Quote
IanBillen
Don't pick on Hairball... he's a good kat. Anyone who has a problem with Hairball has a problem with me .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

I like Hairball a lot. I never even tease him. I tease you mercilessly, Ian. And you drive me mad some of the time, but the place wouldn't be the same without you and your devotion is sincere.

Quote
maumau
ok, don't think charts equals to quality so I dont know the billboard positions of those that comes to my mind.

of course it is a matter of personal taste but, trying to keep some objectivity, I do thinks these album are better than the stones'(and I still listen them a lot)

in 1994: Jeff Buckley's Grace, Pavement's Crooked Rain Crooked Rain (my fav of them, their most "stonesy" album), Portishead's Dummy, Beck's Mellow Gold, Pearl Jam's Vitalogy, Liz Phair's Whip Smart, (some say but i dont: Oasis' Definitely Maybe)

in 1997: Blur's Self titled, Chemical Bros' Dig your own jole, Bjork's Homogenic, Pavement's Brighten the corners, Elliott Smith's Either Or, Sleater Kinney's Dig me out and (some say) Radiohead's Ok Computer

in 2005: Sufjan Steven' Illinoise, Anthony & The Johnsons' I am a bird now, Sleater Kinney's The Woods, White Stripes' Get Behind me satan, maybe even Springsteen's Devil'and dust

Hard to try and be objective when giving an opinion on what one might prefer over the other, but IMO these are all better than what the Stones delivered in those particular years.

1994:
Blur- Parklife
Neil Young and Crazy Horse - Sleeps with Angels
Soundgarden - Superunknown
Oasis - Definitely Maybe
Johnny Cash - American Recordings


1997:
Bob Dylan - Time Out of Mind
Supergrass - In it For the Money
The Charlatans - Tellin' Stories
Spiritualized - Ladies and Gentlemen We Are Floating in Space
Blur - self-titled


2005:
Neil Young - Prairie Wind

I guess is was a bad year for music in general as not much else springs to mind.

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

Quote
rev20
maumau, i think its very cool how much music you like and listen to.
i only know to some extent about a third of what you've listed and none
of it has stuck with me, mostly because the artists have not stuck with me.
i tend to be artist-oriented and attracted to those making both great
music and impacting the culture overall, setting positive trends and
having compelling personalities

except for single tracks, not albums, which can come out of anywhere for me,
from any era or genre, and be totally obscure.

i'm just guessing of course, but i'll bet if i was at your place and you
were playing your favorite cuts for me from any of those albums, that i could
appreciate them and hear what you hear and probably some of them would become
favorite cuts for me too

but i'm pretty sure you are an unusual hardcore Stones fan in having such
active and broad appetites in music, and to not need and perhaps not even enjoy
all the hype and drama that comes with big-name artists like the Stones

dont know if I am so unusual, I'd love to play some of my fav tracks to you and you to bring yours. These days I was spinning my fav Pavements records (thats why I was caught by your challenge at 4 in the morning ) and I was again realizing how much is the Stonesy feeling that pilot me in my musical taste, and it can be a very broad feel. Sleater Kinney's attitude more than sound is an example. of course it is a very personal response. for example I did not like nor listen to Oasis at all, while I loved Blur, even if in the nineties, the media bullshitting comparison was Blur/Beatles Oasis/Stones... naaaa
Beck's mix of rootsy folkblues and dancebeats in Mellow Gold is for me the closest thing to an "early Stones" reincarnation

Hairball has quoted some gorgeous that skipped my mind dont know how: Cash... o my..



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 06:18 by maumau.

Hairball, thanks. I know more of the stuff on your list, and am definitely
surprised that you and maumau still like that many more albums than what the
Stones did

I mean, I have certainly gotten more than a little enjoyment out of White Stripes
and Pearl Jam and Johnny Cash and Bob Dylan and Liz Phair and Beck and neil Young
and oasis and soundgarden and even Chemical Bros and Bjork over the years,
but this cut or that cut only, versus me loving or liking very much about 80%
of what's on the Stones albums in question

happy for both of you being soaked in so much musical pleasure



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 06:27 by rev20.

I listed just records that as a whole I like better

I do like a lot of Voodoo Lounge and still listen to most of it, but not all. Same thing for B2B and ABB, I love some bits of them but also find their weakness (to my ears, ca va sans dir)

Same here - listed albums that I think are better as a whole and/or that I liked better at the time of their release, and can still listen to them from start to finish (although I rarely listen to the Oasis album any more - maybe once every other year ha). As for those Stones albums, there's one or two (maybe three) tracks I like on each, yet I never listen to the albums from start to finish anymore.

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

I just realized something, and I hope its okay to mention it. The music
put forward by maumau and Hairball is generally "too white" for me.
Since I first started paying attention to music, before there was a
Rolling Stones, 80% of the music I have loved has been by black people.

my only first-tier love is the stones, and my second tier is made up of
only james brown, bob marley, and rihanna. i put barry white and sade and
al green and toots hibbert and janet jackson above bob dylan, not in terms
of historical importance of course, but just in terms of listening pleasure.
in the past 30 years i've probably even listened to snoop dogg more than i
have dylan, despite how truly crappy snoop can be at times. but when he
nails it, he nails it. in the past ten years, chris brown and lil wayne...

black music, I think its safe to say, has always been more oriented
towards singles than albums. So I just think and feel that way, as if
I'm perpetually listening to an imaginary modern version of late-night
1960's WMCA 570am New York

even lately, when i've gone thru a roots country phase, its still based
on cuts, not albums. I think i would hang myself if i had to listen to an
entire Hank Snow album, but put on "I don't hurt anymore" and I'm in heaven...



Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 08:35 by rev20.

ha! you pinched me with that "too white" maybe my best records of the nineties are white but the whole picture is that I live deep on black music. maybe not contemporary I admit. anyway last birthday my friends present was a copy of foxy brown ost

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Doxa

---


They probably are rather awere that the 'magic' is no longer there, no matter what they do - or how they do it.

I don't think none of these albums are some half-assed efforts, like them intentionally releasing second-rate material.

While I largely agree with your thoughts, I'd like to add to the whole picture the fact that in the first half of the 90's, both Mick and Keith released solo albums that included song material that would have graced Voodoo Lounge and, a bit later, Bridges. Think of Hate It When You Leave, Wandering Spirit, Don't Tear Me Up, Evening Gown, Out Of Focus - stuff like this would have helped to propel either VL and/or Bridges out of the realms of mediocrity, and things like New Faces sounding like Angel In My Heart's little sister or Suck On The Jugular's backing track being almost identital to a certain remix of Sweet Thing on a Jagger solo single only added to my impression that the 90's Stones albums did not suffer from a lack of suitable material, but from keeping their best songs for their solo albums.

A couple of years later, the well obviously went a bit dry. But even ABB could have been saved to a certain extent with the inclusion of Under The Radar, Jagger's "Blue" (why this is hidden as a b-side track of a Jagger solo single is beyond me), Old Habits Die Hard instead of Streets Of Love, a better, warmer/less harsh production and the exclusion of some just forgettable material, and in case they would have wanted to keep the album's lenght as it was, filling the gap with a cover or two, I'll Go Crazy or whatever. They had great covers on their albums in the 60's and 70's, why can't they do it now if they're in need of one or two songs to round up an album? I mean, even in the 90's Jagger covering Bill Wither's Use Me did his Wandering Spirit album no harm (in fact I liked it a lot!).

To sum it up, we could have had (probably even considerably) better albums in VL, Bridges and ABB. The material was there.

What's happening now with the new album is a different thing altogether. Could be that they simply lost their focus and the album never appears. Could also very well be that behind the scenes, they're cooking something great.

Like you, I love to believe in miracles...

Very good points, thanks! I left the effect or significance of their solo doings out - partly just to cut at least a bit of my already way too long getting post - but my idea in talking about 'magic' was that of it happening as a result from the colloboration of Mick and Keith. They might give different signals in their interviews (at least Keith), but I am rather sure that they both are rather awere that neither of them is as any longer such an inspiring partner to write or work with as they once were. By contrast, since 'growing up apart' in musical taste and especially with their working habits and methods, The Stones stuff they do together tend to sound somehow forced and compromise-full. "Stones-by-numbers" is the common description. It sounds like that neither is willing to take too much riskies or try to follow their intuitions and ambitions 100% through in order not to offend the other too much. Then we have Mick seperating his songs for those which probably work with the Stones (to cheerleader the live audience a'la "Don't Stop") from more ambitious ones, and Keith thinking the same when picking up a thing like "One More Shot" for a Stones release - both taking consciously or non-consciously a strong 'Stones-by-numbers' route. Or then they harshly ignore the other if the other pushes something too hard. It could be the latter option happening now in regards to this new album: Mick refuses to 'waste' his time with Keith in a studio to work out his riff ideas into proper songs and Keith refuses to work on Jagger's demos. If they don't come up with any new 'compromise' or even 'synthesis' to work out their differences, it seems to look like that we are heavily moving toward BRIDGES TO BABYLON territory.

I agree with you that the Stones albums, especially VOODOO LOUNGE, suffer from some songs being 'wasted' in their solo projects. But at the same I think some of those songs - if not all - actually are better because they are not there making compromises with each other, but just wholeheartily following their own intuition and working with some people they don't need to fight all the time. I would go so far that I think all of their solo albums - even GODDESS and MAIN OFFENDER - as artistic expressions and statements are actually stronger or at least more interesting than the Stones albums they've been making during the same time frame (let's forget BLUE & LONESOME here). They probably are not so 'easy-listening' for trained Stones-fan ears, but they are not 'Stones-by-numbers' either. And probably for that reason I tend to think that BRIDGES TO BABYLON actually is their best album from the modern era (if we forget BLUE & LONESOME once again). Most of the songs were initially crafted for a solo project. So if the new album follows that route, it might not be such a bad scenario...

- Doxa

Quote
maumau
ha! you pinched me with that "too white" maybe my best records of the nineties are white but the whole picture is that I live deep on black music. maybe not contemporary I admit. anyway last birthday my friends present was a copy of foxy brown ost

i'm so relieved you took no offense at what i wrote, because it was definitely
not meant as any kind of judgement, just my awkward attempt to understand
why i'm not as turned on by some things that i know objectively are good but
that subjectively don't suck me in,

so yeah the black thing is part of it but probably the single cut versus
album thing is a bigger part. and also although i'm obviously a thinker,
its like that part of my brain doesnt work when it comes to music, and i'm
just reacting emotionally like a kid

so i've got no intellectual justification why i lived and breathed, and
got high from listening to, for example, A Bigger Bang for 18 straight
months after it was released (skipping maybe 5 cuts). And though i only listen
sometimes to various individual tracks now, those 18 months were a great
love affair for me and that's why I rank the album so highly. Doesnt compare
to Exile of course with which i had a 7 year love affair. and even
though now i also just listen to occasional individual Exile cuts, i still
rank it as my favorite album ever

i just always have things that are overwhelming my favorites, until theyre not
and get replaced in my heart with something else. and for a good part of my life
the most recent stones album has been one of those favorite things. (the
Rolling Stones themselves, as both individuals and as a cultural institution
have been another of those favorite things almost always). From
Beggars onward the only stones album i never had a love affair with
was Steel Wheels (but i did grow to like it quite a bit). Yes I even
had extended love affairs with Undercover and Dirty Work



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 16:16 by rev20.

yes I understand completely the emotional feeling about the stones. getting more specific Steel Wheels is really the low point to me too and, I think for a very specific reason, the ephemeral eighties sound production. the writing is discontinuous as in all the late efforts but also good and sometimes great, slipping away, almost hear you sigh, continental drift. but I really dont spin that record anymore. different story with undercover, strong album, not a classic but very good. dirty work has a bad fame but it is raw, and it is a limit but one that I deal with better than "overdone and over produced". steve lillywhite middle eighties rock sound sounds appropriate. it works for me. love many cuts from it and I can spin it as a whole ignoring its flaws.
long live the stones

Quote
maumau
yes I understand completely the emotional feeling about the stones. getting more specific Steel Wheels is really the low point to me too and, I think for a very specific reason, the ephemeral eighties sound production. the writing is discontinuous as in all the late efforts but also good and sometimes great, slipping away, almost hear you sigh, continental drift. but I really dont spin that record anymore. different story with undercover, strong album, not a classic but very good. dirty work has a bad fame but it is raw, and it is a limit but one that I deal with better than "overdone and over produced". steve lillywhite middle eighties rock sound sounds appropriate. it works for me. love many cuts from it and I can spin it as a whole ignoring its flaws.
long live the stones

Imo the low point is A Bigger Bang.
Uninspired album full of fillers.

For me the low point is Bridges To Babylon. I think it is even worse than Black And Blue. That album sounded like a viable band with a proper sound playing quite well even if they had absolutely nothing to say.
From what I read here some see Bridges as two solo albums combined, and that seems to be the exact problem with it. At the time Richards stated that he and Mick had decided to go their separate ways recording, as otherwise it would have never gotten finished. I think Wandering Spirit is the only solo album that is up to par with the Stones, and easily so. For the rest: the whole is more than the sum of its parts, concerning Jagger and Richards (and not only them, who would like Macca better than the Beatles, the Davies bros better than the Kinks, DL Roth better than Van Halen?)

Quote
KRiffhard

Quote
maumau
yes I understand completely the emotional feeling about the stones. getting more specific Steel Wheels is really the low point to me too and, I think for a very specific reason, the ephemeral eighties sound production. the writing is discontinuous as in all the late efforts but also good and sometimes great, slipping away, almost hear you sigh, continental drift. but I really dont spin that record anymore. different story with undercover, strong album, not a classic but very good. dirty work has a bad fame but it is raw, and it is a limit but one that I deal with better than "overdone and over produced". steve lillywhite middle eighties rock sound sounds appropriate. it works for me. love many cuts from it and I can spin it as a whole ignoring its flaws.
long live the stones

Imo the low point is A Bigger Bang.
Uninspired album full of fillers.

I agree with you. Bigger Bang, the word 'rushed' comes to mind. It is too long, no band involvement at all, and it shows. Jagger often says that the way he writes lyrics nowadays is after breakfast, he has his method, which sounds very pragmatic - ABB to me sounds like it was written in maybe 2-3 of those after breakfast sit-downs; maybe while stretching for the morning jog.
Of the late era albums I think Bridges 2 Babylon is by far the best. Matter of fact I rank it pretty high overall. Jagger sounds committed on the record. We know that it was all over the place as far as producers, bassists and guitarists, Jagger vs Keith go - but the Stones thrive on adversity. The result is a strong album. It didn't hurt in the least that they took this album on the road, and played the sh*t out of it.
Black & Blue is another great 70's album; a little short.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
maumau
ok, don't think charts equals to quality so I dont know the billboard positions of those that comes to my mind.

of course it is a matter of personal taste but, trying to keep some objectivity, I do thinks these album are better than the stones'(and I still listen them a lot)

in 1994: Jeff Buckley's Grace, Pavement's Crooked Rain Crooked Rain (my fav of them, their most "stonesy" album), Portishead's Dummy, Beck's Mellow Gold, Pearl Jam's Vitalogy, Liz Phair's Whip Smart, (some say but i dont: Oasis' Definitely Maybe)

in 1997: Blur's Self titled, Chemical Bros' Dig your own jole, Bjork's Homogenic, Pavement's Brighten the corners, Elliott Smith's Either Or, Sleater Kinney's Dig me out and (some say) Radiohead's Ok Computer

in 2005: Sufjan Steven' Illinoise, Anthony & The Johnsons' I am a bird now, Sleater Kinney's The Woods, White Stripes' Get Behind me satan, maybe even Springsteen's Devil'and dust

Hard to try and be objective when giving an opinion on what one might prefer over the other, but IMO these are all better than what the Stones delivered in those particular years.

1994:
Blur- Parklife
Neil Young and Crazy Horse - Sleeps with Angels
Soundgarden - Superunknown
Oasis - Definitely Maybe
Johnny Cash - American Recordings


1997:
Bob Dylan - Time Out of Mind
Supergrass - In it For the Money
The Charlatans - Tellin' Stories
Spiritualized - Ladies and Gentlemen We Are Floating in Space
Blur - self-titled


2005:
Neil Young - Prairie Wind

I guess is was a bad year for music in general as not much else springs to mind.

Wow Hairball, you make a good point re. 2005. That really was a lousy year. And I can tell by your lists that you and I have similar taste. Maybe "Howl" by BRMC, "Cold Roses" by Ryan Adams, "Some Cities" by the Doves. "The Secret Migration" by Mercury Rev and "Broken Social Scene". I would bet that you like all those titles.

Quote
rev20
I just realized something, and I hope its okay to mention it. The music
put forward by maumau and Hairball is generally "too white" for me.
Since I first started paying attention to music, before there was a
Rolling Stones, 80% of the music I have loved has been by black people.

my only first-tier love is the stones, and my second tier is made up of
only james brown, bob marley, and rihanna. i put barry white and sade and
al green and toots hibbert and janet jackson above bob dylan, not in terms
of historical importance of course, but just in terms of listening pleasure.
in the past 30 years i've probably even listened to snoop dogg more than i
have dylan, despite how truly crappy snoop can be at times. but when he
nails it, he nails it. in the past ten years, chris brown and lil wayne...

black music, I think its safe to say, has always been more oriented
towards singles than albums. So I just think and feel that way, as if
I'm perpetually listening to an imaginary modern version of late-night
1960's WMCA 570am New York

even lately, when i've gone thru a roots country phase, its still based
on cuts, not albums. I think i would hang myself if i had to listen to an
entire Hank Snow album, but put on "I don't hurt anymore" and I'm in heaven...

Interesting Rev as I like most of the artists you mention.
The first album I bought with my own money was the Jackson Five Greatest Hits when I was 7 in 1971. I have a massive collection of reggae I've compiled since the late '70's. I just listened to a James Brown two cd comp cd the other day. I'd probably be more satisfied seeing Toots and the Maytalls live again over the Stones. I'm going to see George Clinton & Parliament Funkadelic in a few weeks (last time I saw them was at the Paradiso in Amsterdam about 10 years ago). I saw Burning Spear, Culture, and Jimmy Cliff at the same venue - all separate dates. I was nearly in tears when I saw Smokey Robinson live. Same with Stevie Wonder (I've seen him several times). I was in tears when I saw Aretha Franklin. I liked Snoop Dog with Dr. Dre (Nuthin' But A G Thang) as well as some of his other stuff- "bow wow wow yippie yo yippie yay" lol. The Geto Boys' My Mind's Playing Tricks on Me is great , and perhaps my favorite rap tune. Ice T's You Played Yourself is another great one. George McCrae's Rock Your Baby is a masterpiece. Jungle Boogie by Kool and the Gang is also a masterpiece . Yes I like black music too, and could go on and on and on, but then again I like a very wide spectrum of music that knows no boundaries. (*I'm currently in the thick of seeing Neil Young five times in one week).

But what does all this have to do with Voodoo Lounge, Bridges, and ABB? Or the supposed new album?
And I was going to ask how does your preference of singles over full albums correlate with your admiration for those three albums, but see that you answered in your next post:

"so i've got no intellectual justification why i lived and breathed, and
got high from listening to, for example, A Bigger Bang for 18 straight
months after it was released (skipping maybe 5 cuts)".

PS - You put Janet Jackson above Bob Dylan?!!
lol don't mean to laugh, but I do find that statement funny!

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 19:19 by Hairball.

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Wow Hairball, you make a good point re. 2005. That really was a lousy year. And I can tell by your lists that you and I have similar taste. Maybe "Howl" by BRMC, "Cold Roses" by Ryan Adams, "Some Cities" by the Doves. "The Secret Migration" by Mercury Rev and "Broken Social Scene". I would bet that you like all those titles.

Yes all nice choices, although I'm not very familiar with Mercury Rev (listening to the tune Funny Bird right now on youtube and I like it!).
I really like the Doves first two albums, but after that they sort of fell off my radar.
I saw BRMC open for Spiritualized in a tiny theater in 2001 I think it was, and they were SO loud! I saw them again opening for someone else, and again LOUD!
Ryan Adams is OK and saw him open for the Stones, but never really became a dedicated fan for some reason.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-05 19:37 by Hairball.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Doxa

---


They probably are rather awere that the 'magic' is no longer there, no matter what they do - or how they do it.

I don't think none of these albums are some half-assed efforts, like them intentionally releasing second-rate material.

While I largely agree with your thoughts, I'd like to add to the whole picture the fact that in the first half of the 90's, both Mick and Keith released solo albums that included song material that would have graced Voodoo Lounge and, a bit later, Bridges. Think of Hate It When You Leave, Wandering Spirit, Don't Tear Me Up, Evening Gown, Out Of Focus - stuff like this would have helped to propel either VL and/or Bridges out of the realms of mediocrity, and things like New Faces sounding like Angel In My Heart's little sister or Suck On The Jugular's backing track being almost identital to a certain remix of Sweet Thing on a Jagger solo single only added to my impression that the 90's Stones albums did not suffer from a lack of suitable material, but from keeping their best songs for their solo albums.

A couple of years later, the well obviously went a bit dry. But even ABB could have been saved to a certain extent with the inclusion of Under The Radar, Jagger's "Blue" (why this is hidden as a b-side track of a Jagger solo single is beyond me), Old Habits Die Hard instead of Streets Of Love, a better, warmer/less harsh production and the exclusion of some just forgettable material, and in case they would have wanted to keep the album's lenght as it was, filling the gap with a cover or two, I'll Go Crazy or whatever. They had great covers on their albums in the 60's and 70's, why can't they do it now if they're in need of one or two songs to round up an album? I mean, even in the 90's Jagger covering Bill Wither's Use Me did his Wandering Spirit album no harm (in fact I liked it a lot!).

To sum it up, we could have had (probably even considerably) better albums in VL, Bridges and ABB. The material was there.

What's happening now with the new album is a different thing altogether. Could be that they simply lost their focus and the album never appears. Could also very well be that behind the scenes, they're cooking something great.

Like you, I love to believe in miracles...

Very good points, thanks! I left the effect or significance of their solo doings out - partly just to cut at least a bit of my already way too long getting post - but my idea in talking about 'magic' was that of it happening as a result from the colloboration of Mick and Keith. They might give different signals in their interviews (at least Keith), but I am rather sure that they both are rather awere that neither of them is as any longer such an inspiring partner to write or work with as they once were. By contrast, since 'growing up apart' in musical taste and especially with their working habits and methods, The Stones stuff they do together tend to sound somehow forced and compromise-full. "Stones-by-numbers" is the common description. It sounds like that neither is willing to take too much riskies or try to follow their intuitions and ambitions 100% through in order not to offend the other too much. Then we have Mick seperating his songs for those which probably work with the Stones (to cheerleader the live audience a'la "Don't Stop") from more ambitious ones, and Keith thinking the same when picking up a thing like "One More Shot" for a Stones release - both taking consciously or non-consciously a strong 'Stones-by-numbers' route. Or then they harshly ignore the other if the other pushes something too hard. It could be the latter option happening now in regards to this new album: Mick refuses to 'waste' his time with Keith in a studio to work out his riff ideas into proper songs and Keith refuses to work on Jagger's demos. If they don't come up with any new 'compromise' or even 'synthesis' to work out their differences, it seems to look like that we are heavily moving toward BRIDGES TO BABYLON territory.

I agree with you that the Stones albums, especially VOODOO LOUNGE, suffer from some songs being 'wasted' in their solo projects. But at the same I think some of those songs - if not all - actually are better because they are not there making compromises with each other, but just wholeheartily following their own intuition and working with some people they don't need to fight all the time. I would go so far that I think all of their solo albums - even GODDESS and MAIN OFFENDER - as artistic expressions and statements are actually stronger or at least more interesting than the Stones albums they've been making during the same time frame (let's forget BLUE & LONESOME here). They probably are not so 'easy-listening' for trained Stones-fan ears, but they are not 'Stones-by-numbers' either. And probably for that reason I tend to think that BRIDGES TO BABYLON actually is their best album from the modern era (if we forget BLUE & LONESOME once again). Most of the songs were initially crafted for a solo project. So if the new album follows that route, it might not be such a bad scenario...

- Doxa

You're not the only one!

Strange - with the modern era Stones albums, it seems to be a case of "divided we're strong, together we fall (fail)" when one would think it should be the other way round...

Quote
I tend to think that BRIDGES TO BABYLON actually is their best album from the modern era

I agree.

Anybody Seen My Baby, Lowdown, Flip the Switch, Gunface, Thief in the Night and a few others.

Very solid LP.

Quote
beachbreak

Quote
I tend to think that BRIDGES TO BABYLON actually is their best album from the modern era

I agree.

Anybody Seen My Baby, Lowdown, Flip the Switch, Gunface, Thief in the Night and a few others.

Very solid LP.

I really like it, so can relate to your thoughts, but for me Voodoo Lounge is try favorite of the "modern times" albums ..

Quote
Rocky Dijon

Quote
IanBillen
Don't pick on Hairball... he's a good kat. Anyone who has a problem with Hairball has a problem with me .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

I like Hairball a lot. I never even tease him. I tease you mercilessly, Ian. And you drive me mad some of the time, but the place wouldn't be the same without you and your devotion is sincere.

________________________________________


I kno ..ha and Thank you (..er... I mean ..I 'think' thank you? ..bahaha)


I like teasing a bit too .. We all know what gets under each others skin. However I am having this bad realization .. It just maybe another friggin year (or MORE) until we get another Stones album ..


I mean ... I know they won't announce anything during their UK tour so what are they gonna do? .. Announce in August That they are coming out with an album in a few months? I can't see that happening? Time line is fading fast ..

Quote
Hairball

PS - You put Janet Jackson above Bob Dylan?!!
lol don't mean to laugh, but I do find that statement funny!

as i said, not in terms of historical importance, just in terms of my
current listening pleasure.

and not that i don't think she's important. as the only jackson with
balls. her stuff with jimmy jam and terry lewis was extremely influential
and never gets old for me.

(and the only thing this has to do with the new stones album is this overall
discussion of what might it take to satisfy ALL the people who really
care? and the answer is, you can't do it, so just do what you want, including
perhaps stockpiling tracks for release not until after the demise of the band,
when people will go all bowie/prince crazy for it (and do you really think
the record company would be opposed to that strategy?)

(i confess: i am one of the ones who tend to believe that bowie timed
his euthanasia with his record release. if that's not a great bowie move,
i don't know what is)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-06 06:41 by rev20.

Quote
Ian Billen
However I am having this bad realization .. It just maybe another friggin year (or MORE) until we get another Stones album ..

Welcome to reality Ian.
From hopeful, to saddened, to angry, to disgruntled, to pissed off, to denial, to disillusioned, and finally acceptance...the eight phases I've gone through in dealing with this mess of a supposed new album lol.
Another album of blues covers doesn't sound so bad at this point now, does it?

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

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
Hairball

Quote
maumau
ok, don't think charts equals to quality so I dont know the billboard positions of those that comes to my mind.

of course it is a matter of personal taste but, trying to keep some objectivity, I do thinks these album are better than the stones'(and I still listen them a lot)

in 1994: Jeff Buckley's Grace, Pavement's Crooked Rain Crooked Rain (my fav of them, their most "stonesy" album), Portishead's Dummy, Beck's Mellow Gold, Pearl Jam's Vitalogy, Liz Phair's Whip Smart, (some say but i dont: Oasis' Definitely Maybe)

in 1997: Blur's Self titled, Chemical Bros' Dig your own jole, Bjork's Homogenic, Pavement's Brighten the corners, Elliott Smith's Either Or, Sleater Kinney's Dig me out and (some say) Radiohead's Ok Computer

in 2005: Sufjan Steven' Illinoise, Anthony & The Johnsons' I am a bird now, Sleater Kinney's The Woods, White Stripes' Get Behind me satan, maybe even Springsteen's Devil'and dust

Hard to try and be objective when giving an opinion on what one might prefer over the other, but IMO these are all better than what the Stones delivered in those particular years.

1994:
Blur- Parklife
Neil Young and Crazy Horse - Sleeps with Angels
Soundgarden - Superunknown
Oasis - Definitely Maybe
Johnny Cash - American Recordings


1997:
Bob Dylan - Time Out of Mind
Supergrass - In it For the Money
The Charlatans - Tellin' Stories
Spiritualized - Ladies and Gentlemen We Are Floating in Space
Blur - self-titled


2005:
Neil Young - Prairie Wind

I guess is was a bad year for music in general as not much else springs to mind.

Wow Hairball, you make a good point re. 2005. That really was a lousy year. And I can tell by your lists that you and I have similar taste. Maybe "Howl" by BRMC, "Cold Roses" by Ryan Adams, "Some Cities" by the Doves. "The Secret Migration" by Mercury Rev and "Broken Social Scene". I would bet that you like all those titles.

Strange perhaps, but I am one, who does not at all rank Stones releases with issues from other bands. Somehow, that is quite beyond me.

However, what I really wanted to express by posting, is that 2005 (I have to admit, my knowledge of music from the latest, say, 25 years is even more scarce, and I also had to look it up) offered at least one album, that I do like: "Waiting for the Sirens' Call" by New Order.

[I don't know the later releases after their first two albums, but, as an OT remark, I take a delight in Mercury Rev's first "Yerself Is Steam". Spiritualized's "Ladies And Gentlemen, We Are Floating in Space" is among albums I listen to at the moment, and I got a favourable first impression, I have as yet only listened to it once.]

My main problem with ABB is its sound, its production. The songs themselves are not that bad. OK, possibly a few songs could have been left out. But the album definitely doesn't sound like a bunch of 60-plus year olds giving it another go to cash in a bit for their pension. Definitely not a tired album by some old farts!

Comparing latter-day Stones albums to other albums from the same respective year is a bit of a two-edged sword. One could always say the albums by the other folks weren't any better either, but what counts for my listening pleasure is not how an album compares to other contemporary albums but how I like it in absolute terms, irrespective of the rest.

BTW, the first time I remember that journalists did the comparison thing was Goats Head Soup back in 1973. GHS was evidently not another Sticky Fingers or Exile but some writers didn't want to say it's mediocre only, so they picked out some other albums to compare and found they weren't better than GHS. (I think it was Sounds.) Myself, when GHS came out I didn't like it at all. Meanwhile I kind of half-like it.

Maybe one shouldn't over-emphasize the (lack of a) group approach. Exile apparently was not exactly a group effort either. To judge from the various reports, it was hardly ever the case that all Stones were present at the sessions. Compared to the present situation, one difference certainly is that back then, at least Keith appears to have worked on it more or less constantly, and that in the long run also the other Stones (and possibly also some Non-Stones) did contribute their bits. Despite (or because of?) the not-so-straightforward-either recording situation with Exile, in the end things appear to have been loose enough to leave some room for the others. And here's where it seems to me that there is a major difference: things do not appear so loose any longer nowadays that other Stones (or others in general) might drop in and contribute something in a meaningful way. There's either only Mick and Keith without anyone else, it seems, or Mick and Keith with their respective side-kicks without anyone else. We will certainly not get a recording situation comparable to Exile again with a bunch of guys in their mid-70s anyway,but maybe the problem is not only the fractured session situation but also that at the same time things are rather strict.

Interview here with Charlie and Ronnie. Towards the last portion, they discuss all the sessions for the new album all around the time of recording B&L. Charlie claims he doesn’t know where it is now.

Clash Magazine interview

Old news Homer from February which resulted in several pages of debating and deciphering the meaning of Charlie's words, but thanks for reviving the thread.
Charlie doesn't have a clue about the supposed new album and neither does Ronnie, and now it's probably the last thing on their mind whilst in the thick of touring.
Hopefully Mick and Keith will get back to it after the tour is over, and after they take a break, and after they have some family time, vacations, etc., etc., etc.
But then there's been talk of a return to the US for some shows which could result in further delays.........

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

Yeah, seems like the new album is slowly transforming into a future collector's item?

Quote
doitywoik
Yeah, seems like the new album is slowly transforming into a future collector's item?

Hi doitywoik - long time no see. Seems the new album is literally gathering moss.

All we need now is IanBillen to chime in.

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

Quote
Hairball

Quote
doitywoik
Yeah, seems like the new album is slowly transforming into a future collector's item?

Hi doitywoik - long time no see. Seems the new album is literally gathering moss.

All we need now is IanBillen to chime in.

_______________________________________


I'm watching every bit of it .. don't you worry about that .. (ha ).


They did at least four actual group sessions .. and Mick and Keith got together a few times to work together on songs one on one.


Charlie also mentioned that Mick & Keith are the ones who have to live with it and it isn't out yet because they are not 100% happy just yet with the final.

They 'def' worked on it ...and quite a bit ..and like .. for quite a time span now Lol geeesh.


I don't think they will revisit the US until an album is ready / to be released.

I cant see them revisiting the US without something new.


It is late May .. Unless they only need another couple of weeks to finish it I cant see it being out this year. Time line seems to not work .. I dont think they will make it back to The States until next year.


They are taking the recording approach to the same way they tour now.. in segments... short bursts .. In stead of spending four months holed up in a studio they do a week or two here and there.