Tell Me :
Talk
You're right that is very specific. Plus it's completely believable when you listen to the outtakes that we got to hear. But what I don't understand then, is why Mick and Keith, about two years later, felt the need to come up with all of A Bigger Bang practically from scratch?? Talk about "ditched"
well at least one licks outtakes seems to be a early version of abb track it goes to reason that more then one abb song began in these sessions
but your right it is a question to ask why they supposedly started from scratch
one likely answer is ronnie's exaggerating the quality of those 24 songs
or mick and keith couldn't come to an agreement about what to continue developing after they revisited those 24 songs and decided it be easier to start from scratch
who knows
until we can hear a much more comprehensive collection of outtakes from those sessions it's all just speculation
People, I think you get a bit carried away by Ronnie's quote... Ronnie says a lot, but whoever believes the Stones recorded a quality album but threw it away because there was no time to finish it probably also still believes in Father Christmas, sorry to say that!
Hearing is believing, and if the 4 songs that actually made the grade for 40 Licks are anything to go by, the cream of the crop so to speak, I would not want to hear the rest. They're not bad actually, but pretty generic for a band like the Stones.
And the outtakes? Again, sorry to say that but I don't hear anything of real substance or a "Great Lost Stones Album" here - just more generic stuff that sounds wonderful on bootlegs but surely doesn't indicate a capital crime that the band did not feel inspired to develop them further (apart from morphing Cried Out into Laugh, I Nearly Died maybe). I'm pretty sure that if they had released a whole album from these sessions, it would have been slaughtered even more than ABB.
Qualitywise the 40 Licks-session were a huge step down from BtB, and the band obviously realized that - imo the true reason why they did not turn this into a whole album. Simply trust their judgement and not our fan ears that probably hear masterpieces in each and every fart the band is putting down on tape!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-23 13:07 by retired_dog.
i agree ronnie's not always super reliable about these things
but we are still talking about a 4 song sample of outtakes in a rather early stage of development
some great lost album
no
some good ideas that should have been followed up on for next album but weren't
perhaps
who knows
there really isn't enough material that can be heard to come to any reasonable conclusion one way or the other
at least to me
Exactly. The funny thing about art and creativity is that one cannot logically deduct the outcome from the past achievements and procedures. Like discussed here before, or at least I did, the conditions could be ideal, but the result mediocre. Or the conditions could suck, but the result being a diamond. That's why better wait and listen the outcome before judging it.
I think a good example of the latter is TATTOO YOU. Had people being more awere of how it was constructed, I don't think their expectations would have been that high. That the Stones quickly put together a collection of old rejected songs in order to have an album to go with a tour might not sounded that promising scenario. Their albums from GOATS HEAD SOUP to EMOTIONAL RESCUE weren't that hailed masterpieces (pl. SOME GIRLS) or filler-free that probably was not likely that there would exist a league of hidden gems. The whiners of the day (we know the type) would have had a field day in pointing out in how bad shape the Stones were since not even being able to write new originals any longer (especially if compared to their contemporaries).
That TATTOO YOU turned out be such a strong and strikingly cohesive album is a little wonder. Nowadays the 7 or 8 years the material covers do not sound much, but those days it was. The band that was making GOATS HEAD SOUP was a different band than the one that was making EMOTIONAL RESCUE. A lot had happened between those sessions (I would say much more than what has happened between STEEL WHEELS and this moment, if something totally unexpected has not occurred during the latest sessions). But I think that is the reason why TATTOO YOU stands out of its context. It borrows the deep, blue feelings and sounds from the 1973-76 era - something we would not find really in any Pathe Marconi era albums. "Waiting On A Friend" and "Tops" are typical reflective, fine-nuanced, moody GHS era tracks as "Worried About You" is a long, heavy soul ballad (with a distinctive long guitar solo) Mick was into at the time of BAB. "Slave" is a deep exercise in bluesy funk the band was heavily into at the time. Those songs were born out of inspiration, reflecting the particular time that motivated their muse (and seemingly were well marinated in the can). Even "Start Me Up" is a Pathe Marconi era oddity - a shamelessly retro-sounding trademark open G riff rocker the band had tried to distinguish themselves from in their 'contemporary-sounding' last two albums.
When they put all that material next to more typical Pathe Marconi stuff, and covered it all with coherent production with an inspired Jagger on new vocals, the result was a delicious cocktail. I would say it had such a depthness, variance and musical inspiration that no other Pathe Marconi era album, pl. SOME GIRLS, could match. Probably one could say that hey were a bit cheating there, since it gave a bit too good (or wrong) picture of the creative state of the band at the time. For example, UNDERCOVER, a pure Pathe Marconi album with make-up like flirting with contemporary sounds, didn't quite meet the expactations set by TATTOO YOU. Like I recall one friend who absolutely had loved TATTOO YOU and especially its B-side, saying of UNDERCOVER to me: 'hey, where are all the good songs?'.
- Doxa
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-23 15:19 by Doxa.
New single hopefully coming soon, and if it's anywhere near as good as Living in a Ghost Town, some of us will rejoice.
But I really dread the thought of hearing it ruined in an Applebees commercial, though that seems the way these things go these days.
I must have heard the Start Me Up snippet a dozen times on the tv over the last two weeks while watching football games, and all I can think of when I hear it now it is greasy fattening chicken and ribs.
Worst case nightmare scenario - Applebees will be the promoter for the upcoming tour, and every new Stones song will be misused in advertisements throughout the tour and beyond. Say it ain't so!
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
"Worst case nightmare scenario"? Well, for me it is World War III or the Apocalypse. Everything else is just minor quibbles. However, it's all a matter of perspective.
I'm pretty sure Keith drummed up (as usual) the material too, along the lines of "it's the best stuff we've done in years" (Gazza pointed out at the time that it would be correct since they hadn't recorded anything in 5 years!).
What remains a bit mysterious about these Paris sessions is that they were originally getting together to record 2 songs for 40 licks as mentioned at the "Blimp" PC. Keith actually said that the fact that they had yet to do that was "only a small problem" (or something like that).
Yet they spend 15 days at Guillaume Tell in Paris and come up with 20+ tracks ! Why bother if they only needed 2 songs and had to prepare for a tour...Maybe the studio was booked so why not. In the Licks DVD you can see a screen where you see tracks number and there are indeed 20+. I started a topic about that a good 10 years ago ;-) One of them was "Still In Love" I think...maybe the one that got leaked on FFSO ?
Found it (minus the screenshot) : [iorr.org] : "2002 Sessions in Paris - they did record 30+ songs !"
--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio
or the menu!
thanks read thru the whole thread plus the two others linked in it
always interesting going down the rabbit hole on iorr of old threads
you never know what you'll find
Or... that was then.
How anyone could question what they did and then what they did considering all that they've done when they did what they did... and why... is, I mean, come on, they start 1A-30A, then 2A-30A whatever, and then... a new 1A... they started IORR with leftovers in mind from GHS. For that matter, through 1982k nothing had ever changed.
They clearly have no issues with "looking back" ie apparently every album from 1971-1983 from all I've read. Unfinished songs.
They recorded how many songs for UNDERCOVER? Yet Mick still said this:
Actually all these songs are all new. They were all written this year, last year, over a short base of time when we recorded. They're all new and none of 'em are from previous sessions. This is like 10 tracks that were chosen out of 15 that we actually finished.
- Mick Jagger, 1984
[www.timeisonourside.com]
He is slyly one to just provide what he wants people to hear/read.
19th March - 5th April: Munich, West-Germany, Musicland Studios. Producers:
The Glimmer Twins. Sound engineers: Keith Harwood, Reinhold Mack.
Additional musicians: Billy Preston (p, org)/Ollie Brown (perc)/Wayne Perkins
(gtr)/Harvey Mandel (gtr)/RW (gtr, bvoc; 30.3. - 4.4.75)
- Cellophane Trousers I (MJ/KR) -instrumental (uses Too Tough-riff)
- Cellophane Trousers II (MJ/KR) -version I with additional lead guitar
[www.nzentgraf.de]
Whatever the context is of the new Stones album it's not exactly 18 years in the making, it goes back to late 2015 as I recall... not that long ago, really. Yet, at this point later this year, 8 years.
Looking forward to it.
The deluxe reissues give a more specific eye to that albeit out of context - yet, in regard to the deal at the time, within the context.
well to be honest i don't think they started from scratch with abb myself
i think they probably built upon the outtakes from the previous sessions as makes sense (which i think is what your getting at i'm not certain)
and i hope your right about the new album being made up of songs recorded since 2015
well have to see
can't be to much longer before we have something definitive from them on the content of the new album
Yeah, about every album since STICKY FINGERS there are songs deriving from older sessions. So one could call them 'works in progress' or 'left-overs' from past sessions. I guess in many cases the rejection, or not making the the album in the process, can be due to many reasons.
Sometimes it could be that the song doesn't fit to the artistic statement of the album. If I think TATTOO YOU material, I think "Start Me Up" is such a tune. In SOME GIRLS they wanted to update their sound, and the tune - at least its 'rock version' - is a pretty much a cliche of their trademark, classical sound.
Then some tunes do not fit to a new album if there is enough of same type of songs available. There is just no room (we are talking about good old vinyl days, naturally) or they don't want to the album to sound too heavy on certain type of songs. I think the GOATS HEAD SOUP and BLACK AND BLUE songs of TATTOO YOU belong to this category.
What goes for the rest of TATTOO YOU, most of them are from EMOTIONAL RESCUE sessions, right? A couple of them seemed to be seriouly considered for the album (Wyman mentions "No Use In Crying" and "Neighbours" listed for some early version). Any case, the Pathe Marconi sessions were very productive, so there were lots of (good) stuff in the can. TATTOO YOU is mostly based on that rather recent stuff, just enriched with a few older songs.
- Doxa
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-24 12:34 by Doxa.
Really? If that was the case we should have had a few albums in the past 18 years instead of … none.
Rod
Mick's official Instagram account - [www.instagram.com]
Yeah. I think "Waiting On A Friend" and "Tops" from TATTOO YOU are songs like that. As far I know (and have heard) the early GOATS HEAD SOUP versions are pretty sketchy (basically just the backing tracks). Looks like they pretty quickly decided that they will not work these further now, but leave it to some other occasion to develop further/finish up if needed or feels right. If memory do not make tricks, they picked up "Waiting On A Friend" already during EMOTIONAL RESCUE sessions (the people knowing more could enlight the session history of the songs).
Anyway, I personally think that in the case of TATTOO YOU keeping the songs in the vaults for some years did good for them. The new fresh perspective, with recent production ideas and highly inspired Jagger of 1980/81 finishing up the songs, lifted up the quality and distinction of the songs. This is a very different approach than they had for the bonus material of recent times. There Jagger has tried to be loyal to the context and like imitate his younger self (funnily, LOST & FOUND was an easier task, since his TATTOO YOU era voice is closer to his current one. I think especially "Fast Talking, Slow Walking" gains from this, and I think it is one of the most convincing performances from him what goes for the archives bonus material).
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-24 14:17 by Doxa.
Ah, ok, sorry.
Rod
If that were true, we could have had an album of just B-Side type stuff, which Mick always says he just cranked out in mere minutes each, as if he didn't give them any thought. I think since SW some of their B-Sides have been absolutely stellar, and at this point there is a solid half-album that they could have put out in this regard. All of the bluesy numbers for SW are superb. I've stated elsewhere - perhaps earlier in this thread - that I think sometimes they're best when they don't put too much pressure on themselves and just go with the feel of the song at the moment. In this way, yeah, they could have had a few pretty decent albums by now over the years.
Just consider: Cook Cook Blues, Fancyman Blues, Wish I'd Never Met You, Jump On Top of Me, So Young, Anyway You Look At It, Don't Wanna Go Home, (and given that most on here prefer it) Under The Radar.
Actually, that's a few more than half an album. Almost a full one.
I don't know if it's true or not, but I often think of their latter day stuff in terms of each leader taking turns with the direction of the album. For me, I see their albums being driven in this way:
Undercover - Mick
Dirty Work - Keef
SW - ?? This is the one I can never decide on
Voodoo - Keef
Bridges - Mick
Bang - Keef
So for me, I would expect the new album to be more along the lines of a Mick album. And what I mean by all of that is that they seem to rotate their rock sound with their 'current trend' sound, or more of a dance sound if you will. They album itself may not be comprised of more songs by one or the other, I just personally look at them in that regard, knowing that Keef is more the rocker and Mick is more the what's hot person.
Reading back thru, ABB was praised when it was released (yes, I know that most of their latter day albums have been lauded as their best in decades), but it received a grade of 73 out of 100 by Metacritic, which is a pretty strong score, and it was voted the second best album of the year behind Kanye, according to Rolling Stone. It was considered a return to their roots in the vein of Some Girls, but with more of an edge. Yet, I think most of us here would agree that between ABB and B2B, the latter has held up better over time. The lyrics are less current (non-politically tied to certain politicians in office at the time which I think often dates a song immensely - Sympathy might be an exception here), and B2B is actually more of an experimental album of the boys pushing the boundaries of many different genres. Not to mention that it contains two bonafide latter day classics in Saint Of Me and Out Of Control. Rough Justice should have been one. I truly love that song, and the modern sleazy Exile feel that it exudes, but for one reason or another, it just didn't seem to catch on.
No matter the direction of the new album, I - like all of us - eagerly await it's arrival!!!!
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
wupperstein
()
Date: January 23, 2023 11:06
The long wait will soon be over, believe me.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: January 23, 2023 12:42
Quote
ProfessorWolfQuote
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
You're right that is very specific. Plus it's completely believable when you listen to the outtakes that we got to hear. But what I don't understand then, is why Mick and Keith, about two years later, felt the need to come up with all of A Bigger Bang practically from scratch?? Talk about "ditched"
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
retired_dog
()
Date: January 23, 2023 12:48
-
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-23 13:05 by retired_dog.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-23 13:05 by retired_dog.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: January 23, 2023 12:50
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
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
ProfessorWolf
()
Date: January 23, 2023 12:59
Quote
NikkeiQuote
ProfessorWolfQuote
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
You're right that is very specific. Plus it's completely believable when you listen to the outtakes that we got to hear. But what I don't understand then, is why Mick and Keith, about two years later, felt the need to come up with all of A Bigger Bang practically from scratch?? Talk about "ditched"
well at least one licks outtakes seems to be a early version of abb track it goes to reason that more then one abb song began in these sessions
but your right it is a question to ask why they supposedly started from scratch
one likely answer is ronnie's exaggerating the quality of those 24 songs
or mick and keith couldn't come to an agreement about what to continue developing after they revisited those 24 songs and decided it be easier to start from scratch
who knows
until we can hear a much more comprehensive collection of outtakes from those sessions it's all just speculation
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
retired_dog
()
Date: January 23, 2023 13:05
Quote
ProfessorWolfQuote
NikkeiQuote
ProfessorWolfQuote
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
You're right that is very specific. Plus it's completely believable when you listen to the outtakes that we got to hear. But what I don't understand then, is why Mick and Keith, about two years later, felt the need to come up with all of A Bigger Bang practically from scratch?? Talk about "ditched"
well at least one licks outtakes seems to be a early version of abb track it goes to reason that more then one abb song began in these sessions
but your right it is a question to ask why they supposedly started from scratch
one likely answer is ronnie's exaggerating the quality of those 24 songs
or mick and keith couldn't come to an agreement about what to continue developing after they revisited those 24 songs and decided it be easier to start from scratch
who knows
until we can hear a much more comprehensive collection of outtakes from those sessions it's all just speculation
People, I think you get a bit carried away by Ronnie's quote... Ronnie says a lot, but whoever believes the Stones recorded a quality album but threw it away because there was no time to finish it probably also still believes in Father Christmas, sorry to say that!
Hearing is believing, and if the 4 songs that actually made the grade for 40 Licks are anything to go by, the cream of the crop so to speak, I would not want to hear the rest. They're not bad actually, but pretty generic for a band like the Stones.
And the outtakes? Again, sorry to say that but I don't hear anything of real substance or a "Great Lost Stones Album" here - just more generic stuff that sounds wonderful on bootlegs but surely doesn't indicate a capital crime that the band did not feel inspired to develop them further (apart from morphing Cried Out into Laugh, I Nearly Died maybe). I'm pretty sure that if they had released a whole album from these sessions, it would have been slaughtered even more than ABB.
Qualitywise the 40 Licks-session were a huge step down from BtB, and the band obviously realized that - imo the true reason why they did not turn this into a whole album. Simply trust their judgement and not our fan ears that probably hear masterpieces in each and every fart the band is putting down on tape!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-23 13:07 by retired_dog.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
ProfessorWolf
()
Date: January 23, 2023 13:12
Quote
retired_dogQuote
ProfessorWolfQuote
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
People, I think you get a bit carried away by Ronnie's quote... Ronnie says a lot, but whoever believes the Stones recorded a quality album but threw it away because there was no time to finish it probably also still believes in Father Christmas, sorry to say that!
Hearing is believing, and if the 4 songs that actually made the grade for 40 Licks are anything to go by, the cream of the crop so to speak, I would not want to hear the rest. They're not bad actually, but pretty generic for a band like the Stones.
And the outtakes? Again, sorry to say that but I don't hear anything of real substance or a "Great Lost Stones Album" here - just more generic stuff that sounds wonderful on bootlegs but surely doesn't indicate a capital crime that the band did not feel inspired to develop them further (apart from morphing Cried Out into Laugh, I Nearly Died maybe). I'm pretty sure that if they had released a whole album from these sessions, it would have been slaughtered even more than ABB!
i agree ronnie's not always super reliable about these things
but we are still talking about a 4 song sample of outtakes in a rather early stage of development
some great lost album
no
some good ideas that should have been followed up on for next album but weren't
perhaps
who knows
there really isn't enough material that can be heard to come to any reasonable conclusion one way or the other
at least to me
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 23, 2023 15:07
Quote
retired_dogQuote
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!
Exactly. The funny thing about art and creativity is that one cannot logically deduct the outcome from the past achievements and procedures. Like discussed here before, or at least I did, the conditions could be ideal, but the result mediocre. Or the conditions could suck, but the result being a diamond. That's why better wait and listen the outcome before judging it.
I think a good example of the latter is TATTOO YOU. Had people being more awere of how it was constructed, I don't think their expectations would have been that high. That the Stones quickly put together a collection of old rejected songs in order to have an album to go with a tour might not sounded that promising scenario. Their albums from GOATS HEAD SOUP to EMOTIONAL RESCUE weren't that hailed masterpieces (pl. SOME GIRLS) or filler-free that probably was not likely that there would exist a league of hidden gems. The whiners of the day (we know the type) would have had a field day in pointing out in how bad shape the Stones were since not even being able to write new originals any longer (especially if compared to their contemporaries).
That TATTOO YOU turned out be such a strong and strikingly cohesive album is a little wonder. Nowadays the 7 or 8 years the material covers do not sound much, but those days it was. The band that was making GOATS HEAD SOUP was a different band than the one that was making EMOTIONAL RESCUE. A lot had happened between those sessions (I would say much more than what has happened between STEEL WHEELS and this moment, if something totally unexpected has not occurred during the latest sessions). But I think that is the reason why TATTOO YOU stands out of its context. It borrows the deep, blue feelings and sounds from the 1973-76 era - something we would not find really in any Pathe Marconi era albums. "Waiting On A Friend" and "Tops" are typical reflective, fine-nuanced, moody GHS era tracks as "Worried About You" is a long, heavy soul ballad (with a distinctive long guitar solo) Mick was into at the time of BAB. "Slave" is a deep exercise in bluesy funk the band was heavily into at the time. Those songs were born out of inspiration, reflecting the particular time that motivated their muse (and seemingly were well marinated in the can). Even "Start Me Up" is a Pathe Marconi era oddity - a shamelessly retro-sounding trademark open G riff rocker the band had tried to distinguish themselves from in their 'contemporary-sounding' last two albums.
When they put all that material next to more typical Pathe Marconi stuff, and covered it all with coherent production with an inspired Jagger on new vocals, the result was a delicious cocktail. I would say it had such a depthness, variance and musical inspiration that no other Pathe Marconi era album, pl. SOME GIRLS, could match. Probably one could say that hey were a bit cheating there, since it gave a bit too good (or wrong) picture of the creative state of the band at the time. For example, UNDERCOVER, a pure Pathe Marconi album with make-up like flirting with contemporary sounds, didn't quite meet the expactations set by TATTOO YOU. Like I recall one friend who absolutely had loved TATTOO YOU and especially its B-side, saying of UNDERCOVER to me: 'hey, where are all the good songs?'.
- Doxa
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-23 15:19 by Doxa.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: January 23, 2023 15:28
<That the Stones quickly put together a collection of old rejected songs in order to have an album to go with a tour might not sounded that promising scenario>
I agree, totally. However, unfinished songs are not always rejected, but rather work in progress for a future release - like with many of the songs on TY.
7 out of 11 songs were 1-2 years old (the versions they worked on, anyway), so it's hard to label that album, really, imo
I agree, totally. However, unfinished songs are not always rejected, but rather work in progress for a future release - like with many of the songs on TY.
7 out of 11 songs were 1-2 years old (the versions they worked on, anyway), so it's hard to label that album, really, imo
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
SomeGuy
()
Date: January 23, 2023 16:18
Quote
Rocky Dijon
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.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: January 23, 2023 19:43
Quote
The Sicilian
Nearly 2 million views and no album in sight.
New single hopefully coming soon, and if it's anywhere near as good as Living in a Ghost Town, some of us will rejoice.
But I really dread the thought of hearing it ruined in an Applebees commercial, though that seems the way these things go these days.
I must have heard the Start Me Up snippet a dozen times on the tv over the last two weeks while watching football games, and all I can think of when I hear it now it is greasy fattening chicken and ribs.
Worst case nightmare scenario - Applebees will be the promoter for the upcoming tour, and every new Stones song will be misused in advertisements throughout the tour and beyond. Say it ain't so!
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
VoodooLounge13
()
Date: January 23, 2023 21:14
LOL I don't think Applebee's has the means to sponsor a tour of that magnitude!!!
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
retired_dog
()
Date: January 23, 2023 22:17
Quote
HairballQuote
The Sicilian
Nearly 2 million views and no album in sight.
New single hopefully coming soon, and if it's anywhere near as good as Living in a Ghost Town, some of us will rejoice.
But I really dread the thought of hearing it ruined in an Applebees commercial, though that seems the way these things go these days.
I must have heard the Start Me Up snippet a dozen times on the tv over the last two weeks while watching football games, and all I can think of when I hear it now it is greasy fattening chicken and ribs.
Worst case nightmare scenario - Applebees will be the promoter for the upcoming tour, and every new Stones song will be misused in advertisements throughout the tour and beyond. Say it ain't so!
"Worst case nightmare scenario"? Well, for me it is World War III or the Apocalypse. Everything else is just minor quibbles. However, it's all a matter of perspective.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
maumau
()
Date: January 23, 2023 23:05
wait and hear what they're coming out with
there's no way to compare what happened in 1981, a band of men in their late thirties as they were poking around tracks 7 or 8 years old, to what might happen when men in their late seventies try to build one (possibly) last album of originals having a huge archive of demos, sketches of songs and unfinished tracks frome the last 30 years.
I agree though that less has changed in their life as musicians in the last 30 years that in those 7 or 8 years back then. And that makes me feel not so optimistic about the output. my expectations are low but I am eager to be surprised and rejoice of one last good album
ps: I see that CH is not considered "stonesy" soundwise by many (most?) here. my 2 cent is that I love it and it sounds like I would imagine (hope) a stones record would sound like if someone had asked me 30 years ago. wishful thinking for what is coming up
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-23 23:10 by maumau.
there's no way to compare what happened in 1981, a band of men in their late thirties as they were poking around tracks 7 or 8 years old, to what might happen when men in their late seventies try to build one (possibly) last album of originals having a huge archive of demos, sketches of songs and unfinished tracks frome the last 30 years.
I agree though that less has changed in their life as musicians in the last 30 years that in those 7 or 8 years back then. And that makes me feel not so optimistic about the output. my expectations are low but I am eager to be surprised and rejoice of one last good album
ps: I see that CH is not considered "stonesy" soundwise by many (most?) here. my 2 cent is that I love it and it sounds like I would imagine (hope) a stones record would sound like if someone had asked me 30 years ago. wishful thinking for what is coming up
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-23 23:10 by maumau.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
gotdablouse
()
Date: January 23, 2023 23:38
Quote
doitywoik
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?
I'm pretty sure Keith drummed up (as usual) the material too, along the lines of "it's the best stuff we've done in years" (Gazza pointed out at the time that it would be correct since they hadn't recorded anything in 5 years!).
What remains a bit mysterious about these Paris sessions is that they were originally getting together to record 2 songs for 40 licks as mentioned at the "Blimp" PC. Keith actually said that the fact that they had yet to do that was "only a small problem" (or something like that).
Yet they spend 15 days at Guillaume Tell in Paris and come up with 20+ tracks ! Why bother if they only needed 2 songs and had to prepare for a tour...Maybe the studio was booked so why not. In the Licks DVD you can see a screen where you see tracks number and there are indeed 20+. I started a topic about that a good 10 years ago ;-) One of them was "Still In Love" I think...maybe the one that got leaked on FFSO ?
Found it (minus the screenshot) : [iorr.org] : "2002 Sessions in Paris - they did record 30+ songs !"
--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
ProfessorWolf
()
Date: January 24, 2023 00:19
Quote
VoodooLounge13
LOL I don't think Applebee's has the means to sponsor a tour of that magnitude!!!
or the menu!
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
ProfessorWolf
()
Date: January 24, 2023 01:07
Quote
gotdablouseQuote
doitywoik
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?
I'm pretty sure Keith drummed up (as usual) the material too, along the lines of "it's the best stuff we've done in years" (Gazza pointed out at the time that it would be correct since they hadn't recorded anything in 5 years!).
What remains a bit mysterious about these Paris sessions is that they were originally getting together to record 2 songs for 40 licks as mentioned at the "Blimp" PC. Keith actually said that the fact that they had yet to do that was "only a small problem" (or something like that).
Yet they spend 15 days at Guillaume Tell in Paris and come up with 20+ tracks ! Why bother if they only needed 2 songs and had to prepare for a tour...Maybe the studio was booked so why not. In the Licks DVD you can see a screen where you see tracks number and there are indeed 20+. I started a topic about that a good 10 years ago ;-) One of them was "Still In Love" I think...maybe the one that got leaked on FFSO ?
Found it (minus the screenshot) : [iorr.org] : "2002 Sessions in Paris - they did record 30+ songs !"
thanks read thru the whole thread plus the two others linked in it
always interesting going down the rabbit hole on iorr of old threads
you never know what you'll find
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: January 24, 2023 06:24
Quote
ProfessorWolfQuote
NikkeiQuote
ProfessorWolfQuote
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
You're right that is very specific. Plus it's completely believable when you listen to the outtakes that we got to hear. But what I don't understand then, is why Mick and Keith, about two years later, felt the need to come up with all of A Bigger Bang practically from scratch?? Talk about "ditched"
well at least one licks outtakes seems to be a early version of abb track it goes to reason that more then one abb song began in these sessions
but your right it is a question to ask why they supposedly started from scratch
one likely answer is ronnie's exaggerating the quality of those 24 songs
or mick and keith couldn't come to an agreement about what to continue developing after they revisited those 24 songs and decided it be easier to start from scratch
who knows
until we can hear a much more comprehensive collection of outtakes from those sessions it's all just speculation
Or... that was then.
How anyone could question what they did and then what they did considering all that they've done when they did what they did... and why... is, I mean, come on, they start 1A-30A, then 2A-30A whatever, and then... a new 1A... they started IORR with leftovers in mind from GHS. For that matter, through 1982k nothing had ever changed.
They clearly have no issues with "looking back" ie apparently every album from 1971-1983 from all I've read. Unfinished songs.
They recorded how many songs for UNDERCOVER? Yet Mick still said this:
Actually all these songs are all new. They were all written this year, last year, over a short base of time when we recorded. They're all new and none of 'em are from previous sessions. This is like 10 tracks that were chosen out of 15 that we actually finished.
- Mick Jagger, 1984
[www.timeisonourside.com]
He is slyly one to just provide what he wants people to hear/read.
19th March - 5th April: Munich, West-Germany, Musicland Studios. Producers:
The Glimmer Twins. Sound engineers: Keith Harwood, Reinhold Mack.
Additional musicians: Billy Preston (p, org)/Ollie Brown (perc)/Wayne Perkins
(gtr)/Harvey Mandel (gtr)/RW (gtr, bvoc; 30.3. - 4.4.75)
- Cellophane Trousers I (MJ/KR) -instrumental (uses Too Tough-riff)
- Cellophane Trousers II (MJ/KR) -version I with additional lead guitar
[www.nzentgraf.de]
Whatever the context is of the new Stones album it's not exactly 18 years in the making, it goes back to late 2015 as I recall... not that long ago, really. Yet, at this point later this year, 8 years.
Looking forward to it.
The deluxe reissues give a more specific eye to that albeit out of context - yet, in regard to the deal at the time, within the context.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
ProfessorWolf
()
Date: January 24, 2023 08:52
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
ProfessorWolfQuote
NikkeiQuote
ProfessorWolfQuote
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
You're right that is very specific. Plus it's completely believable when you listen to the outtakes that we got to hear. But what I don't understand then, is why Mick and Keith, about two years later, felt the need to come up with all of A Bigger Bang practically from scratch?? Talk about "ditched"
well at least one licks outtakes seems to be a early version of abb track it goes to reason that more then one abb song began in these sessions
but your right it is a question to ask why they supposedly started from scratch
one likely answer is ronnie's exaggerating the quality of those 24 songs
or mick and keith couldn't come to an agreement about what to continue developing after they revisited those 24 songs and decided it be easier to start from scratch
who knows
until we can hear a much more comprehensive collection of outtakes from those sessions it's all just speculation
Or... that was then.
How anyone could question what they did and then what they did considering all that they've done when they did what they did... and why... is, I mean, come on, they start 1A-30A, then 2A-30A whatever, and then... a new 1A... they started IORR with leftovers in mind from GHS. For that matter, through 1982k nothing had ever changed.
They clearly have no issues with "looking back" ie apparently every album from 1971-1983 from all I've read. Unfinished songs.
They recorded how many songs for UNDERCOVER? Yet Mick still said this:
Actually all these songs are all new. They were all written this year, last year, over a short base of time when we recorded. They're all new and none of 'em are from previous sessions. This is like 10 tracks that were chosen out of 15 that we actually finished.
- Mick Jagger, 1984
[www.timeisonourside.com]
He is slyly one to just provide what he wants people to hear/read.
19th March - 5th April: Munich, West-Germany, Musicland Studios. Producers:
The Glimmer Twins. Sound engineers: Keith Harwood, Reinhold Mack.
Additional musicians: Billy Preston (p, org)/Ollie Brown (perc)/Wayne Perkins
(gtr)/Harvey Mandel (gtr)/RW (gtr, bvoc; 30.3. - 4.4.75)
- Cellophane Trousers I (MJ/KR) -instrumental (uses Too Tough-riff)
- Cellophane Trousers II (MJ/KR) -version I with additional lead guitar
[www.nzentgraf.de]
Whatever the context is of the new Stones album it's not exactly 18 years in the making, it goes back to late 2015 as I recall... not that long ago, really. Yet, at this point later this year, 8 years.
Looking forward to it.
The deluxe reissues give a more specific eye to that albeit out of context - yet, in regard to the deal at the time, within the context.
well to be honest i don't think they started from scratch with abb myself
i think they probably built upon the outtakes from the previous sessions as makes sense (which i think is what your getting at i'm not certain)
and i hope your right about the new album being made up of songs recorded since 2015
well have to see
can't be to much longer before we have something definitive from them on the content of the new album
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
bitusa2012
()
Date: January 24, 2023 12:08
Why is SirJagger (I think Mick’s official Instagram account?) posting a picture of Keith on it today? Never done that before.
Rod
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-24 12:08 by bitusa2012.
Rod
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-24 12:08 by bitusa2012.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 24, 2023 12:10
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I agree, totally. However, unfinished songs are not always rejected, but rather work in progress for a future release - like with many of the songs on TY.
7 out of 11 songs were 1-2 years old (the versions they worked on, anyway), so it's hard to label that album, really, imo
Yeah, about every album since STICKY FINGERS there are songs deriving from older sessions. So one could call them 'works in progress' or 'left-overs' from past sessions. I guess in many cases the rejection, or not making the the album in the process, can be due to many reasons.
Sometimes it could be that the song doesn't fit to the artistic statement of the album. If I think TATTOO YOU material, I think "Start Me Up" is such a tune. In SOME GIRLS they wanted to update their sound, and the tune - at least its 'rock version' - is a pretty much a cliche of their trademark, classical sound.
Then some tunes do not fit to a new album if there is enough of same type of songs available. There is just no room (we are talking about good old vinyl days, naturally) or they don't want to the album to sound too heavy on certain type of songs. I think the GOATS HEAD SOUP and BLACK AND BLUE songs of TATTOO YOU belong to this category.
What goes for the rest of TATTOO YOU, most of them are from EMOTIONAL RESCUE sessions, right? A couple of them seemed to be seriouly considered for the album (Wyman mentions "No Use In Crying" and "Neighbours" listed for some early version). Any case, the Pathe Marconi sessions were very productive, so there were lots of (good) stuff in the can. TATTOO YOU is mostly based on that rather recent stuff, just enriched with a few older songs.
- Doxa
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-24 12:34 by Doxa.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: January 24, 2023 13:01
I think sometimes they just go with the songs that come together the easiest...[not necessarily always the best songs] and then at some point they say.. ".. right, fed up now, we've got enough."
The unused songs then maybe come together better later...with the benefit of time and a different perspective.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-24 13:07 by Spud.
The unused songs then maybe come together better later...with the benefit of time and a different perspective.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-24 13:07 by Spud.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
bitusa2012
()
Date: January 24, 2023 13:13
Quote
Spud
I think sometimes they just go with the songs that come together the easiest...[not necessarily always the best songs] and then at some point they say.. ".. right, fed up now, we've got enough."
Really? If that was the case we should have had a few albums in the past 18 years instead of … none.
Rod
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
bye bye johnny
()
Date: January 24, 2023 13:21
Quote
bitusa2012
Why is SirJagger (I think Mick’s official Instagram account?) posting a picture of Keith on it today? Never done that before.
Mick's official Instagram account - [www.instagram.com]
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 24, 2023 13:28
What goes for the problem Dandie mentioned about labeling TATTOO YOU - naturally this is a spot on topic in this thread 
- I think there is an obvious answer: a new studio album by The Rolling Stones.
It is not 'anything goes' if it is not released before, but I think its motto could be put like this: 'we have recorded so much tracks in the last couple of years that we could release several albums from those sessions. We thought the best of them truely deserve a release of their own now as they still are fresh. It' s bloody strong stuff, you know. Then we have some older gems in our vaults that for some reason didn't fit to our previous albums. So we decided to finish them up and put them out as well'.
If some historical speculation is allowed, they could have released another TATTOO YOU type of album easily: take more material from damn profilic SOME GIRLS and EMOTIONAL RESCUE sessions and add some older gems there. And laugh all the way to bank.
Well, they did not, and despite we probably losing another great Stones album, they let their muse lead they elsewhere. I think the latter was a natural develpment. The band by nature wanted to record new stuff, and say, in 1982/83 the winds of change were happening in the 80's trends, so the 1977-1980 recorded stuff, initially motivated by punk and disco movement, started to be out-dated (and that c&w and 70's style country rock material they had their vaults full of, surely did not help if they wanted to be somehow 'contemporary' and not just old farts). Surely the bulk of new UNDERCOVER material does not differ that much of similar loose jams based on a riff during SOME GIRLS and EMOTIONAL RESCUE sessions, but there are songs that are truely looking forward, breathing the 80's winds.
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-24 13:37 by Doxa.
- I think there is an obvious answer: a new studio album by The Rolling Stones.It is not 'anything goes' if it is not released before, but I think its motto could be put like this: 'we have recorded so much tracks in the last couple of years that we could release several albums from those sessions. We thought the best of them truely deserve a release of their own now as they still are fresh. It' s bloody strong stuff, you know. Then we have some older gems in our vaults that for some reason didn't fit to our previous albums. So we decided to finish them up and put them out as well'.
If some historical speculation is allowed, they could have released another TATTOO YOU type of album easily: take more material from damn profilic SOME GIRLS and EMOTIONAL RESCUE sessions and add some older gems there. And laugh all the way to bank.
Well, they did not, and despite we probably losing another great Stones album, they let their muse lead they elsewhere. I think the latter was a natural develpment. The band by nature wanted to record new stuff, and say, in 1982/83 the winds of change were happening in the 80's trends, so the 1977-1980 recorded stuff, initially motivated by punk and disco movement, started to be out-dated (and that c&w and 70's style country rock material they had their vaults full of, surely did not help if they wanted to be somehow 'contemporary' and not just old farts). Surely the bulk of new UNDERCOVER material does not differ that much of similar loose jams based on a riff during SOME GIRLS and EMOTIONAL RESCUE sessions, but there are songs that are truely looking forward, breathing the 80's winds.
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-24 13:37 by Doxa.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 24, 2023 14:12
Quote
Spud
I think sometimes they just go with the songs that come together the easiest...[not necessarily always the best songs] and then at some point they say.. ".. right, fed up now, we've got enough."
The unused songs then maybe come together better later...with the benefit of time and a different perspective.
Yeah. I think "Waiting On A Friend" and "Tops" from TATTOO YOU are songs like that. As far I know (and have heard) the early GOATS HEAD SOUP versions are pretty sketchy (basically just the backing tracks). Looks like they pretty quickly decided that they will not work these further now, but leave it to some other occasion to develop further/finish up if needed or feels right. If memory do not make tricks, they picked up "Waiting On A Friend" already during EMOTIONAL RESCUE sessions (the people knowing more could enlight the session history of the songs).
Anyway, I personally think that in the case of TATTOO YOU keeping the songs in the vaults for some years did good for them. The new fresh perspective, with recent production ideas and highly inspired Jagger of 1980/81 finishing up the songs, lifted up the quality and distinction of the songs. This is a very different approach than they had for the bonus material of recent times. There Jagger has tried to be loyal to the context and like imitate his younger self (funnily, LOST & FOUND was an easier task, since his TATTOO YOU era voice is closer to his current one. I think especially "Fast Talking, Slow Walking" gains from this, and I think it is one of the most convincing performances from him what goes for the archives bonus material).
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-01-24 14:17 by Doxa.
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 24, 2023 14:53
I wait someone to say:'That's enough, Doxa. This thread is not about TATTOO YOU but a new album. And besides didn't you just declare that by studying history we will not learn anything about the quality or nature of the upcoming album'...
- Doxa
- Doxa
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
bitusa2012
()
Date: January 24, 2023 15:47
Quote
bye bye johnnyQuote
bitusa2012
Why is SirJagger (I think Mick’s official Instagram account?) posting a picture of Keith on it today? Never done that before.
Mick's official Instagram account - [www.instagram.com]
Ah, ok, sorry.
Rod
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
VoodooLounge13
()
Date: January 24, 2023 16:39
Quote
Spud
I think sometimes they just go with the songs that come together the easiest...[not necessarily always the best songs] and then at some point they say.. ".. right, fed up now, we've got enough."
The unused songs then maybe come together better later...with the benefit of time and a different perspective.
If that were true, we could have had an album of just B-Side type stuff, which Mick always says he just cranked out in mere minutes each, as if he didn't give them any thought. I think since SW some of their B-Sides have been absolutely stellar, and at this point there is a solid half-album that they could have put out in this regard. All of the bluesy numbers for SW are superb. I've stated elsewhere - perhaps earlier in this thread - that I think sometimes they're best when they don't put too much pressure on themselves and just go with the feel of the song at the moment. In this way, yeah, they could have had a few pretty decent albums by now over the years.
Just consider: Cook Cook Blues, Fancyman Blues, Wish I'd Never Met You, Jump On Top of Me, So Young, Anyway You Look At It, Don't Wanna Go Home, (and given that most on here prefer it) Under The Radar.
Actually, that's a few more than half an album. Almost a full one.
I don't know if it's true or not, but I often think of their latter day stuff in terms of each leader taking turns with the direction of the album. For me, I see their albums being driven in this way:
Undercover - Mick
Dirty Work - Keef
SW - ?? This is the one I can never decide on
Voodoo - Keef
Bridges - Mick
Bang - Keef
So for me, I would expect the new album to be more along the lines of a Mick album. And what I mean by all of that is that they seem to rotate their rock sound with their 'current trend' sound, or more of a dance sound if you will. They album itself may not be comprised of more songs by one or the other, I just personally look at them in that regard, knowing that Keef is more the rocker and Mick is more the what's hot person.
Reading back thru, ABB was praised when it was released (yes, I know that most of their latter day albums have been lauded as their best in decades), but it received a grade of 73 out of 100 by Metacritic, which is a pretty strong score, and it was voted the second best album of the year behind Kanye, according to Rolling Stone. It was considered a return to their roots in the vein of Some Girls, but with more of an edge. Yet, I think most of us here would agree that between ABB and B2B, the latter has held up better over time. The lyrics are less current (non-politically tied to certain politicians in office at the time which I think often dates a song immensely - Sympathy might be an exception here), and B2B is actually more of an experimental album of the boys pushing the boundaries of many different genres. Not to mention that it contains two bonafide latter day classics in Saint Of Me and Out Of Control. Rough Justice should have been one. I truly love that song, and the modern sleazy Exile feel that it exudes, but for one reason or another, it just didn't seem to catch on.
No matter the direction of the new album, I - like all of us - eagerly await it's arrival!!!!
Re: New Stones album for 2023
Posted by:
MelBelli
()
Date: January 24, 2023 16:49
Steel Wheels is mostly Mick (with Keith driving Mixed Emotions, Can’t Be Seen, AHYS, Slipping Away, and probably Break the Spell).
Bigger Bang is 90% Mick!
Bigger Bang is 90% Mick!
This Thread has been closed
Online Users
Guests:
2000
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10