way Keith writes.

Likewise true, of course. Basically I can't believe that they have any smash songs in the can for 30+ years that never made it onto an album but had to give way to fillers. I could rather imagine that they have a number of sketches or parts of songs they found promising enough for reconsideration. Unless they can be identified on some session boot or so, or unless one of the boys says in an interview when a particular song (or the idea thereof) actually originated, we will possibly never find out which of the new songs come in this category.

Personally I find it hard to estimate how Mick and Keith may have developed as writers since 2005, there is too little evidence to go by. There are only three new Stones tracks that have been released since then (D&G, OMS, LIAGT), half a handful of Mick solo tracks which possibly would never have been Stones material, and Keith's CH, much of which doesn't sound like Stones material either.

If they are (or meanwhile, were?) using different producers on the album, that may well result in a certain unevenness, independently of songwriting.

The last full album we have to go by, ABB, is not universally loved and I would suggest that we'll get something similar stylistically to this as their songwriting is not going to have evolved that much given their ages.

I think ABB had some great material mashed in with some not-so-great, and some excellent material inexplicably left off (Under The Radar) and then according to what I recall, recorded/produced hurriedly (?) - you can feel free to correct me on that point.

At any rate, if we're basically going to get a higher end ABB, without the syrupy lead single and something more along the lines of Easy Sleazy, I think the majority of us will be ecstatic (true, you can't please everyone).

Quote
Doxa
If the starting point is STEEL WHEELS sessions, I don't think there is a danger of the album being incohesive in terms of music coming from different eras. Basically the band hasn't change one bit from those sessions. For example, they could easily use backing tracks from there, do whatever finishing touches, and that will be alright. The result would sound as current or old-fashionable like any Stones recording since then.

- Doxa

And that's exactly the point why I would not worry about "cohesiveness" one bit at this moment.

Besides, there's also the possibility that while a song idea may be originating from 1989 or later it could nonetheless have been completely re-worked in 2022 or earlier by changing something in the songwriting structure (added bridge, an added chord, whatever) that would almost inevitably require a complete new recording instead of using the old backing track from way back then.

As always, I think we should discuss the final result when we actually get to hear it instead of putting our focus on imaginary problems that, while possible indeed, may in truth not materialize at all - like some here obviously seem to like!

I know for a fact that they had a smash number lying around that Keith turned into his solo single Trouble years later. Instead, Stealing My Heart was the one they decided to focus on.

Quote
Nikkei
I know for a fact that they had a smash number lying around that Keith turned into his solo single Trouble years later. Instead, Stealing My Heart was the one they decided to focus on.

Just Because (40 licks sessions)
[youtu.be]

Trouble
[youtu.be]

I really dig the ragtime-y feel of Just Because.

Keith never managed to come up with a reasonable opening riff for this one. In the Just Because version he tried something akin to Flip The Switch (and the rest of the song sounds like the Stones trying to be Status Quo).
In the Trouble version he didn't bother anymore and just starts strumming a generic Keith chord, which at least works better than the FTS clone intro on Just Because.
To me, Trouble is an OK song but not exactly a smash hit that the Stones missed out on.

When Mick sings that melody it is just infectious, especially that line about getting out of jail. Keith couldn't do that so he did something else that doesn't change the fact that it's a good riff but still seems to me that a potential hit went in the dustbin.

Quote
doitywoik
Keith never managed to come up with a reasonable opening riff for this one. In the Just Because version he tried something akin to Flip The Switch (and the rest of the song sounds like the Stones trying to be Status Quo).
In the Trouble version he didn't bother anymore and just starts strumming a generic Keith chord, which at least works better than the FTS clone intro on Just Because.
To me, Trouble is an OK song but not exactly a smash hit that the Stones missed out on.

Compared to the dismal new tracks* they slapped on to 40 Licks, I'd say Trouble is somewhat of a masterpiece. Had Mick and the band continued to work on it during the original sessions, and let it evolve further as a Stones tune, it could have been a latter day classic. Maybe not a "smash hit", but the Stones haven't been known for having smash hits in many decades. Instead it ended up being a very good Keith solo tune - not everyone's cup of tea, but you can't please everyone as has been said. Hopefully they can come up with something along the same lines, and if all the Stones are on the same page, it could possibly result in a "smash hit" for the band.


*edit: Keiths Losing My Touch is actually quite lovely and nice compared to the other three new weaklings on 40 Licks, but again...not everyone's cup of tea.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-22 21:24 by Hairball.

By that measure, "Eliza Upchink" was the lost classic of the UNDERCOVER sessions. I agree they're great boogie numbers, but it's the sort of thing Stones fans love on bootlegs that would never seem as good in a finished form when it would turn out to be "Mean Disposition." And yes, I like all of these songs, but they're not really what a Stones single or album are made of. Turning "Just Because" into "Trouble" was likely the best thing that could have happened to it.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
doitywoik
Keith never managed to come up with a reasonable opening riff for this one. In the Just Because version he tried something akin to Flip The Switch (and the rest of the song sounds like the Stones trying to be Status Quo).
In the Trouble version he didn't bother anymore and just starts strumming a generic Keith chord, which at least works better than the FTS clone intro on Just Because.
To me, Trouble is an OK song but not exactly a smash hit that the Stones missed out on.

Compared to the dismal new tracks* they slapped on to 40 Licks, I'd say Trouble is somewhat of a masterpiece. Had Mick and the band continued to work on it during the original sessions, and let it evolve further as a Stones tune, it could have been a latter day classic. Maybe not a "smash hit", but the Stones haven't been known for having smash hits in many decades. Instead it ended up being a very good Keith solo tune - not everyone's cup of tea, but you can't please everyone as has been said. Hopefully they can come up with something along the same lines, and if all the Stones are on the same page, it could possibly result in a "smash hit" for the band.


*edit: Keiths Losing My Touch is actually quite lovely and nice compared to the other three new weaklings on 40 Licks, but again...not everyone's cup of tea.

Practically anything else from the Paris Sessions would have been better than the new tracks that ended up on 40 Licks. Cried Out is simply a great song (and I don't think it is an early version of Laugh I Nearly Died, but we had this discussion already a few hundred pages back), Dreams, Love Is A (Test) and When I Call Out Your Name are certainly among their better latter-day ballad-type songs, and You Don’t Wanna Be Me is a cool mid-tempo tune. It’s unforgivable they made nothing of these songs. Although, who knows, maybe they would have spoiled them in the course of production and post-production. What’s so great and charming about the Paris Session songs is that it’s just the band plus Chuck (mostly) on hammond without further BS. But again, who knows, maybe they make their return on the new album (allow me that bit of wishful thinking) ...

Keith's Losing My Touch is rather a Keith solo tune to me and not so much a Stones song.

Quote
doitywoik

Keith's Losing My Touch is rather a Keith solo tune to me and not so much a Stones song.

Yes perhaps so, but still much better than the other three new weak tunes included on 40 Licks imo.
And it seems Keith was predicting the future with Losing My Touch while writing a precursor to Living in a Ghost Town Town twenty years before the pandemic ...

Seems things are in a lockdown
Nervous looks all around
Everyone is speaking in whispers
No one wants to make a sound

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-22 23:40 by Hairball.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
doitywoik

Keith's Losing My Touch is rather a Keith solo tune to me and not so much a Stones song.

Yes perhaps so, but still much better than the other three new weak tunes included on 40 Licks imo.
And it seems Keith was predicting the future with Losing My Touch while writing a precursor to Living in a Ghost Town Town twenty years before the pandemic ...

Seems things are in a lockdown
Nervous looks all around
Everyone is speaking in whispers
No one wants to make a sound

Totally escaped me, never really listened to the lyrics. So that's what happens if you skip the lyrics! Considering the overlong genesis of the new album, one wonders whether Keith was also prophetic about them losing their touch ... (OK, it's "my touch" only, but still.)

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
Hairball

Quote
doitywoik

Keith's Losing My Touch is rather a Keith solo tune to me and not so much a Stones song.

Yes perhaps so, but still much better than the other three new weak tunes included on 40 Licks imo.
And it seems Keith was predicting the future with Losing My Touch while writing a precursor to Living in a Ghost Town Town twenty years before the pandemic ...

Seems things are in a lockdown
Nervous looks all around
Everyone is speaking in whispers
No one wants to make a sound

Totally escaped me, never really listened to the lyrics. So that's what happens if you skip the lyrics! Considering the overlong genesis of the new album, one wonders whether Keith was also prophetic about them losing their touch ... (OK, it's "my touch" only, but still.)

Yes, considering the overlong genesis of the new album...(quite an understatement lol)... 18 LONG years and counting...seems they really did lose their touch...temporarily anyways...hope to see them bounce back!
Speculation of multiple producers, clashing songwriters (Keith vs. Mick), a new drummer, possible guest appearance (Dua Lipa, Taylor Swift, Macca, etc.), decades old leftovers...it all might be the recipe for a winner!

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

Quote
Hairball

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
Hairball

Quote
doitywoik

Keith's Losing My Touch is rather a Keith solo tune to me and not so much a Stones song.

Yes perhaps so, but still much better than the other three new weak tunes included on 40 Licks imo.
And it seems Keith was predicting the future with Losing My Touch while writing a precursor to Living in a Ghost Town Town twenty years before the pandemic ...

Seems things are in a lockdown
Nervous looks all around
Everyone is speaking in whispers
No one wants to make a sound

Totally escaped me, never really listened to the lyrics. So that's what happens if you skip the lyrics! Considering the overlong genesis of the new album, one wonders whether Keith was also prophetic about them losing their touch ... (OK, it's "my touch" only, but still.)

Yes, considering the overlong genesis of the new album...(quite an understatement lol)... 18 LONG years and counting...seems they really did lose their touch...temporarily anyways...hope to see them bounce back!
Speculation of multiple producers, clashing songwriters (Keith vs. Mick), a new drummer, possible guest appearance (Dua Lipa, Taylor Swift, Macca, etc.), decades old leftovers...it all might be the recipe for a winner!

Did I miss a photo somewhere?! Hadn’t heard anything about her being on the album.

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
Hairball

Quote
doitywoik
Keith never managed to come up with a reasonable opening riff for this one. In the Just Because version he tried something akin to Flip The Switch (and the rest of the song sounds like the Stones trying to be Status Quo).
In the Trouble version he didn't bother anymore and just starts strumming a generic Keith chord, which at least works better than the FTS clone intro on Just Because.
To me, Trouble is an OK song but not exactly a smash hit that the Stones missed out on.

Compared to the dismal new tracks* they slapped on to 40 Licks, I'd say Trouble is somewhat of a masterpiece. Had Mick and the band continued to work on it during the original sessions, and let it evolve further as a Stones tune, it could have been a latter day classic. Maybe not a "smash hit", but the Stones haven't been known for having smash hits in many decades. Instead it ended up being a very good Keith solo tune - not everyone's cup of tea, but you can't please everyone as has been said. Hopefully they can come up with something along the same lines, and if all the Stones are on the same page, it could possibly result in a "smash hit" for the band.


*edit: Keiths Losing My Touch is actually quite lovely and nice compared to the other three new weaklings on 40 Licks, but again...not everyone's cup of tea.

Practically anything else from the Paris Sessions would have been better than the new tracks that ended up on 40 Licks. Cried Out is simply a great song (and I don't think it is an early version of Laugh I Nearly Died, but we had this discussion already a few hundred pages back), Dreams, Love Is A (Test) and When I Call Out Your Name are certainly among their better latter-day ballad-type songs, and You Don’t Wanna Be Me is a cool mid-tempo tune. It’s unforgivable they made nothing of these songs. Although, who knows, maybe they would have spoiled them in the course of production and post-production. What’s so great and charming about the Paris Session songs is that it’s just the band plus Chuck (mostly) on hammond without further BS. But again, who knows, maybe they make their return on the new album (allow me that bit of wishful thinking) ...

Keith's Losing My Touch is rather a Keith solo tune to me and not so much a Stones song.

absolutely agree with you about the licks sessions

and i hope (and suspect) there's a lot more out there waiting to leak from them

although i also love what ended up on the 40 licks set

but agree with you that there to over produced i've always thought don't stop and losing my touch sounded better live

if they do end up using outtakes from these sessions i'd be very curious to see what they make of them

I recall Ronnie saying in a book about the Paris sessions that they recorded enough songs for an album but didn't have the time to actually finish it. (I never get the title right so I won't make another, possibly misleading, attempt). I also remember that Ronnie said there that they also asked him if he had something to bring to the table.

So it would be interesting to know how many songs they actually recorded or worked on (not counting mere warm-up grooves such as Well Well or Strange Western Grip), and what happened to Ronnie's song(s). Did it (or they) end up on I Feel Like Playing, or was it (they) ditched or forgotten about?

Apart from Ronnie, I can't recall any of them talking about the Paris Sessions 2002, nor can I recall Ronnie talking about it in a different place. Someone should ask them if the occasion arises. Maybe Ronnie is more accessible here than Mick or Keith?

Lyrics apart, Cried Out, Dreams, Love Is A (Test), When I Call Out Your Name and You Don’t Wanna Be Me sound pretty worked out, more than just sketches or idea-finding jam attempts in the studio. If there is more such stuff, leakers: Please leak it!

40 Leaks....

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

I just read through the last few pages and realized [anonymous poster] is right. Mick has sucked since he went solo nearly forty years ago. The only good Stones songs are Keith songs. Keith should have stayed solo. I hate The Rolling Stones. I don't want the new album. I'm not even sure why I get up in the morning.

Or...I could look forward to a new album in 2023 and be positive. I'm not sure which outlook I prefer.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-23 05:45 by Rocky Dijon.

ROCKMAN

Nearly 2 million views and no album in sight.

Oh my god! We made it! 600 pages, and not a clue as to what a new album will contain. This thread started in 2016 and it has no more information than when it started. Bravo.

Quote
doitywoik
I recall Ronnie saying in a book about the Paris sessions that they recorded enough songs for an album but didn't have the time to actually finish it. (I never get the title right so I won't make another, possibly misleading, attempt). I also remember that Ronnie said there that they also asked him if he had something to bring to the table.

So it would be interesting to know how many songs they actually recorded or worked on (not counting mere warm-up grooves such as Well Well or Strange Western Grip), and what happened to Ronnie's song(s). Did it (or they) end up on I Feel Like Playing, or was it (they) ditched or forgotten about?

Apart from Ronnie, I can't recall any of them talking about the Paris Sessions 2002, nor can I recall Ronnie talking about it in a different place. Someone should ask them if the occasion arises. Maybe Ronnie is more accessible here than Mick or Keith?

Lyrics apart, Cried Out, Dreams, Love Is A (Test), When I Call Out Your Name and You Don’t Wanna Be Me sound pretty worked out, more than just sketches or idea-finding jam attempts in the studio. If there is more such stuff, leakers: Please leak it!

what your thinking of is the book "according to the rolling stones" they talk about forty licks on page 298-305

ronnie says the they recorded a lot of songs during those sessions and besides what ended up on of the forty licks set they came up with another 24 songs (a very specific number for him to just throw out!) and that they had the basis of a new album but got caught up in the tour and didn't have time to do overdubs and finish it

he also says he contributed some song ideas as well at mick's request and that mick and keith were getting along and working well together

charlie also mentions that he worked with mick before the sessions on demos