Quote
liddas

Quote
Doxa

It is pretty hard to understand what Keith is actually trying to say there, other that he is bashing Mick there (a constant theme of the book). To me it doesn't sound it is anything about sonical matters at all: only that Mick - and only him - is so vain that he just wants to work in a fancy 'real' studio an sich, despite it not, as Keith seem to maintain, mattering to the final result at all.


- Doxa

I think that all Keith had in mine was he didn't want another Bridges to Babylon production. Probably he was afraid that "Hand" could receive the "Juice" treatment or that the tracks in general could be over polished (compare the sound of the recent Babylon outtakes to the official release).

C

Annnnnnd yet it’s B2B for which many of us here are hoping. The last Stones classic album. It’s the last album that has held up well over time.

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
liddas

Quote
Doxa

It is pretty hard to understand what Keith is actually trying to say there, other that he is bashing Mick there (a constant theme of the book). To me it doesn't sound it is anything about sonical matters at all: only that Mick - and only him - is so vain that he just wants to work in a fancy 'real' studio an sich, despite it not, as Keith seem to maintain, mattering to the final result at all.


- Doxa

I think that all Keith had in mine was he didn't want another Bridges to Babylon production. Probably he was afraid that "Hand" could receive the "Juice" treatment or that the tracks in general could be over polished (compare the sound of the recent Babylon outtakes to the official release).

C

That is certainly plausible. Good hypothesis!

Of course, but my first impression is still standing - on some tracks, the "rawness" works, while some others like Back Of My Hand, Biggest Mistake and Streets Of Love for example simply sound like more or less cheap demos, too one-dimensional, too much "in your face", whatever one wants to call it - these could have used a bit more production finesse, more "air", more interesting textures/soundscapes.

That and the impression that the album is simply too long for such an one-dimensional "rawness exercise" in general and the songwriting quality of certain tracks in particular ("Infamy", "Driving Too Fast", "Dangerous Beauty" and the like). A bit like "Voodoo Lounge", the longer it plays, one increasingly loses interest.

A shortened tracklist, the addition of "Under the Radar" and a bit more imaginative production on certain tracks while keeping the "rawness" of some others could have helped the album tremendously.

I’ve never understood all the love for UTR. I much prefer DWGH and wish that they t had been included on the album. Driving Too Fast is actually my favorite track on the album and I would have loved to have heard Charlie bang out that one live. I also love Infamy. Great groove. BOMH is another great track. The album might be bloated and could have been trimmed but we’ll never agree on what 10-12 songs to keep.

Quote
gotdablouse
Exactly, someone's finally hit the nail on the head, ABB sounds like a collection of demos for the most part. Even worse, demos that they tried to spruce up in the studio but since you "can't polish a turd" like Keith like to say, they ended up making them worse, ONNYA for instance sounded a lot better when they first played it at Juilliard. It stood to reason that getting help from seasoned players and producers like they did for B2B could only have produced something a lot better and memorable...

Too bad Mick didn't put his foot down after also being downvoted for VL and then later complaining about it very publicly in the long Wenner interview in 1995. Maybe he got pressed for time (like he did for WS) and couldn't delay the tour.

ONNYA I like a lot. I think it’s very interesting original sounding. It would definitely make my final version of the album.

and it’s interesting to note that with all the rumored guests and hip new producer involved on the new album that chances are they’re adding layers upon layers to all of the songs once again.

Damn great remarks here about the latest album of originals here! I dig the variety of opinions. That's what discussion is all about, right?

I said above that probably the album had been better if Mick had his will through - that they should have done something to the material in a proper studio, like Keith told us. Well, who knows. That's speculation if it would been sharpened into EXILE form, like I provocatively proposed, or would the result been something over-produced stuff like "Juiced" (probably the weakest track the Stones have ever released in my book).

But A BIGGER BANG is what it is. An artistic statement of its own. It is something the Stones released and wanted to release back then and were ready to stand behind.

And I think it is unique sounding thing. It doesn't sound like BRIDGES or any classic Stones album. It is 'raw', demo-like. Its backing tracks are based on Mick's beats, Charlie just over-dubbing them. Not him taking part in 'writing' the song. The bass parts, the guitars and most of the stuff is just Mick and Keith, Ronnie doing some quick over-dubs. Minimal side musicians. None of the old magic of 'the whole band capturing the groove in this precise moment' really present. It was built up differently, piece by piece.

Well, we can say it was not any big artistic success, quite the contrary. But I think its distinguishness lies in its 'odd' nature. Not every Stones album should sound like some sort of 'ideal' Stones album or similar like some other. Nor I don't think any classic album or masterpiece was lost had they re-worked some the material. The song-writing was not that strong to begin with. A tiny better it might have been due to some track edition, re-working etc. Make them sound more 'easy-listening' to trained Stones fan ears. But not essentially better. We could say the same about DIRTY WORK if we like.

It is an honest representation what the Stones as creative artists were at the time. What they wanted to 'say' then.

It is what it is, and that's alright. Without it their legacy would have been less interesting. At least as a Stones fan I think so.

- Doxa



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2023-04-14 01:38 by Doxa.

Quote
mkbbcmr
"Back Of My Hand" sounds "somewhat sterile"? I beg to differ. The "detached" vocals, the dystopian lyrics ("Goya's paranoias" indeed) and the rawness of the recording add up to anything but sterile. Great track.

Best track on ABB.

Quote
MrEcho

Quote
mkbbcmr
"Back Of My Hand" sounds "somewhat sterile"? I beg to differ. The "detached" vocals, the dystopian lyrics ("Goya's paranoias" indeed) and the rawness of the recording add up to anything but sterile. Great track.

Best track on ABB.

I think it is one of the best tracks on the album, but honestly I think it is more like a pastishe, even though the lyrics are great. It sounds great and ear-candy first - The Stones playing the blues, wow! - but after some listenings I think its charm disappears pretty quickly. To be a great blues number there should be more real originality and depth. It is way too obvious and somehow 'thin'. More form than substance. I think BLUE & LONESOME offers much stronger and convincing material, if one wants to hear the Stones playing the blues. What it really is (and the Stones do that very well) .

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-04-14 01:59 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa
Damn great remarks here about the latest album of originals here! I dig the variety of opinions. That's what discussion is all about, right?

I said above that probably the album had been better if Mick had his will through - that they should have done something to the material in a proper studio, like Keith told us. Well, who knows. That's speculation if it would been sharpened into EXILE form, like I provocatively proposed, or would the result been something over-produced stuff like "Juiced" (probably the weakest track the Stones have ever released in my book).

But A BIGGER BANG is what it is. An artistic statement of its own. It is something the Stones released and wanted to release back then and were ready to stand behind.

And I think it is unique sounding thing. It doesn't sound like BRIDGES or any classic Stones album. It is 'raw', demo-like. Its backing tracks are based on Mick's beats, Charlie just over-dubbing them. Not him taking part in 'writing' the song. The bass parts, the guitars and most of the stuff is just Mick and Keith, Ronnie doing some quick over-dubs. Minimal side musicians. None of the old magic of 'the whole band capturing the groove in this precise moment' really present. It was built up differently, piece by piece.

Well, we can say it was not any big artistic success, quite the contrary. But I think its distinguishness lies in its 'odd' nature. Not every Stones album should sound like some sort of 'ideal' Stones album or similar like some other. Nor I don't think any classic album or masterpiece was lost had they re-worked some the material. The song-writing was not that strong to begin with. A tiny better it might have been due to some track edition, re-working etc. Make them sound more 'easy-listening' to trained Stones fan ears. But not essentially better. We could say the same about DIRTY WORK if we like.

It is an honest representation what the Stones as creative artists were at the time. What they wanted to 'say' then.

It is what it is, and that's alright. Without it their legacy would have been less interesting. At least as a Stones fan I think so.

- Doxa

Well, "what they wanted to say" - I really doubt that. I feel it's more like "the best they could come up with under the circumstances" - like time pressure & Charlie's health problems and last but not least their usual creative dissonances. Mick finally had Keith have his way, creating songs face to face, close collaboration like in their heydays, but in the end realized that even their old working methods don't automatically recreate the magic of old.

There's stuff on ABB that I'm pretty sure would have been relegated to "outtake status" in the past. Stuff that simply is not up to scratch if we're talking about Stones standarts.

But yeah, it is what it is. And that's not a capital crime - because even on their weakest albums I still find a handful of tracks I would not want to miss!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-04-14 02:18 by retired_dog.

Yeah, R Dog, I get what you mean by doing best under those circumstances, since them not being ideal. But still, I think, as they did release the album they, pragmatically speaking, were pleased with it enough, and were ready stand behind it. I mean, these were the guys who once thought that ROCK AND ROLL CIRCUS or SOME GIRLS LIVE IN TEXAS were too subpar to be released. Surely the circumstances were different in 2005 and probably they were not so worried about the quality in order to get the album out for the tour, but still... Now, in the case of a new album, they supposedly think differently (quality seems to matter), but are we sure they weren't that different in 2005?

Honestly, I don't know. But what I tend to think is that the artists, if they were to release something, are somehow satisfied with the product. That it actually expresses something they want to 'say'.

The thing in regard to A BIGGER BANG is that we do know a lot about the circumstances under which the album was done, and we seem to indicate that those mattered for the album not being so good. But we don't know does the band think similarly. Or if it was not fulfilling their artistic purposes. Or, theoretically, if Mick and Keith's songs had been better, the album had been better the album had been better, no matter how it was executed. Or, had some kind of miracle happened, The Glimmer Twins had given us a masterpiece by some other means. What I try to say is that we are using some old concepts of how the Stones once have worked in order to explain why the results weren't that great this time. Nothing wrong there, but I am not so sure if the explanation is that valid. Creativity or the greatness of art cannot be reduced to following old habits and customs.

Hmmm...Probably I just try to say that what I am to judge what people like Mick Jagger or Keith Richards should do in order to get the best out of them.. They are their own masters, and I am just a follower...

- Doxa



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2023-04-14 03:53 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa
Yeah, R Dog, I get what you mean by doing best under those circumstances, since them not being ideal. But still, I think, as they did release the album they, pragmatically speaking, were pleased with it enough, and were ready stand behind it. I mean, these were the guys who once thought that ROCK AND ROLL CIRCUS or SOME GIRLS LIVE IN TEXAS were too subpar to be released. Surely the circumstances were different in 2005 and probably they were not so worried about the quality in order to get the album out for the tour, but still... Now, in the case of a new album, they supposedly think differently (quality seems to matter), but are we sure they weren't that different in 2005?

Honestly, I don't know. But what I tend to think is that the artists, if they were to release something, are somehow satisfied with the product. That it actually expresses something they want to 'say'.

The thing in regard to A BIGGER BANG is that we do know a lot about the circumstances under which the album was done, and we seem to indicate that those mattered for the album not being so good. But we don't know does the band think similarly. Or if it was not fulfilling their artistic purposes. Or, theoretically, if Mick and Keith's songs had been better, the album had been better the album had been better, no matter how it was executed. Or, had some kind of miracle happened, The Glimmer Twins had given us a masterpiece by some other means. What I try to say is that we are using some old concepts of how the Stones once have worked in order to explain why the results weren't that great this time. Nothing wrong there, but I am not so sure if the explanation is that valid. Creativity or the greatness of art cannot be reduced to following old habits and customs.

Hmmm...Probably I just try to say that what I am to judge what people like Mick Jagger or Keith Richards should do in order to get the best out of them.. They are their own masters, and I am just a follower...

- Doxa

I think the terms I marked in bold, "pleased with it enough" and "somehow satisfied with the product" describe best what they may have felt after the completion of ABB. I mean, they are no idiots and surely realize that "Rough Justice" is no "All Down The Line", "Streets Of Love" is no "Angie" or "Wild Horses" and "Back Of My Hand" is no "Love In Vain", "Down In The Hole", maybe not even no "The Storm".

Still, ABB as a whole is not that bad that it would have been impossible to stand behind it - at the time, that is. And both Mick and Keith are clever enough in promo talks to give you the impression that they're really, really convinced and satisfied with whatever product they put out.

It's only readable in the aftermath, the years to follow the fact what they may really have thought about a certain project. Let's not forget that ABB was a contractual obligation, their last album for Virgin/EMI, so they had to release something. Yes, there's some good stuff on it. Yes, it was cheap to produce. No harm in putting it out - even without studio polish. They knew they could get away with it because back then, it already must have dawned on them that new albums were not essential for touring. Consequently, their next contract with Universal lacks any obligation to record new albums of originals.

I think that after ABB, they did not want a situation ever again where they would be contractually forced to release something. Something they may in their hearts not have been totally satisfied with. I think that tells something about how they were really thinking about the album. Plus they were getting older, plus they realized they could sell tickets without new music, of course.

As mentioned before in this thread - the fact that a new album of original music is finally on the horizon without any contractual pressures makes me very optimistic that this fabled "new album" is not a contrived one, not full of compromises, but something that truly represents whereever their artistic route and creative ways have led them.

Something they really, really want to say.

It's interesting that B2B is the album Keith still regards as the "forgotten classic". He has said in different interviews during the years that it's underrated and among their best.

Maybe because he has three songs on it, who knows?

I really REALLY like ABB. I love Under the Radar and Wanna go Home. They should have both been ON the album main. Could have replaced She saw me Coming and Look What the Cat Dragged in.

Rod

Quote
bitusa2012
I really REALLY like ABB. I love Under the Radar and Wanna go Home. They should have both been ON the album main. Could have replaced She saw me Coming and Look What the Cat Dragged in.

I agree. No more dressing up mediocre or bad songs with glitzy production. I think it is the best of the four albums made '89-'05. It's a bit like, substance with no polish or polish with no substance.

Also, in this day and age, I would'nt say you can only make a good sounding album in a proper studio. Besides, what's the difference between recording in Mick's current chateau or at Headley Grange in the 70s? Amazing albums have been made in castles, former monasteries, warehouses, post offices and whathaveyounot.

<What's the difference between recording in Mick's current chateau or at Headley Grange in the 70s?>

The Rolling Stones Mobile Studio?

Quote
DandelionPowderman


The Rolling Stones Mobile Studio?

Right. Do we have any idea of the equipment that was used on ABB?

Quote
SomeGuy

Quote
DandelionPowderman


The Rolling Stones Mobile Studio?

Right. Do we have any idea of the equipment that was used on ABB?

I said it in jest, but I believe Mick said something about laptops. They probably had the best equipment possible regarding mics etc, though.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
SomeGuy

Quote
DandelionPowderman


The Rolling Stones Mobile Studio?

Right. Do we have any idea of the equipment that was used on ABB?

I said it in jest, but I believe Mick said something about laptops. They probably had the best equipment possible regarding mics etc, though.

Alrighty

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Doxa
Yeah, R Dog, I get what you mean by doing best under those circumstances, since them not being ideal. But still, I think, as they did release the album they, pragmatically speaking, were pleased with it enough, and were ready stand behind it. I mean, these were the guys who once thought that ROCK AND ROLL CIRCUS or SOME GIRLS LIVE IN TEXAS were too subpar to be released. Surely the circumstances were different in 2005 and probably they were not so worried about the quality in order to get the album out for the tour, but still... Now, in the case of a new album, they supposedly think differently (quality seems to matter), but are we sure they weren't that different in 2005?

Honestly, I don't know. But what I tend to think is that the artists, if they were to release something, are somehow satisfied with the product. That it actually expresses something they want to 'say'.

The thing in regard to A BIGGER BANG is that we do know a lot about the circumstances under which the album was done, and we seem to indicate that those mattered for the album not being so good. But we don't know does the band think similarly. Or if it was not fulfilling their artistic purposes. Or, theoretically, if Mick and Keith's songs had been better, the album had been better the album had been better, no matter how it was executed. Or, had some kind of miracle happened, The Glimmer Twins had given us a masterpiece by some other means. What I try to say is that we are using some old concepts of how the Stones once have worked in order to explain why the results weren't that great this time. Nothing wrong there, but I am not so sure if the explanation is that valid. Creativity or the greatness of art cannot be reduced to following old habits and customs.

Hmmm...Probably I just try to say that what I am to judge what people like Mick Jagger or Keith Richards should do in order to get the best out of them.. They are their own masters, and I am just a follower...

- Doxa

I think the terms I marked in bold, "pleased with it enough" and "somehow satisfied with the product" describe best what they may have felt after the completion of ABB. I mean, they are no idiots and surely realize that "Rough Justice" is no "All Down The Line", "Streets Of Love" is no "Angie" or "Wild Horses" and "Back Of My Hand" is no "Love In Vain", "Down In The Hole", maybe not even no "The Storm".

Still, ABB as a whole is not that bad that it would have been impossible to stand behind it - at the time, that is. And both Mick and Keith are clever enough in promo talks to give you the impression that they're really, really convinced and satisfied with whatever product they put out.

It's only readable in the aftermath, the years to follow the fact what they may really have thought about a certain project. Let's not forget that ABB was a contractual obligation, their last album for Virgin/EMI, so they had to release something. Yes, there's some good stuff on it. Yes, it was cheap to produce. No harm in putting it out - even without studio polish. They knew they could get away with it because back then, it already must have dawned on them that new albums were not essential for touring. Consequently, their next contract with Universal lacks any obligation to record new albums of originals.

I think that after ABB, they did not want a situation ever again where they would be contractually forced to release something. Something they may in their hearts not have been totally satisfied with. I think that tells something about how they were really thinking about the album. Plus they were getting older, plus they realized they could sell tickets without new music, of course.

As mentioned before in this thread - the fact that a new album of original music is finally on the horizon without any contractual pressures makes me very optimistic that this fabled "new album" is not a contrived one, not full of compromises, but something that truly represents whereever their artistic route and creative ways have led them.

Something they really, really want to say.

I read in a newspaper, that in Keith's book or in an interview around 2005, Keith says that BTB is an album too underrated by the fans.
I never got the impression Keith didn't approve of albums from SW onwards.

Don’t understand all the hate for Streets of Love.
I love it and the crowds seeing it live seemed to as well

I’m inclined to agree, but I haven’t played it since ABB tour. That says something.

You haven't played it since the ABB tour?

Quote
Deathgod
Don’t understand all the hate for Streets of Love.
I love it and the crowds seeing it live seemed to as well

I must admit, it’s awful bad and the cliché lyrics are awful sad.
And I ah ah ay think it su su sucks that Mick wrote such a lazy song.
He walks the Streets of Love where a thousand songs have the same damn name.
Give him one more chance not to be as lame.

Quote
VoodooLounge13

Quote
liddas

Quote
Doxa

It is pretty hard to understand what Keith is actually trying to say there, other that he is bashing Mick there (a constant theme of the book). To me it doesn't sound it is anything about sonical matters at all: only that Mick - and only him - is so vain that he just wants to work in a fancy 'real' studio an sich, despite it not, as Keith seem to maintain, mattering to the final result at all.


- Doxa

I think that all Keith had in mine was he didn't want another Bridges to Babylon production. Probably he was afraid that "Hand" could receive the "Juice" treatment or that the tracks in general could be over polished (compare the sound of the recent Babylon outtakes to the official release).

C

Annnnnnd yet it’s B2B for which many of us here are hoping. The last Stones classic album. It’s the last album that has held up well over time.

Yes, I still listen to B2B. BB is not on my playlist. Whp knows if there will be any new album. I gave up waiting and enjoy, what we have. Including the memories of the tour last year.

My opinion is that in terms of "art" or "relevance" to the contemporary music scene any trickling expectation on the new album is absurd
A new Stones album in 2023 is relevant to a relatively small bunch of fans - and that doesn't need any explanation here - and as a commercial product.
The latter we know because of Blue & Lonesome and the number of "copies" it surprisingly sold. To me that means that there is a lot of people of a certain age that are happy to spend their money - for themselves or for a gift or both - on a new product by a "legend" act, and this legend act in particular, given it is at least average or "return to the form" quality, if the product is good the lot may even turn into a majority and that imo was the case of B&L.
No way Mick and Keith will come out with something groundbreaking at this stage of the game, something that can be put "up there", and this trickling waiting, which is wearying, makes sense only in terms of product placement (in relation to the possible tour, timing for the market seasons) and has nothing to do with the refinement of a masterwork. Rumors on VIP guests playing on it serve the cause of creating that kind of hype.
In this regard it makes me more curious Dua Lipa contribution if there is, than Macca's.
It is going to be a good album I believe, maybe even a very good one (I am thinking of CH here), it will surely give the press something to talk about for a while, and give many people the perfect present for an old time friend.
nothing challenging.
Ready to be happy to be magically proved wrong

I want a new positive rumor.

I still love lots of stuff on A Bigger Bang. It’s bloated yes, and very hot and miss. A track like ONNYA - It really rocks! It’s a shame then that the lyrics for it are so abysmal. Then look at a song like Dangerous Beauty, which I think has great lyrics. And it rocks too….

It’s just overall it has that bloated feel, much more so than any of the previous three albums. You could cut it down to 10 songs to make it much better. That is indeed true for every album since SW.

JumpingKentFlash

Quote
JumpingKentFlash
I still love lots of stuff on A Bigger Bang. It’s bloated yes, and very hot and miss. A track like ONNYA - It really rocks! It’s a shame then that the lyrics for it are so abysmal. Then look at a song like Dangerous Beauty, which I think has great lyrics. And it rocks too….

It’s just overall it has that bloated feel, much more so than any of the previous three albums. You could cut it down to 10 songs to make it much better. That is indeed true for every album since SW.

I agree, in principal. But nowadays, given the paucity of any new Rolling Stones material, I’ll happily take a bloated record. Give me everything they’ve recorded. Let me edit it down to what I like. As YOU would all do. I don’t like everything you all like, same as you don’t like all I like. I LOVE Streets of Love. ADORE It Won’t Take Long. Hate Look What the cat Dragged in. Don’t much care for Driving too Fast. LOVE… Sweet Neo Con. Yet that is universally reviled. But, bloated or not, I’m GLAD I have all this music. So, give me everything you’ve recorded lads, and let me choose MY best. Is not going to be anyone else’s!

Rod

Quote
Bjorn
I want a new positive rumor.

Yes that would be nice.
All the excitement over the Macca-Stones collaboration has now subsided, along with the news of a new producer, the various other rumoured guests (Stevie Wonder?), Charlie being included, etc.
It's all become old news now, and seems the wind has been sucked out of the sails since the tour announcement was postponed back in February. Time for some new rumours!

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

WHAT excitement ?????????



ROCKMAN

Maybe not new info but i think this article wasn't shared before:

Latest update from Roger Friedman, who previously shared the Sanctuary Studios info:

Reality Check: Rolling Stones Album Does Have Paul, No Ringo, And Is In the Finishing Stages (Exclusive)

(February 22, 2023)

Yesterday’s bombshell that the surviving Beatles and Rolling Stones would all be on the same album caused a near riot in classic rock circles.

But the real story, from what I’m told, is a little less feverish. My source, who is right in the middle of this, says the following: “Paul came in and played bass on one track. I have no idea if Ringo is doing anything. His name hasn’t come up at all.”

This makes sense. It’s unlikely Ringo will come in play drums on a Stones track. It would be a little disrespectful to the memory of Charlie Watts. And Ringo is all about peace and love.

McCartney doesn’t sing on the track. And the final tracks haven’t been finalized, says my source. But the good news is, the album is in the finishing stages. The band is out of the studio, recording is done. So we could see a new Stones album mid summer. And that would be exciting.

As for a tour: “not now,” says a source. “At this point it may be too late for summer, given what’s available.” But they added: “The band is always up for a tour. They could decide at the last minute.”

[www.showbiz411.com]