The thread is so epic and convoluted by now; has been down so many side streets, that I find myself asking the original question:
So, is there a new album actually in the works? And if so, when do we think it will be released? and why?

The SG Bonus Material is one of my favourite albums, period .

Not sure what that says about it, or about me ?

But it doesn't bother me how long it takes the idea or the bones of a song to reach completion and release.

AFAIC, It remains a new song to the listener.

I think a new album is "in the works."

I think it will be released posthumously (meaning after the Stones stop touring, not referring to anyone's death).

I think their focus is entirely on touring, as Keith indicated when he said their recent session work was for the purpose of getting the chops up for the tour, not recording or polishing tracks for release. Once they're done with touring they will start going through the (recent) vaults for tracks to release.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
HMS

Quote
GasLightStreet
All the songs on TATTOO YOU were finished in 1981, making them... new songs... because they were finished.

You´re Wrong, wrong, helplessly wrong all over...
finishing an old song does not make it automatically a new song.
Plundered My Soul isn´t a new song, it´s a finished old song (at best). Worried About You wasn´t a new song in 1981 it was an finished old song. You missed the thin line between new song and finished old song it seems... although the line in fact isn´t that thin.

Nope. Unheard of = new. It's new now when it's released.

Totally wrong. If tomorrow surfaces a yet unheard/unknown Bing Crosby song recorded in 1933 it would not be a "new song" but a "newly discovered song". Waiting On A Friend wasn´t a "new song" in 1981 it was a "previously unreleased recently finished old song" For heaven´s sake get the difference, your stubborness makes my hair turning grey...

In observance of a landmark occasion - the thread has hit 350 pages, yet there's still no new album in the foreseeable future!

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

btw I just want to say the songs on TY were not 100% finished and just slap dashed on to the album. there are overdubs from the early 80's on a lot of the tunes

Quote
GasLightStreet
FACT: TATTOO YOU is not a compilation.

Just like VOODOO LOUNGE, it consists of songs recorded in recording studios. As it has been unnecessarily established, except for your complete inadequateness, it doesn't matter when they were done, they're still new when they are released, partially because they've never been heard before.

It does matter.
What about the few people in 1981 having tapes of the unfinished songs from 1972-75? Do you think they thought of Slave, Worried About You, No Use In Crying as new songs when TY was released? - No they didn´t because these songs weren´t new, not even to those who never heard them before. These songs were previously unreleased unfinished old songs reworked in 1981.

Come on, the Stones didn´t even choose the songs for TY themselves, Chris Kimsey dived into the vaults and presented them (particularly Mick) what he thought was worth completing/finishing. Probably Mick made the final choice but it was Kimsey´s list. TY isn´t a genuine Stones-album, there is no point in argueing, the facts speak for themselves, loud and clear.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-24 17:14 by HMS.

Quote
keefriffhard4life
btw I just want to say the songs on TY were not 100% finished and just slap dashed on to the album. there are overdubs from the early 80's on a lot of the tunes

Yes, they polished up songs mostly from way-back-when and sold them as brandnew and didn´t tell us about the origins of most of the stuff on TY.

Quote
HMS

Quote
keefriffhard4life
btw I just want to say the songs on TY were not 100% finished and just slap dashed on to the album. there are overdubs from the early 80's on a lot of the tunes

Yes, they polished up songs mostly from way-back-when and sold them as brandnew and didn´t tell us about the origins of most of the stuff on TY.

maybe its just me but I always looked at thing like let it bleed-exile as a set of sessions and GHS-ER as a set of sessions and TY closing the chapter on the GHS-ER sessions. that's why I think of it as an album and not a compilation



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-06-24 18:07 by keefriffhard4life.

Quote
GasLightStreet
Since this unreleased new album that isn't finished and is apparently still stuck on the wall according to one blabbering critic, this album will only be a new compilation by the time it's released next December, since it was started in December of 2015.

So no new Stones album, just another compilation.

I thought about that and the answer is no, you´re wrong. The new album obviously would contain new material recorded for a new album, although it would have been taken a rather long time to put it in stores. But five years for making an album isn´t unusual nowadays. It would not consist of left-overs from other album-projects and there would not be other albums of original material released prior to the new album. So it would be completely different from TY. It would be a genuine Stones album, not a compilation like TY.

There wont be a new album this year.
So please,Bjornulf, end this thread.
Jeroen

Quote
keefriffhard4life
maybe its just me but I always looked at thing like let it bleed-exile as a set of sessions and GHS-ER as a set of sessions and TY closing the chapter on the GHHS-ER sessions. that's why I think of it as an album and not a compilation

...anyway you put it... technically TY is a compilation of old and not-so-old material with new layers of paint here and there. The process is the same as with the SG-bonus-CD.

Quote
keefriffhard4life
btw I just want to say the songs on TY were not 100% finished and just slap dashed on to the album. there are overdubs from the early 80's on a lot of the tunes

Of course they weren't 100% finished - just like the songs for this supposed new album now.

Slap dashed? They spent over a month working on overdubs and editing in 1980 and 3 months in 1981 doing more. Considering the time spent on recording the bottoms, a lot of work went into the songs on TATTOO YOU.

A new song is a new song when it's released. Even Mick agrees. When it's finished has zero relevance. About half of EOMS was similar to TY. Plundered My Soul was a new song in 2010, regardless of Mick writing lyrics for it in 2009 with the bottoms being recorded in 1971. If Keith found a riff he recorded at home in 1974 and used it on the new album, it's still a new riff, because it hasn't been used before.

They were very much like any other Rolling Stones song then or now, to be honest. You'd listen to them and you'd go, Okay, so that needs a vocal, and that's the chorus, this is that. Some were pretty much together, and some were less together. And you just treat them as if they were new, to be perfectly honest. It's always a bit odd to revisit things, but after you get used to them, it doesn't really matter if they were done last week or 35, 40 years ago.
- Mick Jagger, 2010

It's kind of interesting, the process. It sounds a bit weird, but to be honest, if someone had sent me these tracks and told me, You did those two years ago - the process is exactly the same. It's not the best way of writing songs. My favorite way of writing songs is to have the melody and at least most of the lyrics while the music's there, but sometimes it happens that it isn't like that, and a lot of people work like that, that sometimes you have to write to a finished track. It happens like that and you just do it.
- Mick Jagger, 2010


[timeisonourside.com]

Quote
GasLightStreet
About half of EOMS was similar to TY.

I don´t think EOMS contains material recorded almost a decade before it was released.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriffhard4life
btw I just want to say the songs on TY were not 100% finished and just slap dashed on to the album. there are overdubs from the early 80's on a lot of the tunes

Of course they weren't 100% finished - just like the songs for this supposed new album now.

Slap dashed? They spent over a month working on overdubs and editing in 1980 and 3 months in 1981 doing more. Considering the time spent on recording the bottoms, a lot of work went into the songs on TATTOO YOU.

A new song is a new song when it's released. Even Mick agrees. When it's finished has zero relevance. About half of EOMS was similar to TY. Plundered My Soul was a new song in 2010, regardless of Mick writing lyrics for it in 2009 with the bottoms being recorded in 1971. If Keith found a riff he recorded at home in 1974 and used it on the new album, it's still a new riff, because it hasn't been used before.

They were very much like any other Rolling Stones song then or now, to be honest. You'd listen to them and you'd go, Okay, so that needs a vocal, and that's the chorus, this is that. Some were pretty much together, and some were less together. And you just treat them as if they were new, to be perfectly honest. It's always a bit odd to revisit things, but after you get used to them, it doesn't really matter if they were done last week or 35, 40 years ago.
- Mick Jagger, 2010

It's kind of interesting, the process. It sounds a bit weird, but to be honest, if someone had sent me these tracks and told me, You did those two years ago - the process is exactly the same. It's not the best way of writing songs. My favorite way of writing songs is to have the melody and at least most of the lyrics while the music's there, but sometimes it happens that it isn't like that, and a lot of people work like that, that sometimes you have to write to a finished track. It happens like that and you just do it.
- Mick Jagger, 2010


[timeisonourside.com]

I am agreeing with you that TY is a new album. I said they didn't just slap dash the songs together on an album. like I said earlier to me it seemed like GHS-ER was one long creative process for the band and TY closed that chapter. after that the band pretty much has done a session for each album and haven't really brought back old backing tracks to complete new albums. not talking about the bonus discs for deluxe releases btw

Quote
GasLightStreet
A new song is a new song when it's released. Even Mick agrees. When it's finished has zero relevance.

Wrong oh so very wrong... and i dont care what Mick says when I know I am right. A recently finished eight years old song isn´t a new song. It´s an old song finally finsished. That is clear for anyone to see.

Quote
HMS

Quote
GasLightStreet
A new song is a new song when it's released. Even Mick agrees. When it's finished has zero relevance.

Wrong oh so very wrong... and i dont care what Mick says when I know I am right. A recently finished eight years old song isn´t a new song. It´s an old song finally finsished. That is clear for anyone to see.

I agree. Tattoo You is a non-compilation album of original material in part compiled from previously unreleased tracks along with newly recorded songs.

Quote
runrudolph
There wont be a new album this year.
So please,Bjornulf, end this thread.
Jeroen

Just change the title:

Compilation Stones album for 2020?

Quote
Rokyfan

Quote
runrudolph
There wont be a new album this year.
So please,Bjornulf, end this thread.
Jeroen

Just change the title:

Compilation Stones album for 2020?

Or maybe No Filter Live album/dvd for 2019?

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

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriffhard4life
btw I just want to say the songs on TY were not 100% finished and just slap dashed on to the album. there are overdubs from the early 80's on a lot of the tunes

Of course they weren't 100% finished - just like the songs for this supposed new album now.

Slap dashed? They spent over a month working on overdubs and editing in 1980 and 3 months in 1981 doing more. Considering the time spent on recording the bottoms, a lot of work went into the songs on TATTOO YOU.

A new song is a new song when it's released. Even Mick agrees. When it's finished has zero relevance. About half of EOMS was similar to TY. Plundered My Soul was a new song in 2010, regardless of Mick writing lyrics for it in 2009 with the bottoms being recorded in 1971. If Keith found a riff he recorded at home in 1974 and used it on the new album, it's still a new riff, because it hasn't been used before.

They were very much like any other Rolling Stones song then or now, to be honest. You'd listen to them and you'd go, Okay, so that needs a vocal, and that's the chorus, this is that. Some were pretty much together, and some were less together. And you just treat them as if they were new, to be perfectly honest. It's always a bit odd to revisit things, but after you get used to them, it doesn't really matter if they were done last week or 35, 40 years ago.
- Mick Jagger, 2010

It's kind of interesting, the process. It sounds a bit weird, but to be honest, if someone had sent me these tracks and told me, You did those two years ago - the process is exactly the same. It's not the best way of writing songs. My favorite way of writing songs is to have the melody and at least most of the lyrics while the music's there, but sometimes it happens that it isn't like that, and a lot of people work like that, that sometimes you have to write to a finished track. It happens like that and you just do it.
- Mick Jagger, 2010


[timeisonourside.com]

I am agreeing with you that TY is a new album. I said they didn't just slap dash the songs together on an album. like I said earlier to me it seemed like GHS-ER was one long creative process for the band and TY closed that chapter. after that the band pretty much has done a session for each album and haven't really brought back old backing tracks to complete new albums. not talking about the bonus discs for deluxe releases btw

I gotta enlarge the fonts or something, I totally missed that.

Quote
HMS
A recently finished eight years old song isn´t a new song. It´s an old song finally finsished. That is clear for anyone to see.

Right. So the topic of this thread: the long-gestating Stones album, when finally released, will contain a number of tracks that were started by Mick, Matt, and Charlie in 2011. Therefore, the new Stones album will not be a new studio album, but a compilation of old songs finally finished since you're clearly a "bottoms" man.

The fact that one of the tracks is originally from 1989, was allegedly reworked in 1991 as a potential B-side and then scrapped, remixed in 2017 for everyone to reconsider, and subsequently overdubbed to the extent I'm not sure how much of it is old and how much is new. Does that count as a completely new recording of an old idea to you? I imagine it all depends when the rhythm track was laid down in your view. Since newly-written lyrics and recorded vocals or guitar and saxophone overdubs are irrelevant to the age of the track.

It is crazy for audience members to decide what is new. When exactly is the cutoff between new and not new?
The artists decides at some point that a certain song rings his bell, and that he feels the need to complete and release. It could all be written that morning and recorded, mixed and mastered the same day; or it could be rumbling in the back of his brain for 8 years, but never was right for one reason or another. Then one day he makes it right. New or not new, who cares? But it would be on the new album.

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
It is crazy for audience members to decide what is new. When exactly is the cutoff between new and not new?
The artists decides at some point that a certain song rings his bell, and that he feels the need to complete and release. It could all be written that morning and recorded, mixed and mastered the same day; or it could be rumbling in the back of his brain for 8 years, but never was right for one reason or another. Then one day he makes it right. New or not new, who cares? But it would be on the new album.

Precisely. It's new, regardless.

New releases are new releases. Personally, I see a distinction between a true archival release of an outtake like "Good Time Women" vs. "Pass the Wine" or "Plundered My Soul" which I think of as new Stones recordings released in 2010.

You can buy an old car and add new rear view mirrors, a new car-player, a new set of wheels and so on but it will still be an old car.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
It is crazy for audience members to decide what is new. When exactly is the cutoff between new and not new?
The artists decides at some point that a certain song rings his bell, and that he feels the need to complete and release. It could all be written that morning and recorded, mixed and mastered the same day; or it could be rumbling in the back of his brain for 8 years, but never was right for one reason or another. Then one day he makes it right. New or not new, who cares? But it would be on the new album.

Precisely. It's new, regardless.

No.
Rumbling in the back of his brain for 8 years is different from something that is on tape for 8 years.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
So the topic of this thread: the long-gestating Stones album, when finally released, will contain a number of tracks that were started by Mick, Matt, and Charlie in 2011. Therefore, the new Stones album will not be a new studio album, but a compilation of old songs finally finished since you're clearly a "bottoms" man.

No. It would not be a compilation because there were no other albums of original material released since 2011 (starting point for new album). It would just be an album that took long in the making. But indeed they shouldnt wait too long otherwise it could effect their credibility as artists. At their age it does even more matter when a song was recorded - is the singer 79 or is he actually 71? same with the guitar players. This is very important. Anyway should they use material recorded in 2011 it has to be mentioned in the liner notes, of course it has.

Back in the day when the studio album was king I would bet all bands went into the studio with fresh new material before they had to use old songs that were finished and released on the new record.

A new released song can be a new song with new lyrics and music or a old song finished and released on the new record.

With the stones and there lack of output the last 25 years who cares I just want to listen to something I have never heard before.

Quote
HMS
You can buy an old car and add new rear view mirrors, a new car-player, a new set of wheels and so on but it will still be an old car.

that's not the same at all. the difference? the car was sold to someone when it WAS NEW. did the rolling stones sell people officially released versions of the songs on TY the way they were recorded in the sessions they came from and then try to resell the same songs with early 80's overdubs as "new material"?

It's a valid point if one thinks Mick's lyrics and vocals constitute an add-on. Alternatively, we're being wound up by someone who enjoys winding up people who take trivialities far too seriously.