Quote
Hairball
*I was referring to albums of original Stones material - not the covers album.
But now that it's mentioned, I was sort of in the middle regarding B&L - positive regarding the production, but not so positive regarding the remakes themselves.

Quote
KRiffhard

Quote
chriseganstar
Paris studio booked for end November, plus Don Was.

...are you sure?!

Quote
doitywoik
Best would of course be both an EP and an LP (with different songs) .... let's be optimistic, no?

Quote
Testify

Quote
Hairball
*I was referring to albums of original Stones material - not the covers album.
But now that it's mentioned, I was sort of in the middle regarding B&L - positive regarding the production, but not so positive regarding the remakes themselves.

These days I met some musicians and great blues fans, they are not fans of the Stones, and everyone has said that B & L is a great cover album.
The greatness of B & L is that it adds nothing, the Stones play these covers just for fun as it should always be in the blues, in the blues there is nothing more to add and the Stones have understood it. I admit that listening to these words made me very happy ...

Quote
bv
The Mich Jagger interview with AP is saying this:

- Yes they are working on the new songs, and when Mick says "hope" he is in the "secrets" corner which means they are working on the new songs

- They might blend in 1-2 new songs from the EP (which is expected winter/spring) live next year, but no more, because this is a stadium tour

Quote
JumpingKentFlash
I really don’t get why they seem to not want to include covers on their albums. All their best albums have had covers on them.

Quote
KRiffhard

Quote
matxil

Quote
KRiffhard

Too much 'musical philosophy'...it's only r'n'r!! A new Stones album must be an event which we should welcome with much enthusiasm and positivity!

Why exactly?

You can find the answer at 0:26!!
[youtu.be]

Quote
JumpingKentFlash
I really don’t get why they seem to not want to include covers on their albums. All their best albums have had covers on them.

Quote
cyclist
There have been over two BILLION people born on earth since the release of that album.

Quote
Hairball
But what really caught my attention with B&L in a positive way was the minimal production and the fact they sound like a real working band - no bells, whistles, gimmicks, excessive overdubs, etc.

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
Hairball
But what really caught my attention with B&L in a positive way was the minimal production and the fact they sound like a real working band - no bells, whistles, gimmicks, excessive overdubs, etc.

That's exactly how I'd like to hear the new songs: no gimmicks, no excessive overdubs. To me, the Stones always sound best when they sound just natural, just playing their stuff. That's also Part of what makes, say, SF and EOMS so great. Just imagine (or better don't) what these albums had sounded like if given the full-blown 21st century treatment of digital studio trickery and gimmickry. We don't really want to know, do we (except, maybe, for academic purposes ).

The Paris Sessions give an idea how great new songs might sound when just played, without heavy production (which of course presupposes that the songs themselves are finished and ready to be played).

re covers:
Better a good cover than a lame original. However, I could well live without stuff like Cherry Oh Baby ...

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
Hairball
But what really caught my attention with B&L in a positive way was the minimal production and the fact they sound like a real working band - no bells, whistles, gimmicks, excessive overdubs, etc.

That's exactly how I'd like to hear the new songs: no gimmicks, no excessive overdubs. To me, the Stones always sound best when they sound just natural, just playing their stuff. That's also Part of what makes, say, SF and EOMS so great. Just imagine (or better don't) what these albums had sounded like if given the full-blown 21st century treatment of digital studio trickery and gimmickry. We don't really want to know, do we (except, maybe, for academic purposes ).

The Paris Sessions give an idea how great new songs might sound when just played, without heavy production (which of course presupposes that the songs themselves are finished and ready to be played).

re covers:
Better a good cover than a lame original. However, I could well live without stuff like Cherry Oh Baby ...

Quote
doitywoik
I was not so much talking about overdubs as such but about ways of production that make things sound, well, unnatural. As you said, EOMS, ER and others with a great sound had their overdubs too, but they didn't affect the sound in a bad way (also, I'm sure also B&L didn't go completely without any overdubs). Take for example, I Just Want To See His Face. The singers were only added later on in LA, and still it sounds like they were there in the room when the take was cut. Also, there's nothing wrong with overdubbing a guitar part etc., if it makes things better. To me, it's pretty much doing it the right way and not overdoing it/overloading a track, and not compress things to death, or suffocate the tracks in postproduction.

Quote
MisterDDDD
Last Stones album the majority were on the positive side was the *Grammy winning, 2+ million selling, Blue & Lonesome.

I think some may believe that because the vocal minority clog up these threads with negativity (regardless of topic), they are somehow the majority.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
doitywoik
I was not so much talking about overdubs as such but about ways of production that make things sound, well, unnatural. As you said, EOMS, ER and others with a great sound had their overdubs too, but they didn't affect the sound in a bad way (also, I'm sure also B&L didn't go completely without any overdubs). Take for example, I Just Want To See His Face. The singers were only added later on in LA, and still it sounds like they were there in the room when the take was cut. Also, there's nothing wrong with overdubbing a guitar part etc., if it makes things better. To me, it's pretty much doing it the right way and not overdoing it/overloading a track, and not compress things to death, or suffocate the tracks in postproduction.

Gotcha

Quote
doitywoik
I was not so much talking about overdubs as such but about ways of production that make things sound, well, unnatural. As you said, EOMS, ER and others with a great sound had their overdubs too, but they didn't affect the sound in a bad way (also, I'm sure also B&L didn't go completely without any overdubs). Take for example, I Just Want To See His Face. The singers were only added later on in LA, and still it sounds like they were there in the room when the take was cut. Also, there's nothing wrong with overdubbing a guitar part etc., if it makes things better. To me, it's pretty much doing it the right way and not overdoing it/overloading a track, and not compress things to death, or suffocate the tracks in postproduction.

Quote
MisterDDDD
Last Stones album the majority were on the positive side was the *Grammy winning, 2+ million selling, Blue & Lonesome.

I think some may believe that because the vocal minority clog up these threads with negativity (regardless of topic), they are somehow the majority.

Quote
keithsman

Quote
doitywoik
I was not so much talking about overdubs as such but about ways of production that make things sound, well, unnatural. As you said, EOMS, ER and others with a great sound had their overdubs too, but they didn't affect the sound in a bad way (also, I'm sure also B&L didn't go completely without any overdubs). Take for example, I Just Want To See His Face. The singers were only added later on in LA, and still it sounds like they were there in the room when the take was cut. Also, there's nothing wrong with overdubbing a guitar part etc., if it makes things better. To me, it's pretty much doing it the right way and not overdoing it/overloading a track, and not compress things to death, or suffocate the tracks in postproduction.

Agreed, another thing i notice on more resent Stones albums is how much higher up in the mix Micks vocals have become, in the day his voice was meshed and woven in well with the music and the backing singers, now its full in the face and after a while it somehow lessens the overall listening experience, not for everyone, but imho it effects the feeling and mood of an album, sledgehammer results, too much attitude not enough substance, damn that reminds me of my school reports.

Quote
keithsman

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
Hairball
But what really caught my attention with B&L in a positive way was the minimal production and the fact they sound like a real working band - no bells, whistles, gimmicks, excessive overdubs, etc.

That's exactly how I'd like to hear the new songs: no gimmicks, no excessive overdubs. To me, the Stones always sound best when they sound just natural, just playing their stuff. That's also Part of what makes, say, SF and EOMS so great. Just imagine (or better don't) what these albums had sounded like if given the full-blown 21st century treatment of digital studio trickery and gimmickry. We don't really want to know, do we (except, maybe, for academic purposes ).

The Paris Sessions give an idea how great new songs might sound when just played, without heavy production (which of course presupposes that the songs themselves are finished and ready to be played).

re covers:
Better a good cover than a lame original. However, I could well live without stuff like Cherry Oh Baby ...

You nailed it doitywoik , i'm just thinking how good the last few albums might have sounded had they been giving the old Exile minimalist production. In fact why don't they try harder to recreate that sound.

Also songs would come to life when played live, whereas songs like Undercover, Love Is Strong, YGMR etc seem disappointing when played live because its impossible to do the studio tweaking on them, they fall flat played live like some important ingredient is missing, back in the day Stones songs had a life of their own when played live..

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
Hairball
But what really caught my attention with B&L in a positive way was the minimal production and the fact they sound like a real working band - no bells, whistles, gimmicks, excessive overdubs, etc.

That's exactly how I'd like to hear the new songs: no gimmicks, no excessive overdubs. To me, the Stones always sound best when they sound just natural, just playing their stuff. That's also Part of what makes, say, SF and EOMS so great. Just imagine (or better don't) what these albums had sounded like if given the full-blown 21st century treatment of digital studio trickery and gimmickry. We don't really want to know, do we (except, maybe, for academic purposes ).

The Paris Sessions give an idea how great new songs might sound when just played, without heavy production (which of course presupposes that the songs themselves are finished and ready to be played).

re covers:
Better a good cover than a lame original. However, I could well live without stuff like Cherry Oh Baby ...

Let me first point out that I don't disagree with that. However, Exile is stuffed with sessions musicians, backup singers etc, but imo they don't really distract the Stones's natural sound.

And albums like SG and ER, which are heavily overdubbed - but with few guests - also sound great.

So, that leads me to think that it's the way they do the overdubs, rather than if they do lots of overdubs. Having the song ready and in their DNA might help. We know they played through the Exile songs a trillion times at Nellcôte

Quote
doitywoik
I was not so much talking about overdubs as such but about ways of production that make things sound, well, unnatural. As you said, EOMS, ER and others with a great sound had their overdubs too, but they didn't affect the sound in a bad way (also, I'm sure also B&L didn't go completely without any overdubs). Take for example, I Just Want To See His Face. The singers were only added later on in LA, and still it sounds like they were there in the room when the take was cut. Also, there's nothing wrong with overdubbing a guitar part etc., if it makes things better. To me, it's pretty much doing it the right way and not overdoing it/overloading a track, and not compress things to death, or suffocate the tracks in postproduction.