Quote
doitywoik

Quote
retired_dog
Why would the Stones re-record ABKCO era songs?

For the same reasons Taylor Swift redid her albums Fearless and Red.

(Yet I don't think it would be a good idea if the Stones really did it.)

Please quote correctly. This is not my question, it's from GasLightStreet's confusing reply to my original post - which already gives the answer btw.:

"I know from "inside Virgin Records" sources that the Stones had threatened to re-record ABKCO-era material for 40 Licks in case ABKCO weren't willing to cooperate for this career-spanning compilation."

I clearly meant the "40 Licks"-compilation, that was when they were with Virgin Records and needed ABKCO to cooperate to include pre-1971 material.

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
retired_dog
Why would the Stones re-record ABKCO era songs?

For the same reasons Taylor Swift redid her albums Fearless and Red.

(Yet I don't think it would be a good idea if the Stones really did it.)

Please quote correctly. This is not my question, it's from GasLightStreet's confusing reply to my original post - which already gives the answer btw.:

"I know from "inside Virgin Records" sources that the Stones had threatened to re-record ABKCO-era material for 40 Licks in case ABKCO weren't willing to cooperate for this career-spanning compilation."

I clearly meant the "40 Licks"-compilation, that was when they were with Virgin Records and needed ABKCO to cooperate to include pre-1971 material.

That would've been cool. Would have loved to hear the new versions

Quote
jp.M
"the Shadows" have done it...!

And more remakes:

Neil Sedaka - Breaking Up is Hard to Do in 1962, and then again in 1975

Elton John - Candle in the Wind in 1972, and then again in 1997

Allma Brothers - Midnight Rider in 1971, and then again in 1973 by Greg Allman for a solo album.
Allman Brothers - Whipping Post in 1969, and then again in 1997 by Greg Allman for a solo album.

And here's an odd twist in remake history:

The Isley Brothers - This Old Heart of Mine in 1966, and then covered by Rod Stewart in 1975, and then Rod and Ronald Isley teamed up in 1989 for a remake.

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

Quote
Doxa
Let's see how many awful ideas to mock the Stones this mini fan/troll called Hairball is able to come with. A pretty good start.

- Doxa

The mere sight of Hairball's name "fills me with an urge to def***". Pink Floyd reference. I've met this guy, he buys tickets in the very back then complains about the lousy sound. I'm with you Doxa! Wish he would leave.

Lol...wtf...don't be an obnoxious lying dick roller...first time I met you I was in the Pit at Neil Young at the LA Forum...or maybe front floor for Fleetwood Mac - I never buy tickets in the back!
*edit - I think it was the front floor section at Paul Rogers/Bad Company. Whatever the case, after I met you I instantly regretted it as there was something quite unpleasant about you...you're creepy!

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-08-14 04:38 by Hairball.

Quote
Whale

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
retired_dog
Why would the Stones re-record ABKCO era songs?

For the same reasons Taylor Swift redid her albums Fearless and Red.

(Yet I don't think it would be a good idea if the Stones really did it.)

Please quote correctly. This is not my question, it's from GasLightStreet's confusing reply to my original post - which already gives the answer btw.:

"I know from "inside Virgin Records" sources that the Stones had threatened to re-record ABKCO-era material for 40 Licks in case ABKCO weren't willing to cooperate for this career-spanning compilation."

I clearly meant the "40 Licks"-compilation, that was when they were with Virgin Records and needed ABKCO to cooperate to include pre-1971 material.

That would've been cool. Would have loved to hear the new versions

Might have been interesting in a train wreck kind of way, but hard to imagine they could actually improve any of their past classic greats.
Of all the bands that have re-recorded their own tunes, can't think of any that were an improvement - the Stones would be no different.
BUT now it might be better than nothing...even if they re-recorded some of their early blues covers...call it Blue and Lonesome revisited pt. II...

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

Quote
Hairball
Lol...wtf...don't be an obnoxious lying dick roller...first time I met you I was in the Pit at Neil Young at the LA Forum...or maybe front floor for Fleetwood Mac - I never buy tickets in the back!
*edit - I think it was the front floor section at Paul Rogers/Bad Company. Whatever the case, after I met you I instantly regretted it as there was something quite unpleasant about you...you're creepy!

Nope. I was in the photo pit for Eli Young and was ushered out with all the other photographers after 3 songs. I've never been to Fleetwood Mac, can't stand them. It was at Roger Waters. You were waving from the high up seats, texting me on a flip phone at a snails pace. Public opinion here seems to agree, you're a troll. Sitting at home critiquing Stones shows all over the world instead of being there. You're a troll and you have a poor memory.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Whale

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
retired_dog
Why would the Stones re-record ABKCO era songs?

For the same reasons Taylor Swift redid her albums Fearless and Red.

(Yet I don't think it would be a good idea if the Stones really did it.)

Please quote correctly. This is not my question, it's from GasLightStreet's confusing reply to my original post - which already gives the answer btw.:

"I know from "inside Virgin Records" sources that the Stones had threatened to re-record ABKCO-era material for 40 Licks in case ABKCO weren't willing to cooperate for this career-spanning compilation."

I clearly meant the "40 Licks"-compilation, that was when they were with Virgin Records and needed ABKCO to cooperate to include pre-1971 material.

That would've been cool. Would have loved to hear the new versions

Might have been interesting in a train wreck kind of way, but hard to imagine they could actually improve any of their past classic greats.
Of all the bands that have re-recorded their own tunes, can't think of any that were an improvement - the Stones would be no different.
BUT now it might be better than nothing...even if they re-recorded some of their early blues covers...call it Blue and Lonesome revisited pt. II...

The Stones have a lot of albums and songs with a lot of different styles. Love for them to deliver a new album, but if not so be it, the back-catalogue is the best consolation prize you could get, along with yet another new live show.

Things are just fine.

Quote
roller99

Quote
Hairball
Lol...wtf...don't be an obnoxious lying dick roller...first time I met you I was in the Pit at Neil Young at the LA Forum...or maybe front floor for Fleetwood Mac - I never buy tickets in the back!
*edit - I think it was the front floor section at Paul Rogers/Bad Company. Whatever the case, after I met you I instantly regretted it as there was something quite unpleasant about you...you're creepy!

Nope. I was in the photo pit for Eli Young and was ushered out with all the other photographers after 3 songs. I've never been to Fleetwood Mac, can't stand them. It was at Roger Waters. You were waving from the high up seats, texting me on a flip phone at a snails pace. Public opinion here seems to agree, you're a troll. Sitting at home critiquing Stones shows all over the world instead of being there. You're a troll and you have a poor memory.

I've heen to 64 shows since 1981 including clubs, theaters, arenas, and stadiums, with the last two just last year, but I don't need to defend my fan credentials towards such a creepy/dangerous liar such as you.
And no, I met you before the Roger Waters show...I think it was Paul Rogers/Bad Company - maybe intermission.*(edit: Just dawned on me...had to be Joe Walsh and Paul Rogers/Bad Company at the Forum in '16).... However, I do recall you at Roger Waters (great show) sitting high up constantly texting me your dismissive opinions during each song throughout the show - talk about a buzz kill. I happened to be with my young niece who hadn't been to many concerts yet, and it was near impossible to ignore your constant texting...like a pest demanding attention. Couldn't delete you off of my fb friends list fast enough - you give off the creepy vibes, and I know many who have said the same about you...

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



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-08-14 08:23 by Hairball.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
roller99

Quote
Hairball
Lol...wtf...don't be an obnoxious lying dick roller...first time I met you I was in the Pit at Neil Young at the LA Forum...or maybe front floor for Fleetwood Mac - I never buy tickets in the back!
*edit - I think it was the front floor section at Paul Rogers/Bad Company. Whatever the case, after I met you I instantly regretted it as there was something quite unpleasant about you...you're creepy!

Nope. I was in the photo pit for Eli Young and was ushered out with all the other photographers after 3 songs. I've never been to Fleetwood Mac, can't stand them. It was at Roger Waters. You were waving from the high up seats, texting me on a flip phone at a snails pace. Public opinion here seems to agree, you're a troll. Sitting at home critiquing Stones shows all over the world instead of being there. You're a troll and you have a poor memory.

I've heen to 64 shows since 1981 including clubs, theaters, arenas, and stadiums, with the last two just last year, but I don't need to defend my fan credentials towards such a creepy/dangerous liar such as you.
And no, I met you before the Roger Waters show...I think it was Paul Rogers/Bad Company - maybe intermission. However, I do recall you at Roger Waters (great show) sitting high up constantly texting me your dismissive opinions during each song throughout the show - talk about a buzz kill. I happened to be with my young niece who hadn't been to many concerts yet, and it was near impossible to ignore your constant texting...like a pest demanding attention. Couldn't delete you off of my fb friends list fast enough - you give off the creepy vibes, and I know many who have said the same about you...

I'm glad you think I'm creepy, I would hate to have someone like you around. I see many complaints here about you, nobody has ever complained about me, not to my face. Your memory is as skewed as your troll comments, but go ahead and get it all out poor little troll.

Having grown up in the L.A. area surrounded by celebrities, people like you who are constantly dropping names and who toot their own horns aren't as impressive as you seem to think.
In fact it's obnoxious, conceited, and narcissistic. I know you're not originally from the L.A., but if it makes you feel special...

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



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-08-14 06:29 by Hairball.

Quote
Hairball
Having grown up in the L.A. area surrounded by celebrities, people like you who are constantly dropping names and who toot their own horns aren't as impressive as you seem to think.
In fact it's obnoxious, conceited, and narcissistic. I know you're not originally from the L.A., but if it makes you feel special...

I'm a journalist...how often do I even post here? Both of us have no idea what you're talking about. My (and many others here) point is that you continually criticize the band and make asinine comments. This is my last comment here, but you go ahead and fire the last shot as I can see how desperately you want the last word. I won't see it however, but you go ahead and get it all out poor little troll boy.

Please stop the stalking....

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

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Witness

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
Hairball
Due to the writers block and/or Mick and Keiths inability to write together anymore, maybe they could record some new and updated versions of some of their early originals.
Contemporary cover versions of their own tunes! Might be farfetched, but consider the writings already done...just give the tunes a facelift, and they could almost sound brand new.
Probably not the best idea, but could possibly be better than nothing. A new version of Satisfaction in 2022 from the current Stones? Or Get Off of My Cloud? Or an updated version of Tell Me? Why not...

So go full circle and return to being a cover band? Of their own material? Or covers of covers?

A truly horrible idea.

For a hypothetical Rolling Stones that had continued quite regularly to make and release studio albums, like they did up to UNDERCOVER (and I have to add DIRTY WORK), also for the following years, something in the vein you suggest, could have been an interesting variation. I think not, however, for a Stones with studio album releases as far between, like they had from STEEL WHEELS until A BIGGER BANG, in the continuation as well. In the actual case with no releases of studio albums at all from the Rolling Stones after A BIGGER BANG, apart from BLUE & LONESOME, I must apologize, but I have to say that I find that idea completely out of place.

I know from "inside Virgin Records" sources that the Stones had threatened to re-record ABKCO-era material for 40 Licks in case ABKCO weren't willing to cooperate for this career-spanning compilation. While commercially understandable considering their split copyrights situation, I personally found a move like that artistically desastrous already back then. If they would do it now, I even think it would just pollute their catalog. I mean, we have tons of official live recordings, what "new & updated" studio re-recordings could add to their legacy I just am totally unable to imagine, even under "better than nothing" aspects. I'm well aware that a lot of lesser acts have released re-recordings of their famous material over the years, usually when they switched record companies, but in the end, record buyers usually seek for the originals.

It's been hard enough to accept that the Stones have turned into a golden oldies live act over the years, but releasing re-recordings would turn them into a travesty imo.

Historically it seems to be of a control issue. Publishing etc.

The Stones gave that up a long time ago and have seemingly figured things out since.

Def Leppard dipped into it for their own reasons (with a fantastic version, actually) because of what Universal was doing to them.

The same label that owns ALL the Rolling Stones releases.

Why would the Stones re-record ABKCO era songs?

Can you imagine being a band, artist, etc, having to cover yourself? "Hey let's do this song again and sound like we did in..."

Your reply has little to nothing to do with what I posted. Not the first time! Is my English really THAT bad? Please read again. PROPERLY!

It was in the gist of what you said, in general, not specific. An example of what you said.

In regard to the questions outside of what you said. The Stones have not ever been "at war" with ABKCO, unlike Def Leppard. Didn't mean otherwise.

Add Bob Marley to the list of musicians who have re-recorded their own songs - in fact he's probably done it more than anybody.
Many early tunes were eventually re-recorded years later...the list is long.......and maybe some of the re-recorded versions could be considered better?
Depends on personal taste, but in most cases the re-recordings are defnitely more widely known as Bob became bigger and bigger as the years rolled on...

Original recorded in 1971 w/Peter Tosh and Bunny Wailer, produced by Lee Perry:




And re-recorded in 1974 (w/out Peter Tosh and Bunny Wailer), produced by Chris Blackewell - perhaps the best known/most popular version:





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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-08-14 07:11 by Hairball.

I don’t consider the Stripped sessions to be re-recordings, as such: they’re acoustic versions, and quite different, too. It was a one-off and a bit of fun, I’m sure. I’d hope they wouldn’t re-record old, classic material. I think I’d rather no new album than a remake of Gimme Shelter.

I've been trying to text celebrities during concerts to no avail. It only made me miss a couple of songs

I had resolved to stop posting here for the umpteenth time and just read, but Jeez, people, get a grip. Hairball or Lem or whoever else gets on people's nerves aren't the Enemy posting to destroy the site, tear fandom apart, and make the Stones decide to retire. They're fans, like all of us.

They're opinionated. They're not afraid to go against the grain and speak something other than endless praise and how lucky we are the Stones are still willing to take our money. If Hairball has the time and inclination to post "Hit the Wall" a hundred times a day, that's his business. Why fight with him or call him names? Just ignore him if you don't like his opinions.

The honest to God truth is there are times Hairball posts things I agree with or laugh at or irritate me or make me shake my head in bewilderment. The thing is, I'm the one choosing to read what he has to say. I don't read every thread or even every post in threads I follow. Many times, I'll just read posts by people I feel I know. Hairball is one of them. Agree, disagree, read, ignore is all fine, but be tolerant. If Bjornulf didn't want these guys here, he'd do something about it.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
I had resolved to stop posting here for the umpteenth time and just read, but Jeez, people, get a grip. Hairball or Lem or whoever else gets on people's nerves aren't the Enemy posting to destroy the site, tear fandom apart, and make the Stones decide to retire. They're fans, like all of us.

They're opinionated. They're not afraid to go against the grain and speak something other than endless praise and how lucky we are the Stones are still willing to take our money. If Hairball has the time and inclination to post "Hit the Wall" a hundred times a day, that's his business. Why fight with him or call him names? Just ignore him if you don't like his opinions.

The honest to God truth is there are times Hairball posts things I agree with or laugh at or irritate me or make me shake my head in bewilderment. The thing is, I'm the one choosing to read what he has to say. I don't read every thread or even every post in threads I follow. Many times, I'll just read posts by people I feel I know. Hairball is one of them. Agree, disagree, read, ignore is all fine, but be tolerant. If Bjornulf didn't want these guys here, he'd do something about it.

Now thát is a class-A post, Rocky.
Maximum Respect.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
I had resolved to stop posting here for the umpteenth time and just read, but Jeez, people, get a grip. Hairball or Lem or whoever else gets on people's nerves aren't the Enemy posting to destroy the site, tear fandom apart, and make the Stones decide to retire. They're fans, like all of us.

They're opinionated. They're not afraid to go against the grain and speak something other than endless praise and how lucky we are the Stones are still willing to take our money. If Hairball has the time and inclination to post "Hit the Wall" a hundred times a day, that's his business. Why fight with him or call him names? Just ignore him if you don't like his opinions.

The honest to God truth is there are times Hairball posts things I agree with or laugh at or irritate me or make me shake my head in bewilderment. The thing is, I'm the one choosing to read what he has to say. I don't read every thread or even every post in threads I follow. Many times, I'll just read posts by people I feel I know. Hairball is one of them. Agree, disagree, read, ignore is all fine, but be tolerant. If Bjornulf didn't want these guys here, he'd do something about it.

You are great; you implore me to admit that I really like the people on here

Sometimes all ya got is ya gut ....

Trust it and dont tell the cops anything .....



ROCKMAN

Quote
Rocky Dijon
I had resolved to stop posting here for the umpteenth time and just read, but Jeez, people, get a grip. Hairball or Lem or whoever else gets on people's nerves aren't the Enemy posting to destroy the site, tear fandom apart, and make the Stones decide to retire. They're fans, like all of us.

They're opinionated. They're not afraid to go against the grain and speak something other than endless praise and how lucky we are the Stones are still willing to take our money. If Hairball has the time and inclination to post "Hit the Wall" a hundred times a day, that's his business. Why fight with him or call him names? Just ignore him if you don't like his opinions.

The honest to God truth is there are times Hairball posts things I agree with or laugh at or irritate me or make me shake my head in bewilderment. The thing is, I'm the one choosing to read what he has to say. I don't read every thread or even every post in threads I follow. Many times, I'll just read posts by people I feel I know. Hairball is one of them. Agree, disagree, read, ignore is all fine, but be tolerant. If Bjornulf didn't want these guys here, he'd do something about it.

agree

and the most offensive thing to me he's ever posted is the idea that the stones re record there hits

seriously why mess with perfection?




also chuck berry

Quote
Nikkei

Quote
Rocky Dijon
I had resolved to stop posting here for the umpteenth time and just read, but Jeez, people, get a grip. Hairball or Lem or whoever else gets on people's nerves aren't the Enemy posting to destroy the site, tear fandom apart, and make the Stones decide to retire. They're fans, like all of us.

They're opinionated. They're not afraid to go against the grain and speak something other than endless praise and how lucky we are the Stones are still willing to take our money. If Hairball has the time and inclination to post "Hit the Wall" a hundred times a day, that's his business. Why fight with him or call him names? Just ignore him if you don't like his opinions.

The honest to God truth is there are times Hairball posts things I agree with or laugh at or irritate me or make me shake my head in bewilderment. The thing is, I'm the one choosing to read what he has to say. I don't read every thread or even every post in threads I follow. Many times, I'll just read posts by people I feel I know. Hairball is one of them. Agree, disagree, read, ignore is all fine, but be tolerant. If Bjornulf didn't want these guys here, he'd do something about it.

You are great; you implore me to admit that I really like the people on here

You make me wanna be a better man...or something.

Somewhere there are children growing up reading this message board who aspire to one day earn an "or something" from you. Though your old user name is missed.

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Rocky Dijon
I had resolved to stop posting here for the umpteenth time and just read, but Jeez, people, get a grip. Hairball or Lem or whoever else gets on people's nerves aren't the Enemy posting to destroy the site, tear fandom apart, and make the Stones decide to retire. They're fans, like all of us.

They're opinionated. They're not afraid to go against the grain and speak something other than endless praise and how lucky we are the Stones are still willing to take our money. If Hairball has the time and inclination to post "Hit the Wall" a hundred times a day, that's his business. Why fight with him or call him names? Just ignore him if you don't like his opinions.

The honest to God truth is there are times Hairball posts things I agree with or laugh at or irritate me or make me shake my head in bewilderment. The thing is, I'm the one choosing to read what he has to say. I don't read every thread or even every post in threads I follow. Many times, I'll just read posts by people I feel I know. Hairball is one of them. Agree, disagree, read, ignore is all fine, but be tolerant. If Bjornulf didn't want these guys here, he'd do something about it.

agree

and the most offensive thing to me he's ever posted is the idea that the stones re record there hits

seriously why mess with perfection?




also chuck berry

I got that album sometime in the late 70s. Didn't understand it was re-recordings, or maybe I didn't think it was a bad thing then. Come on. The Stones re-recording their old hits? With who? They've always been about a certain feel. Brian on King Bee. I heard the Stones doing Worried About You in concert a couple years or so back. It's not the same with Mick Taylor's fluid, soaring lead. How about Miss You without Bill? Brown Sugar without Bobby Keys. The Stones would never be that desperate. It's estimated Keith and Mick have at least $300 Million a piece. It seemed it was going that route when the idea of a duets album was rumored. That sunk fast.

I come her for relief from the world. To love and bitch about my favorite group of all time. It's like family.

he recorded it after switching from chess to mercury records in 1967

fun note the 1989 cd release actually has 4 extra songs not released on the original vinyl version

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Somewhere there are children growing up reading this message board who aspire to one day earn an "or something" from you. Though your old user name is missed.

You're clearly conflating me for someone who may be dead or as they say in German, Tod.

<heard the Stones doing Worried About You in concert a couple years or so back. It's not the same with Mick Taylor's fluid, soaring lead>

I assume you meant it's not the same without Taylor's lead?

However, Mick Taylor has never played on that track.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-08-16 11:18 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Somewhere there are children growing up reading this message board who aspire to one day earn an "or something" from you. Though your old user name is missed.

You're clearly conflating me for someone who may be dead or as they say in German, Tod.

Is Tod dead..?

Quote
z

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Somewhere there are children growing up reading this message board who aspire to one day earn an "or something" from you. Though your old user name is missed.

You're clearly conflating me for someone who may be dead or as they say in German, Tod.

Is Tod dead..?

I think he was on the Euro-tour, so no. He is not "tot"