Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm
They are playing great on this tour.

We don't need another album. It would add nothing to their body of work.

Let them finish the tour and get on with whatever they have left of their lives.

It's time everyone moved on. The Stones don't owe anyone anything.

Let's stop living our lives through the Stones and let them enjoy their days as they see fit.

I leave it to themselves to decide, whether they want to make another studio album. It is not up to you, unasked to represent, for instance, my view. They deserve to know that there still are at least some listeners, who have a deep interest in a new studio album, if the band otherwise were to feel the inspiration and inclination to do it.

The Stones are one vital channel through which I live, but very far from the only one. Hopefully they may consider it as a privilege and not a burden to be capable of supplying such channel.

Ooooooooo get you! Well, I don't believe that I was seeking to represent your view. I was simply expressing my own view that we (meaning the world in general, the record buying public, Rolling Stones fans) don't need another Stones album. If a new studio album happens great. If it doesn't? I aint losing no sleep.

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm
They are playing great on this tour.

We don't need another album. It would add nothing to their body of work.

Let them finish the tour and get on with whatever they have left of their lives.

It's time everyone moved on. The Stones don't owe anyone anything.

Let's stop living our lives through the Stones and let them enjoy their days as they see fit.

I leave it to themselves to decide, whether they want to make another studio album. It is not up to you, unasked to represent, for instance, my view. They deserve to know that there still are at least some listeners, who have a deep interest in a new studio album, if the band otherwise were to feel the inspiration and inclination to do it.

The Stones are one vital channel through which I live, but very far from the only one. Hopefully they may consider it as a privilege and not a burden to be capable of supplying such channel.

Ooooooooo get you! Well, I don't believe that I was seeking to represent your view. I was simply expressing my own view that we (meaning the world in general, the record buying public, Rolling Stones fans) don't need another Stones album. If a new studio album happens great. If it doesn't? I aint losing no sleep.

My point of view to you stands in the next sentence in bold. Well, I do not say WE. On the contrary, I am one of the small minority who need a new album by them. So much of a fan, I still am.

It may also result in a certain minor renewal of their setlists. That could contribute to my wanting to see them live again. A further motive.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-29 18:53 by Witness.

Quote
Send It To me
I have a friend who I introduced to the Stones whose favorite record is Bridges to Babylon, and he was disappointed they didn't play any of it when we went to see them in 2015.

I can understand his disappointment. I'm not sure of all the setlists they had that tour except for the one show I attended - the San Diego opener.
The newest song was Doom and Gloom (2012) followed by Keith's Slipping Away (1989). After that, one song from Tattoo You, none from Emotional Rescue, two from Some Girls, none from Black and Blue, one from It's Only Rock 'n Roll, none from Goats Head Soup, three from Exile, four from Sticky Fingers, three from Let it Bleed, three from Beggars, and finally Satisfaction. It is a great setlist nostalgically, and you can see how the strength of it lies on their older albums. That said, I think it's odd that they almost completely ignore everything from the last 37 years (give or take a track or two) as there a few good choices they could and should play for fans of the modern era. As it stands though, pretty much the same old show, and part of the reason some of us don't find it as thrilling as it once was. It's like visiting a museum you've been to numerous times to admire the dinosaur bones - there comes a time where there's really nothing new to be discovered.

As for the supposed new album, if they feel it in their hearts and still have the creative drive, they should finish it. Doesn't really matter if it sucks or not - at least they will have accomplished something. I'm always excited and game to hear a new Stones album or any new material- whether it's a blues covers album, an album of originals, or a couple of new tunes randomly slapped on to a Greatest Hits package.. To say it's been somewhat disappointing the last few decades is an understatement, yet here I am wishfully thinking they still might have something up their sleeves. Call it devotion or call it stupidity (or maybe both), but the Stones have that kind of attraction for some reason.

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

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm
They are playing great on this tour.

We don't need another album. It would add nothing to their body of work.

Let them finish the tour and get on with whatever they have left of their lives.

It's time everyone moved on. The Stones don't owe anyone anything.

Let's stop living our lives through the Stones and let them enjoy their days as they see fit.

I leave it to themselves to decide, whether they want to make another studio album. It is not up to you, unasked to represent, for instance, my view. They deserve to know that there still are at least some listeners, who have a deep interest in a new studio album, if the band otherwise were to feel the inspiration and inclination to do it.

The Stones are one vital channel through which I live, but very far from the only one. Hopefully they may consider it as a privilege and not a burden to be capable of supplying such channel.

Ooooooooo get you! Well, I don't believe that I was seeking to represent your view. I was simply expressing my own view that we (meaning the world in general, the record buying public, Rolling Stones fans) don't need another Stones album. If a new studio album happens great. If it doesn't? I aint losing no sleep.

My point of view to you stands in the next sentence in bold. Well, I do not say WE. On the contrary, I am one of the small minority who need a new album by them. So much of a fan, I still am.

It may also result in a certain minor renewal of their setlists. That could contribute to my wanting to see them live again. A further motive.

You really think a new album would freshen up their set lists? ABB didn’t. People did nothing but complain about the 2 new songs in 2012. If the Stones cared enough about new material they would have done it years ago. They haven’t so ergo they don’t care.

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm
They are playing great on this tour.

We don't need another album. It would add nothing to their body of work.

Let them finish the tour and get on with whatever they have left of their lives.

It's time everyone moved on. The Stones don't owe anyone anything.

Let's stop living our lives through the Stones and let them enjoy their days as they see fit.

I leave it to themselves to decide, whether they want to make another studio album. It is not up to you, unasked to represent, for instance, my view. They deserve to know that there still are at least some listeners, who have a deep interest in a new studio album, if the band otherwise were to feel the inspiration and inclination to do it.

The Stones are one vital channel through which I live, but very far from the only one. Hopefully they may consider it as a privilege and not a burden to be capable of supplying such channel.

Ooooooooo get you! Well, I don't believe that I was seeking to represent your view. I was simply expressing my own view that we (meaning the world in general, the record buying public, Rolling Stones fans) don't need another Stones album. If a new studio album happens great. If it doesn't? I aint losing no sleep.

My point of view to you stands in the next sentence in bold. Well, I do not say WE. On the contrary, I am one of the small minority who need a new album by them. So much of a fan, I still am.

It may also result in a certain minor renewal of their setlists. That could contribute to my wanting to see them live again. A further motive.

You really think a new album would freshen up their set lists? ABB didn’t. People did nothing but complain about the 2 new songs in 2012. If the Stones cared enough about new material they would have done it years ago. They haven’t so ergo they don’t care.

Yes, I see the possibilty that a new album may give rise to for instance three new songs in the setlists. If the album would be good, that the choice of the three songs even may be different from concert to concert. In fact, I have wondered whether the outdrawn prosess for this album may be caused by the band being more critical on this occasion, in order to achieve a decidedly better album than during the later three decades.

Edit: Writing on a phone, I do writing errors.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-29 23:51 by Witness.

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm
They are playing great on this tour.

We don't need another album. It would add nothing to their body of work.

Let them finish the tour and get on with whatever they have left of their lives.

It's time everyone moved on. The Stones don't owe anyone anything.

Let's stop living our lives through the Stones and let them enjoy their days as they see fit.

I leave it to themselves to decide, whether they want to make another studio album. It is not up to you, unasked to represent, for instance, my view. They deserve to know that there still are at least some listeners, who have a deep interest in a new studio album, if the band otherwise were to feel the inspiration and inclination to do it.

The Stones are one vital channel through which I live, but very far from the only one. Hopefully they may consider it as a privilege and not a burden to be capable of supplying such channel.

Ooooooooo get you! Well, I don't believe that I was seeking to represent your view. I was simply expressing my own view that we (meaning the world in general, the record buying public, Rolling Stones fans) don't need another Stones album. If a new studio album happens great. If it doesn't? I aint losing no sleep.

My point of view to you stands in the next sentence in bold. Well, I do not say WE. On the contrary, I am one of the small minority who need a new album by them. So much of a fan, I still am.

It may also result in a certain minor renewal of their setlists. That could contribute to my wanting to see them live again. A further motive.

You really think a new album would freshen up their set lists? ABB didn’t. People did nothing but complain about the 2 new songs in 2012. If the Stones cared enough about new material they would have done it years ago. They haven’t so ergo they don’t care.

Yes, I see the possibilty that a new album may give rise to for instance three new songs in the setlists. If the album would be good, that the choice of the three songs even may be different from concert to concert. In fact, I have wondered whether the outdrawn prosess for this album may be caused by the band being more critical on this occasion, in other to achieve a decidedly better album than during the later three decades.

I think that’s wishful thinking.

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm
They are playing great on this tour.

We don't need another album. It would add nothing to their body of work.

Let them finish the tour and get on with whatever they have left of their lives.

It's time everyone moved on. The Stones don't owe anyone anything.

Let's stop living our lives through the Stones and let them enjoy their days as they see fit.

I leave it to themselves to decide, whether they want to make another studio album. It is not up to you, unasked to represent, for instance, my view. They deserve to know that there still are at least some listeners, who have a deep interest in a new studio album, if the band otherwise were to feel the inspiration and inclination to do it.

The Stones are one vital channel through which I live, but very far from the only one. Hopefully they may consider it as a privilege and not a burden to be capable of supplying such channel.

Ooooooooo get you! Well, I don't believe that I was seeking to represent your view. I was simply expressing my own view that we (meaning the world in general, the record buying public, Rolling Stones fans) don't need another Stones album. If a new studio album happens great. If it doesn't? I aint losing no sleep.

My point of view to you stands in the next sentence in bold. Well, I do not say WE. On the contrary, I am one of the small minority who need a new album by them. So much of a fan, I still am.

It may also result in a certain minor renewal of their setlists. That could contribute to my wanting to see them live again. A further motive.

You really think a new album would freshen up their set lists? ABB didn’t. People did nothing but complain about the 2 new songs in 2012. If the Stones cared enough about new material they would have done it years ago. They haven’t so ergo they don’t care.

Yes, I see the possibilty that a new album may give rise to for instance three new songs in the setlists. If the album would be good, that the choice of the three songs even may be different from concert to concert. In fact, I have wondered whether the outdrawn prosess for this album may be caused by the band being more critical on this occasion, in other to achieve a decidedly better album than during the later three decades.

I think that’s wishful thinking.

I take the chance. I'll rather represent wishful thinking than take it on me seriously, on behalf of the majority of fans, to state that WE don't need another album. That is rather pompous.

BLUE AND LONESOME was something that really could happen. Probably not seen in advance from a realistic point of view, though.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
How can Slipping Away and The Worst be "solo tunes"? Mick sings on both. The entire band plays on both.

Does Jagger sing behind the stage then?

- Doxa

How can you know? Maybe he hums along while putting on fresh panties?

Quote
ouroux58
174 pages for nothing. They don't win money with records.

OK, they don't win money with records. We don't win money with posting in this thread. Yet, we carry on. So why shouldn't they?

Quote
Send It To me
I have a friend who I introduced to the Stones whose favorite record is Bridges to Babylon, and he was disappointed they didn't play any of it when we went to see them in 2015.

I’ve felt similarly in recent years/tours. W.r.t. Bridges, because the songs from Bridges that got played on stage sounded great . I like the live version of Flip That Switch on No Security much better than the studio version. It sounds much more alive (no pun intended) and organic whereas the album track sound a bit forced to me. Also, I believe that many of the B2B tracks that didn’t get played live so far might come across nicely in concert (in principle, at least).

Quote
Hairball
That said, I think it's odd that they almost completely ignore everything from the last 37 years (give or take a track or two) as there a few good choices they could and should play for fans of the modern era. As it stands though, pretty much the same old show, and part of the reason some of us don't find it as thrilling as it once was. It's like visiting a museum you've been to numerous times to admire the dinosaur bones - there comes a time where there's really nothing new to be discovered.

Second that. Also, the often-heard argument that the audiences largely aren’t familiar with the newer material counts only partially for me. If you want the audiences to get familiar with a song, you have to play it. Radio won’t do the job no more these days. However, that something worked well in the recording studio doesn’t necessarily mean it will also work well in a live situation, so newer songs possibly need a bit more rehearsal time to find how to play them live best than just one or two quick runs-through in rehearsal. Maybe that’s also part of the problem/reason. Like, I still believe Doom & Gloom could be killer live with a slightly different arrangement. And for the youngster compartment in the audience, I’m not sure if they would know the difference between a new(er) song and an older song anyway if they aren’t familiar with either.

Just remembering the 2003 Vienna show. First time I had seats (as opposed to lawn; because my wife was along), and in the seat row before us there was a bunch of no-longer-quite-young females who kept chatting all through the show until Satisfaction, when they got up and cheered and danced a bit. So their Stones experience was to hear Satisfaction played live and in person by the Stones, and the rest of the concert didn’t matter much. They might as well have played a bunch of rarities or novelties instead. I would have been happy and the girlies wouldn’t have cared anyway.

Otherwise, yes, it’s not just that at some point there's really nothing new to be discovered but also that you will hear quite a number of tunes that you have already heard played better many times before. Like, I really love Gimme Shelter and SFTD but I won’t hear them again played as they were, say, in 1990. Meanwhile the tunes are but a shadow of what they used to be. So, as for me, it would be nice for them to be shelved for a while in favour of other stuff that probably works better with regard to their present condition as a live band.

Quote
Hairball
As for the supposed new album, if they feel it in their hearts and still have the creative drive, they should finish it. Doesn't really matter if it sucks or not - at least they will have accomplished something. I'm always excited and game to hear a new Stones album or any new material- whether it's a blues covers album, an album of originals, or a couple of new tunes randomly slapped on to a Greatest Hits package.. To say it's been somewhat disappointing the last few decades is an understatement, yet here I am wishfully thinking they still might have something up their sleeves. Call it devotion or call it stupidity (or maybe both), but the Stones have that kind of attraction for some reason.

Second that too (with the possible exception of the Greatest Hits). Also, I think it’s not correct to say that a new album wouldn’t add anything to their body of work. So far, every new album did. Whether one likes (or dislikes) the results (or parts thereof) is a different question. Judging from interviews, Mick certainly wants the new album to sound different from the previous ones (“taking the band in a new direction”, or so). What Keith wants is not entirely clear (to me), except that he wants to work out things together with Mick (like, “I’m ready for a session anytime, just waiting for his call” or something along these lines) - which is not the worst bit of news.
As long as Mick can still write stuff like Doom&Gloom, and Keith can put out songs like those on Crosseyed, I’d say there’s still enough potential for a decent album. Only problem, the longer the wait, the higher the expectations - up to a point possibly where they couldn’t be met by any band.

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm
They are playing great on this tour.

We don't need another album. It would add nothing to their body of work.

Let them finish the tour and get on with whatever they have left of their lives.

It's time everyone moved on. The Stones don't owe anyone anything.

Let's stop living our lives through the Stones and let them enjoy their days as they see fit.

I leave it to themselves to decide, whether they want to make another studio album. It is not up to you, unasked to represent, for instance, my view. They deserve to know that there still are at least some listeners, who have a deep interest in a new studio album, if the band otherwise were to feel the inspiration and inclination to do it.



The Stones are one vital channel through which I live, but very far from the only one. Hopefully they may consider it as a privilege and not a burden to be capable of supplying such channel.

Ooooooooo get you! Well, I don't believe that I was seeking to represent your view. I was simply expressing my own view that we (meaning the world in general, the record buying public, Rolling Stones fans) don't need another Stones album. If a new studio album happens great. If it doesn't? I aint losing no sleep.

My point of view to you stands in the next sentence in bold. Well, I do not say WE. On the contrary, I am one of the small minority who need a new album by them. So much of a fan, I still am.

It may also result in a certain minor renewal of their setlists. That could contribute to my wanting to see them live again. A further motive.

You really think a new album would freshen up their set lists? ABB didn’t. People did nothing but complain about the 2 new songs in 2012. If the Stones cared enough about new material they would have done it years ago. They haven’t so ergo they don’t care.

Yes, I see the possibilty that a new album may give rise to for instance three new songs in the setlists. If the album would be good, that the choice of the three songs even may be different from concert to concert. In fact, I have wondered whether the outdrawn prosess for this album may be caused by the band being more critical on this occasion, in other to achieve a decidedly better album than during the later three decades.

I think that’s wishful thinking.

I take the chance. I'll rather represent wishful thinking than take it on me seriously, on behalf of the majority of fans, to state that WE don't need another album. That is rather pompous.

BLUE AND LONESOME was something that really could happen. Probably not seen in advance from a realistic point of view, though.

Pompous!You crack me up. It’s not that deep. But I am sure that the Stones will note your noble concerns and pull out all the stops.

Lol...still laughing at that "fresh panties" line doitywoik!

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

Quote
doitywoik





Only problem, the longer the wait, the higher the expectations - up to a point possibly where they couldn’t be met by any band.

Aw, c'mon, that has nothing to do with reality. There is no any expectations, if we won't count some very diehards here and somewhere else. The world doesn't expect anything from the Rolling Stones in terms of new music, and hadn't been for ages. That train left the station long time ago. If anything new comes up that will be a nice bonus, nothing else - be it good or bad, something going along the lines of A BIGGER BANG or VOODOO LOUNGE or whatever, or be it the biggest shit ever released, doesn't really matter. Their legacy is already done and sealed. They know that, and the world knows that. Some die-hards just still think to think in terms of 20th Century that a "living and breathing band" still needs some new records to "tour behind" in order not to be a "nostalgia act" or something as 'bad'. That whole distinction between "living and breathing band" and "nostalgia act" is something The Stones have already outlived, the whole distinction belonging to the nostalgic past with no current relevance. One cannot see Bach nor The Beatles, but one can see The Rolling Stones. And that's it.

I think the only instance craving for a new album, beside the die-hard nostalgics/aesthetics, is their record company. They - Universal - probably need a product in their falling business to attract a potential two million audience or so who even still are willing to buy the album in physical copies. Probably that's why - like georgelicks have reported - they are so critical about the given material - will it sell or not. Seemingly Mick and Keith are alright with that - meaning: they don't take the whole thing so seriously at all. Back in the old days there was no any person in any old record companies of theirs - starting with DECCA - that they could have given any shit about their opinion of their recorded material. The Stones are actually doing a favor, if they please, for their record company. There is no actual demand by any realistic sense nor deadline. Nor real money. Just a bonus for anyone involved. If they please.

And meanwhile, they continue being the biggest concert attraction in the world. Like cultural icons of their statue should be.

- Doxa



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-30 00:20 by Doxa.

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

This is what happens when fandom becomes a habit, rather than a hobby.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
doitywoik





Only problem, the longer the wait, the higher the expectations - up to a point possibly where they couldn’t be met by any band.

Aw, c'mon, that has nothing to do with reality. There is no any expectations, if we won't count some very diehards here and somewhere else. The world doesn't expect anything from the Rolling Stones in terms of new music, and hadn't been for ages. That train left the station long time ago. If anything new comes up that will be a nice bonus, nothing else - be it good or bad, something going along the lines of A BIGGER BANG or VOODOO LOUNGE or whatever, or be it the biggest shit ever released, doesn't really matter. Their legacy is already done and sealed. They know that, and the world knows that. Some die-hards just still think to think in terms of 20th Century that a "living and breathing band" still needs some new records to "tour behind" in order to that they wouldn't be a "nostalgia act" or something as 'bad'. That whole distinction between "living and breathing band" and "nostalgia act" is something The Stones have already outlived, the whole distinction belonging to the nostalgic past with no current relevance. One cannot see Bach nor The Beatles, but one can see The Rolling Stones. And that's it.

I think the only instance craving for a new album, beside the die-hard nostalgics/aesthetics, is their record company. They - Universal - probably need a product in their falling business to attract a potential two million audience or so who even still are willing to buy the album in physical copies. Probably that's why - like georgelicks have reported - they are so critical about the given material - will it sell or not. Seemingly Mick and Keith are alright with that - meaning: they don't take the whole thing so seriously at all. Back in the old days there was no any person in any old record companies of theirs - starting with DECCA - that they could have given any shit about their opinion of their recorded material. The Stones are actually doing a favor, if they please, for their record company. There is no actual demand by any realistic sense nor deadline. Just a bonus for anyone involved. If they please.

And meanwhile, they continue being the biggest concert attraction in the world. Like cultural icons of their statue should be.

- Doxa

This past week or so i have been listening to Voodoo Lounge in my car again and its a brilliant album, almost as good as Tattoo You imho.
There are 3 or 4 songs that are crap but the rest of the album is top draw.
I think if the new album material is of a similar Standard it will sell as good as BAL.

Quote
keithsman


I think if the new album material is of a similar Standard it will sell as good as BAL.

Yep. If I'de be a person in Universal in charge of things like this, I would also make the new album sound like VOODOO LOUNGE, that is, 'Stones For Dummies'. Goes pretty well with conservatism of their concert set lists and everything. A nostalgia act is a nostalgia act, and nothing else. The less you change and try unfamiliar things, the better. No surprises - this is The Rolling Stones!

- Doxa

Double post, my embarasment.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-30 00:44 by Witness.

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

Quote
Witness

Quote
KevinLocksPerm

This is what happens when fandom becomes a habit, rather than a hobby.

A superficial glance at your postal history and my own showed me that your 30th post backwards happened 15 days ago, and for me 5 months ago.

I agree though that fandom for me is not what I consider a hobby as.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
keithsman


I think if the new album material is of a similar Standard it will sell as good as BAL.

Yep. If I'de be a person in Universal in charge of things like this, I would also make the new album sound like VOODOO LOUNGE, that is, 'Stones For Dummies'. Goes pretty well with conservatism of their concert set lists and everything. A nostalgia act is a nostalgia act, and nothing else. The less you change and try unfamiliar things, the better. No surprises - this is The Rolling Stones!

- Doxa

So what you are saying is i am a dummy because i like Voodoo Lounge

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
keithsman


I think if the new album material is of a similar Standard it will sell as good as BAL.

Yep. If I'de be a person in Universal in charge of things like this, I would also make the new album sound like VOODOO LOUNGE, that is, 'Stones For Dummies'. Goes pretty well with conservatism of their concert set lists and everything. A nostalgia act is a nostalgia act, and nothing else. The less you change and try unfamiliar things, the better. No surprises - this is The Rolling Stones!

- Doxa

So what you are saying is i am a dummy because i like Voodoo Lounge

Well, to an extent I do like it too, as I do of any Stones album, but to me that album has always been a showcase that they artistically gave up evolving and just started copying themselves (with rather cheap and especially no memorable results). Like they were under-estimating the judgment of their listeners. Back in 1994 when the album was released some fandom - or trust on them - in me simply died. It's been pretty hard to take them seriously ever since.

It is one of those albums that just sounds nice, too nice, by first listening - so obvious, so familiar, so 'Stonesy' by form - but when the first attraction goes away, there is no real substance to get attracted to or get hooked by. An anti-thesis to EXILE ON MAIN STREET.

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-30 00:58 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
keithsman


I think if the new album material is of a similar Standard it will sell as good as BAL.

Yep. If I'de be a person in Universal in charge of things like this, I would also make the new album sound like VOODOO LOUNGE, that is, 'Stones For Dummies'. Goes pretty well with conservatism of their concert set lists and everything. A nostalgia act is a nostalgia act, and nothing else. The less you change and try unfamiliar things, the better. No surprises - this is The Rolling Stones!

- Doxa

So what you are saying is i am a dummy because i like Voodoo Lounge

Well, to an extent I do like it too, as I do of any Stones album, but to me that album has always been a showcase that they artistically gave up evolving and just started copying themselves (with rather cheap and especially no memorable results). Like they were under-estimating the judgment of their listeners. Back in 1994 when the album was released some fandom - or trust on them - in me simply died. It's been pretty hard to take them seriously ever since.

It is one of those albums that just sounds nice, too nice, by first listening - so obvious, so familiar, so 'Stonesy' by form - but when the first attraction goes away, there is no real substance to get attracted to or get hooked by. An anti-thesis to EXILE ON MAIN STREET.

- Doxa

Yes i see what you mean, i obviously love all the great albums more from Beggers to Some Girls, but yeah i know exactly what you are saying, that's probably why i stop listening to albums like ABB , VL, BTB, SW, they don't have the depth as you say, so its easy to tire of them quickly, funnily enough Undercover just keeps getting better for some reason, i can't get enough of it, Emotional Rescue too.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
keithsman


I think if the new album material is of a similar Standard it will sell as good as BAL.

Yep. If I'de be a person in Universal in charge of things like this, I would also make the new album sound like VOODOO LOUNGE, that is, 'Stones For Dummies'. Goes pretty well with conservatism of their concert set lists and everything. A nostalgia act is a nostalgia act, and nothing else. The less you change and try unfamiliar things, the better. No surprises - this is The Rolling Stones!

- Doxa

So what you are saying is i am a dummy because i like Voodoo Lounge

Well, to an extent I do like it too, as I do of any Stones album, but to me that album has always been a showcase that they artistically gave up evolving and just started copying themselves (with rather cheap and especially no memorable results). Like they were under-estimating the judgment of their listeners. Back in 1994 when the album was released some fandom - or trust on them - in me simply died. It's been pretty hard to take them seriously ever since.

It is one of those albums that just sounds nice, too nice, by first listening - so obvious, so familiar, so 'Stonesy' by form - but when the first attraction goes away, there is no real substance to get attracted to or get hooked by. An anti-thesis to EXILE ON MAIN STREET.

- Doxa

According to what I have read here, I have not heard them myself, did they not leave out songs though that they had been working on, which could have given a somewhat other impression? ( Or am I confusing things?)

Quote
Witness


According to what I have read here, I have not heard them myself, did they not leave out songs though that they had been working on, which could have given a somewhat other impression? ( Or am I confusing things?)

Honestly, I don't know. I have heard some VOODOO LOUNGE out-takes, but none of them has made that different impression to me. Jagger talks about some more experimental or rhytmically interesting things had been left out, and I always hear die-hards saying how 'this or that' bootleg gem might have been more stellar in album, but I am not that impressed. They didn't screw up a potential masterpiece by wrong song selections nor behind the desk.

-Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-05-30 01:22 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa
Aw, c'mon, that has nothing to do with reality. There is no any expectations, if we won't count some very diehards here and somewhere else.

- Doxa

I was in such an optimistic mood, and now you come along and push me back into reality ...

Realistically speaking I think there are no such expectations w.r.t. any other group or musician either, not these days. That whole thing has possibly died away in the course of the 90ies, for everyone. Trying hard to think of anyone whose new album, or song, or video, would still raise someone's eyebrow but noone comes to mind. Now that Bowie's gone anyway. Madonna? No way. The other Italian chick (forget the name) - yep, Lady Gaga, anyone care? No. U2? Well, Bono's offshore ties appear to be more interesting to the world. Neil Young has large enough a fan base to do whatever he wants and put out whatever he likes on his albums - and does so (which I find good), but is there much general interest outside the BOF quarters? Don't think so. OK, Bobby Z might still be mentioned in a corner of a newspaper page somewhere in the back of the paper in case he released a new album of original songs. But otherwise? Dunno, seems to me these are no longer the days, in general. There doesn't really seem to be a young band that is "relevant" (whatever that means) and makes people wonder what their next album might be like - or am I missing something?

Also, whoever happens to be in the charts at present (no clue) doesn't seem to tour, at least not in my quarter of the planet (not counting what they call "volkstuemliche Musik" over here, kind of super-commercial countryside music - not folk, there’s no English equivalent ), it's just the pension brigade that drops by every couple of years. The Stones, The Crim (in 4 weeks, got tix already ), old heavy rockers in a package, Bob, sometimes Neil, ... We should be glad these guys at least still go on tours. What would be left if they wouldn't?

Possible exception: the metal scene, I don't know enough about present-day metal for a qualified judgement. All I can say I never see any posters announcing a show - but this may have to do with the fact that I don't follow them on Twitter and aren't friends with them on Facebook.

As for the Stones, a new album would still give them half a page in a paper, over here at least. Who might buy a physical copy apart from fans and a handful of accidental customers I really don't know. The type of media coverage will certainly depend on the album: if it turns out to be a great "traditional" album or a totally cool "modern" album it certainly won't sink in the media immediately (but only after a few days) and will certainly get reviews of the kind that may make some more people go get a copy. But if it weren’t for the brand name, ...

No matter what or how the new album will turn out to be (if it turns out to be one day), the thing I'm sure about is it won't sound like one of those late-career BOF albums. Whatever one might say about ABB, or D&G otherwise, they don’t sound old, sick and tired, and a new album wouldn’t either. Fortunately I don't have to care if it will be "relevant" in any sense. If there are some good songs on it, I will enjoy them. And that's fine enough for me.

-----

Voodoo Lounge: I never really fully warmed to VL. When I first heard Love Is Strong on the radio as the new Stones single that was the first time I really had the impression of Stones by the numbers. I Go Wild and You Got Me Rocking are OK live numbers. Hm. The songs aren't so bad actually, but ... Dunno, maybe also has to do with the time in my life when the album came out. I am also one of those who think that some songs come in better arrangements on boots, but “stellar” isn’t really the term I would use. I remember a few songs (but can’t remember which ones) that have a more warm, natural, somethimes countryish, sound than the released versions.

Quote
Hairball
Lol...still laughing at that "fresh panties" line doitywoik!

Yeah, the Great Keith Set Backstage Mystery - finally uncovered ... If you’re digging too deep you might learn things you never really wanted to know ...

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
IanBillen
Too much anticipation & talk from fans over the length of this wait and supposed new studio album that has been in the works for a long time now.

Yes, they must be worried about the couple of hundred fans here that talk about it. It MUST keep them awake at nights in cold sweats...

REALLY? We're not being a bit grandiose here????

I WANT a new album. But to lay "our anticipation" at their feet as a concern? REALLY?

__________________________________



Not 'ours' ...we are only a few hundred out of millions. More over I am talking about the press .. the critics.. the die hards ..people in the industry ..etc.

Is the band under some kind of deal with a record company (Universal?)? I mean, have they promised to release new material? In the old days it was that that forced them into the studio.
That and the prospect to make a new deal (to make new money...). If they don't have that pressure I don't think we will see something new. They are lazy to begin with. And now they are old too...

Quote
Stoneage
Is the band under some kind of deal with a record company (Universal?)? I mean, have they promised to release new material?

Basically yes, the way I remember. There was talk about 2 million quid for a new album. But apparently there's no deadline.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Always loved Thief In The Night! Here live with Ronnie's daughter on backing vocals, I beleive

[www.youtube.com]

Wow, that's a very good version. Here I was thinking it was impossible to do Thief In The Night live. Thanks for proving me wrong.

Quote
matxil

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Always loved Thief In The Night! Here live with Ronnie's daughter on backing vocals, I beleive

[www.youtube.com]

Wow, that's a very good version. Here I was thinking it was impossible to do Thief In The Night live. Thanks for proving me wrong.

It's pretty good on No Security, too.

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
Stoneage
Is the band under some kind of deal with a record company (Universal?)? I mean, have they promised to release new material?

Basically yes, the way I remember. There was talk about 2 million quid for a new album. But apparently there's no deadline.

That's right, there's no deadline for the new album, also during the old Virgin deal there was no deadline too.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
matxil

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Always loved Thief In The Night! Here live with Ronnie's daughter on backing vocals, I beleive

[www.youtube.com]

Wow, that's a very good version. Here I was thinking it was impossible to do Thief In The Night live. Thanks for proving me wrong.

It's pretty good on No Security, too.

I haven't listened entirely to any live album of theirs since the Flashback debacle. I seem to remember that the Flip the Switch version on No Security is not bad but I didn't even know Like A Thief was on it.

Quote
matxil

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
matxil

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Always loved Thief In The Night! Here live with Ronnie's daughter on backing vocals, I beleive

[www.youtube.com]

Wow, that's a very good version. Here I was thinking it was impossible to do Thief In The Night live. Thanks for proving me wrong.

It's pretty good on No Security, too.

I haven't listened entirely to any live album of theirs since the Flashback debacle. I seem to remember that the Flip the Switch version on No Security is not bad but I didn't even know Like A Thief was on it.

No shit!