Quote
Lorenz
The fact that any sane person would seriously consider those two new songs experimental blows my mind. It also really annoys me. We all have paid plenty of money into the Stones machinery, we have dedicated plenty of time on them. To release something like this and seriously be so delusional to think they are actually putting out a good product is ridiculous. If this is any indication of the new album to come, the Stones are absolutely done for. They will get 1 star reviews and end their career in a disaster, destroying what's left of their legacy. I really think it's that bad.

No, they are definitely not experimental. The Stones were experimenting with grooves and rap already as early as 1964, see "Cops & Robbers". That was Gangsta Rap and as such, much ahead of its time and therefore did no get an official release until recently, as a GRRR! bonus....

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
stone4ever
Ok another day, another post, a chance to get something out there to whoever listens.
This thing that keeps getting repeated by people like Doxa ( don't take this the wrong way Doxy i love your angle on things because you make me question what i believe to be true) is that if Mick doesn't come up with something new and original, we will keep getting albums like Bridges and ABB. Its been said many time's that Keith's old fashioned generic Stones by numbers sound is the reason these albums underwhelm.
Have you thought to yourself that the reasons these albums underwhelm could be because Keith doesn't get his way. Could Micks domination of these albums and his refusal to write songs from scratch with keith be the reason we aren't getting albums like Some Girls or Tattoo You. I'm very interested in this new album when (if) it comes out, because the info we are getting sounds like keith isn't giving into Mick this time round. I honestly believe that GGAG and EL are the result of a hissy fit from Mick because Keith refuses to allow this album to be another Bridges. I think of the last two Stones albums as Mick solo albums using the Stones as session players with a few keith tracks thrown on for good measure.
If Mick pays Keith enough respect ( as a result of CH ) and they work with each other in an encouraging way and settle their differences, the next album could be as good as Tattoo You. I think had Mick worked on half a dozen tracks from CH and sang on them we would have had a Stones album up there with Tattoo You.
CH would not have had sounded Snooze fest with Mick working and singing on it, i know that for a fact.

This implies that Keith has songs or at least song ideas of Some Girls / Tattoo You quality and Mick just refuses to work on them in the Stones context. If that was indeed the case, I guess we would have already heard such quality songs in one way or another (in form of Keith Richards solo albums, for instance) in the meantime.

In case neither Keith nor Mick have song sketches of this quality, I doubt that just locking them both up in the kitchen would do the trick once more.

But I'll give you that: In case they really can't agree on songs either one brings to the table for the new album, I prefer them working on outtakes from the past two or three decades and release them. A new Tattoo You could be better than nothing!

No, i believe songs of that quality came from keith collaborating with Mick, i don't think Keith holds songs of mass apeal on his own. Keith can't make a hit single if his life depended on it. Same for Mick.
When they lived and worked in harmony together we had the albums that changed the world of music. Late 60's early 70's Stones albums. Of course Brian and Taylor helped in the mix.

Perhaps Mick and Keith haven't been working together on any songs from scratch for 2 or 3 decades. Its beginning to look increasingly that Stones albums have been two halves meshed together. Its always going to sound like a Stones album when keith plays on it, but is it really. Yeah it gets the Stonesy Keith sound but its becoming clear from insiders on iorr that these have been mostly Mick songs in recent years. Admittedly Micks songs are as good if not better then Keith's lazy contributions in recent decades, but they just don't make the grade this way. There is this clip on 25/5 Stones documentary where you see Mixed Emotions being created, Keith looks all soul and putting the song to Mick with guitar and humming. Mick looks all business like, irritatingly saying to keith yes i know its in FF and G. It struck me then how awkward Mick looked working with keith, i'm convinced that other than playing the finished product together they haven't sat is a room and worked together for a very long time, and this could be the reason Stones albums don't have that magic ingredient anymore.
I don't think Mick can stand being near Keith most of the time.
For what reason we will never know.
Don't get me wrong i love CH and wouldn't want it changed for the world, but i can envisage some amazing Stones songs coming from some of it with Micks fairy dust.

Quote
Lorenz
Many of you are not into any new music, you don't know how much good stuff is out there by young and new bands. The Stones as they are today are entirely irrelevant, except as a nostalgia act.

To-may-to, to-mah-to...

Quote
treaclefingers
can we complain about where we're at as fans? New material flying out from everywhere, Ronnie, Keith, now Mick, the blues album, the new album in the works, the vaults, the Mono box...it just doesn't end...what else, oh yeah, the never ending tour.

What you've said is all true Rocky, but from the glass half full POV, it's looking pretty damn good and has been since 2012, and even before with the enhanced catalogue releases. Pretty unbelievable as they hit their mid 70s.

Sunset can be the most glorious part of the day.

....Gotta Get A Grip ....



ROCKMAN

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
stone4ever
Ok another day, another post, a chance to get something out there to whoever listens.
This thing that keeps getting repeated by people like Doxa ( don't take this the wrong way Doxy i love your angle on things because you make me question what i believe to be true) is that if Mick doesn't come up with something new and original, we will keep getting albums like Bridges and ABB. Its been said many time's that Keith's old fashioned generic Stones by numbers sound is the reason these albums underwhelm.
Have you thought to yourself that the reasons these albums underwhelm could be because Keith doesn't get his way. Could Micks domination of these albums and his refusal to write songs from scratch with keith be the reason we aren't getting albums like Some Girls or Tattoo You. I'm very interested in this new album when (if) it comes out, because the info we are getting sounds like keith isn't giving into Mick this time round. I honestly believe that GGAG and EL are the result of a hissy fit from Mick because Keith refuses to allow this album to be another Bridges. I think of the last two Stones albums as Mick solo albums using the Stones as session players with a few keith tracks thrown on for good measure.
If Mick pays Keith enough respect ( as a result of CH ) and they work with each other in an encouraging way and settle their differences, the next album could be as good as Tattoo You. I think had Mick worked on half a dozen tracks from CH and sang on them we would have had a Stones album up there with Tattoo You.
CH would not have had sounded Snooze fest with Mick working and singing on it, i know that for a fact.

This implies that Keith has songs or at least song ideas of Some Girls / Tattoo You quality and Mick just refuses to work on them in the Stones context. If that was indeed the case, I guess we would have already heard such quality songs in one way or another (in form of Keith Richards solo albums, for instance) in the meantime.

In case neither Keith nor Mick have song sketches of this quality, I doubt that just locking them both up in the kitchen would do the trick once more.

But I'll give you that: In case they really can't agree on songs either one brings to the table for the new album, I prefer them working on outtakes from the past two or three decades and release them. A new Tattoo You could be better than nothing!

No, i believe songs of that quality came from keith collaborating with Mick, i don't think Keith holds songs of mass apeal on his own. Keith can't make a hit single if his life depended on it. Same for Mick.
When they lived and worked in harmony together we had the albums that changed the world of music. Late 60's early 70's Stones albums. Of course Brian and Taylor helped in the mix.

Perhaps Mick and Keith haven't been working together on any songs from scratch for 2 or 3 decades. Its beginning to look increasingly that Stones albums have been two halves meshed together. Its always going to sound like a Stones album when keith plays on it, but is it really. Yeah it gets the Stonesy Keith sound but its becoming clear from insiders on iorr that these have been mostly Mick songs in recent years. Admittedly Micks songs are as good if not better then Keith's lazy contributions in recent decades, but they just don't make the grade this way. There is this clip on 25/5 Stones documentary where you see Mixed Emotions being created, Keith looks all soul and putting the song to Mick with guitar and humming. Mick looks all business like, irritatingly saying to keith yes i know its in FF and G. It struck me then how awkward Mick looked working with keith, i'm convinced that other than playing the finished product together they haven't sat is a room and worked together for a very long time, and this could be the reason Stones albums don't have that magic ingredient anymore.
I don't think Mick can stand being near Keith most of the time.
For what reason we will never know.
Don't get me wrong i love CH and wouldn't want it changed for the world, but i can envisage some amazing Stones songs coming from some of it with Micks fairy dust.

So Keith brings only lazy contributions now and Mick can't stand being near him except to sprinkle his fairy dust over everything and then, poof! We have amazing Stones songs. I do hope I have that right, stone4ever. Otherwise, I won't not know what to expect from the new album.

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
stone4ever
Ok another day, another post, a chance to get something out there to whoever listens.
This thing that keeps getting repeated by people like Doxa ( don't take this the wrong way Doxy i love your angle on things because you make me question what i believe to be true) is that if Mick doesn't come up with something new and original, we will keep getting albums like Bridges and ABB. Its been said many time's that Keith's old fashioned generic Stones by numbers sound is the reason these albums underwhelm.
Have you thought to yourself that the reasons these albums underwhelm could be because Keith doesn't get his way. Could Micks domination of these albums and his refusal to write songs from scratch with keith be the reason we aren't getting albums like Some Girls or Tattoo You. I'm very interested in this new album when (if) it comes out, because the info we are getting sounds like keith isn't giving into Mick this time round. I honestly believe that GGAG and EL are the result of a hissy fit from Mick because Keith refuses to allow this album to be another Bridges. I think of the last two Stones albums as Mick solo albums using the Stones as session players with a few keith tracks thrown on for good measure.
If Mick pays Keith enough respect ( as a result of CH ) and they work with each other in an encouraging way and settle their differences, the next album could be as good as Tattoo You. I think had Mick worked on half a dozen tracks from CH and sang on them we would have had a Stones album up there with Tattoo You.
CH would not have had sounded Snooze fest with Mick working and singing on it, i know that for a fact.

This implies that Keith has songs or at least song ideas of Some Girls / Tattoo You quality and Mick just refuses to work on them in the Stones context. If that was indeed the case, I guess we would have already heard such quality songs in one way or another (in form of Keith Richards solo albums, for instance) in the meantime.

In case neither Keith nor Mick have song sketches of this quality, I doubt that just locking them both up in the kitchen would do the trick once more.

But I'll give you that: In case they really can't agree on songs either one brings to the table for the new album, I prefer them working on outtakes from the past two or three decades and release them. A new Tattoo You could be better than nothing!

No, i believe songs of that quality came from keith collaborating with Mick, i don't think Keith holds songs of mass apeal on his own. Keith can't make a hit single if his life depended on it. Same for Mick.
When they lived and worked in harmony together we had the albums that changed the world of music. Late 60's early 70's Stones albums. Of course Brian and Taylor helped in the mix.

Perhaps Mick and Keith haven't been working together on any songs from scratch for 2 or 3 decades. Its beginning to look increasingly that Stones albums have been two halves meshed together. Its always going to sound like a Stones album when keith plays on it, but is it really. Yeah it gets the Stonesy Keith sound but its becoming clear from insiders on iorr that these have been mostly Mick songs in recent years. Admittedly Micks songs are as good if not better then Keith's lazy contributions in recent decades, but they just don't make the grade this way. There is this clip on 25/5 Stones documentary where you see Mixed Emotions being created, Keith looks all soul and putting the song to Mick with guitar and humming. Mick looks all business like, irritatingly saying to keith yes i know its in FF and G. It struck me then how awkward Mick looked working with keith, i'm convinced that other than playing the finished product together they haven't sat is a room and worked together for a very long time, and this could be the reason Stones albums don't have that magic ingredient anymore.
I don't think Mick can stand being near Keith most of the time.
For what reason we will never know.
Don't get me wrong i love CH and wouldn't want it changed for the world, but i can envisage some amazing Stones songs coming from some of it with Micks fairy dust.

So Keith brings only lazy contributions now and Mick can't stand being near him except to sprinkle his fairy dust over everything and then, poof! We have amazing Stones songs. I do hope I have that right, stone4ever. Otherwise, I won't not know what to expect from the new album.

That's not what i said and you know it.
I think Keith buckles to Micks domination, that gives him a lazy attitude, he can't be bothered to do battle with that control freak. Keith felt compelled once again to do another solo album. CH had material in it worthy of making a great Stones album that would have been as good as Tattoo You with Micks fairy dust over parts of it. GGAG is garbage compared with any track on CH.
What you can expect from the new album is more garbage.
.

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
stone4ever
Ok another day, another post, a chance to get something out there to whoever listens.
This thing that keeps getting repeated by people like Doxa ( don't take this the wrong way Doxy i love your angle on things because you make me question what i believe to be true) is that if Mick doesn't come up with something new and original, we will keep getting albums like Bridges and ABB. Its been said many time's that Keith's old fashioned generic Stones by numbers sound is the reason these albums underwhelm.
Have you thought to yourself that the reasons these albums underwhelm could be because Keith doesn't get his way. Could Micks domination of these albums and his refusal to write songs from scratch with keith be the reason we aren't getting albums like Some Girls or Tattoo You. I'm very interested in this new album when (if) it comes out, because the info we are getting sounds like keith isn't giving into Mick this time round. I honestly believe that GGAG and EL are the result of a hissy fit from Mick because Keith refuses to allow this album to be another Bridges. I think of the last two Stones albums as Mick solo albums using the Stones as session players with a few keith tracks thrown on for good measure.
If Mick pays Keith enough respect ( as a result of CH ) and they work with each other in an encouraging way and settle their differences, the next album could be as good as Tattoo You. I think had Mick worked on half a dozen tracks from CH and sang on them we would have had a Stones album up there with Tattoo You.
CH would not have had sounded Snooze fest with Mick working and singing on it, i know that for a fact.

This implies that Keith has songs or at least song ideas of Some Girls / Tattoo You quality and Mick just refuses to work on them in the Stones context. If that was indeed the case, I guess we would have already heard such quality songs in one way or another (in form of Keith Richards solo albums, for instance) in the meantime.

In case neither Keith nor Mick have song sketches of this quality, I doubt that just locking them both up in the kitchen would do the trick once more.

But I'll give you that: In case they really can't agree on songs either one brings to the table for the new album, I prefer them working on outtakes from the past two or three decades and release them. A new Tattoo You could be better than nothing!

No, i believe songs of that quality came from keith collaborating with Mick, i don't think Keith holds songs of mass apeal on his own. Keith can't make a hit single if his life depended on it. Same for Mick.
When they lived and worked in harmony together we had the albums that changed the world of music. Late 60's early 70's Stones albums. Of course Brian and Taylor helped in the mix.

Perhaps Mick and Keith haven't been working together on any songs from scratch for 2 or 3 decades. Its beginning to look increasingly that Stones albums have been two halves meshed together. Its always going to sound like a Stones album when keith plays on it, but is it really. Yeah it gets the Stonesy Keith sound but its becoming clear from insiders on iorr that these have been mostly Mick songs in recent years. Admittedly Micks songs are as good if not better then Keith's lazy contributions in recent decades, but they just don't make the grade this way. There is this clip on 25/5 Stones documentary where you see Mixed Emotions being created, Keith looks all soul and putting the song to Mick with guitar and humming. Mick looks all business like, irritatingly saying to keith yes i know its in FF and G. It struck me then how awkward Mick looked working with keith, i'm convinced that other than playing the finished product together they haven't sat is a room and worked together for a very long time, and this could be the reason Stones albums don't have that magic ingredient anymore.
I don't think Mick can stand being near Keith most of the time.
For what reason we will never know.
Don't get me wrong i love CH and wouldn't want it changed for the world, but i can envisage some amazing Stones songs coming from some of it with Micks fairy dust.

So Keith brings only lazy contributions now and Mick can't stand being near him except to sprinkle his fairy dust over everything and then, poof! We have amazing Stones songs. I do hope I have that right, stone4ever. Otherwise, I won't not know what to expect from the new album.

That's not what i said and you know it.
I think Keith buckles to Micks domination, that gives him a lazy attitude, he can't be bothered to do battle with that control freak. Keith felt compelled once again to do another solo album. CH had material in it worthy of making a great Stones album that would have been as good as Tattoo You with Micks fairy dust over parts of it. GGAG is garbage compared with any track on CH.
What you can expect from the new album is more garbage.
.

I didn't know it, but I think I know exactly how you see things now.

I think people like you need things explained in the most primitive way or it goes over your head. If it isn't in black and white you can't understand whats being said. Things are more complex than black or white. Nothing regarding Mick and Keith is simple or straight forward. It might appear that way.
Say something please, enlighten me. Do you have a theory, a disagreement, an idea, or do you just go out of your way to be a wise-ass.

agree stone4ever things are not b or w, in general, and in between jagger and richards in particular

In all relationships nothing is simple or straight forward .....



ROCKMAN

Well, I gotta say that I didn't expect this. Is it as good as Mick's previous solo material? Hard to say, it's still too new to judge. It would be interesting if Mick does end up making a 5th solo album at some point. Hopefully that would be after the Stones album is finished an we don't have a repeat of the situation regarding Dirty Work.

"Is it as good as Mick's previous solo material"?

Yes - it's actually better imo.

But has the party already ended? Other than here on this IORR thread, I see and hear nothing about these tunes. There's a local "classic rock" radio station nearby based in Santa Barbara that plays what it wants with real live DJ's. They played tunes from Crosseyed Heart and Blue and Lonesome from the minute they were released and for quite awhile afterwards (Crosseyed Heart lasted much longer tha B&L on their playlist though). They even occasionally play "deep" Stones cuts such as Rain Fall Down and Saint of Me amongst others. So far - and I listen to this station every day for at least a couple of hours - no sign of Getta Grip/England Lost. Being that there's similarities to Rain Fall Down, I would have thought they would have jumped all over these new releases, but so far NADA (nothing). Has anyone anywhere heard either of these on a radio station? I seriously doubt they'd be played on a teeny bopper top 40 station that plays only contemporary/cutting edge hits, but maybe they are? Also, still wondering if Mick will unleash these live on Fallon or SNL...or maybe he'll take the Keith Crosseyed Heart route and let them hibernate for eternity.

In the meantime, I've had my fulfillment on all of these and am revisiting classic Stones and Keith solo. It was brief cheap thrill and kind of fun while it lasted,
but maybe I have a short attention span disorder when it comes to average music like this where there's just not enough substance.

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

Quote
stone4ever
I think people like you need things explained in the most primitive way or it goes over your head. If it isn't in black and white you can't understand whats being said. Things are more complex than black or white. Nothing regarding Mick and Keith is simple or straight forward. It might appear that way.
Say something please, enlighten me. Do you have a theory, a disagreement, an idea, or do you just go out of your way to be a wise-ass.

I guess I've been called worse than a primitive dim-witted wise-ass, so I'll take it with some grace and humor, stone4ever. I'm not interested in trading insults, I'll just say that I'm old enough to have had more than my fair share of compromise in my own relationships so I think I do understand nuance when it's said. I didn't see it in your post - I thought it was somewhat insulting to both Mick and Keith - so I responded in anger. I'm not angry anymore, it's just words and just your opinion, which you are certainly entitled to express. And no, I really don't go out of my way to be a wise-ass. A bit cheeky perhaps, but that's usually the extent. But maybe I'm losing my touch...

Quote
Rockman
From Rev Twenty Redlights over at Shidoobeeeeeeeeee

And now IORR's "Rocky Dijon", who is the contractor who actually manages the Stones propaganda section, has joined in.
The amen chorus is in full swing...

Oh dear Oh DEAR Rocky ....
Tinkerbell doesn't know whether to like the Jagger tracks or not ...
Now your going to totally confuse him ... ... hhhaa

I paid a visit and saw the latest. He's trying very hard to press buttons which must mean people over there are largely ignoring him. The good Reverend is far too smart to believe his own conspiracy theories but he thinks it might make for entertaining reading if he can inflame egos. He is amusing as always and he knows enough genuine background of individuals to get his theories half-right in the hopes of irritating those he calls out with the half that is fabricated. If he keeps it up, I'll have him defrocked and revoke his backstage passes.

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
stone4ever
I think people like you need things explained in the most primitive way or it goes over your head. If it isn't in black and white you can't understand whats being said. Things are more complex than black or white. Nothing regarding Mick and Keith is simple or straight forward. It might appear that way.
Say something please, enlighten me. Do you have a theory, a disagreement, an idea, or do you just go out of your way to be a wise-ass.

I guess I've been called worse than a primitive dim-witted wise-ass, so I'll take it with some grace and humor, stone4ever. I'm not interested in trading insults, I'll just say that I'm old enough to have had more than my fair share of compromise in my own relationships so I think I do understand nuance when it's said. I didn't see it in your post - I thought it was somewhat insulting to both Mick and Keith - so I responded in anger. I'm not angry anymore, it's just words and just your opinion, which you are certainly entitled to express. And no, I really don't go out of my way to be a wise-ass. A bit cheeky perhaps, but that's usually the extent. But maybe I'm losing my touch...

Haha its all good Latebloomer. I'll be taking a rest from here, so over to posters who don't insult Mick and Keith. ( i love keith BTW ) Surprised that you haven't picked up on that. I didn't say you was Dim witted, you came to that conclusion all on your own Sorry couldn't resist that one. When i say Keith is lazy or his songs are not as good as Micks, i'm being slightly sarcastic, its the tone we get from some posters on here, like keith does generic music by numbers and that Mick makes all the new exciting sounds Its my way of drawing people into discussion because if i don't bring Keith down to their opinion of him or relate to him in that manner they will not enter the conversation. Personally i don't think Mick or keith do justice to their talents as solo artists, it was nice for them to do solo albums but the results only served as proof they needed the other ones gifts to Capitalize on their considerable talents.
At the end of the day i just want discussion, i learn from debate and other peoples opinions, i just saw your posts as a distraction to discussion, but i can see you was being sincere in your anger over my comments. Thanks for being honest with me, no hard feelings i hope.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2017-08-03 19:33 by stone4ever.

So I have listened to both songs twice now, a week apart. Made the mistake the first time of watching the videos which greatly distract from the music. These songs are not terrible, but are far from great. They are okay. GGAG has too many lyrics. EL has too few. As an artist, Mick should express what he feels. But I personally do not prefer "topical" songs. For me, a song should first and foremost be enjoyable to listen to, and should make me feel something, be it happy, sad, sexy, wistful, melancholy, something. The best songs are about the human condition: love, heartache, loneliness, joy, beauty, sex, courage, hope, peace.

This is not to say that a topical song can't be a great song. SFTD was topical and great. For What it's Worth, Buffalo Springfield, was topical and great: "There's something happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear." Brilliant lyrics. Neil Young, who I love, writes a lot of topical songs, but they aren't always great songs. His love songs are best. "It's so hard to make love pay when you're on the losing end." Brilliant.

I'd prefer Mick and Keith to stick to songs that make you feel something. "Love is a bed full of blues." Brilliant.

Moral of story & message to Sir Mick: 'stick to being a Rolling Stone' !!



[ I want to shout, but I can hardly speak ]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-08-03 13:44 by paulywaul.

Keith is his "Wendy Lady"

Quote
Maindefender
Keith is his "Wendy Lady"

Or maybe his Captain Hook. There is the pirate aspect to consider after all!

Peace,
Mr DJA

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
stone4ever
I think people like you need things explained in the most primitive way or it goes over your head. If it isn't in black and white you can't understand whats being said. Things are more complex than black or white. Nothing regarding Mick and Keith is simple or straight forward. It might appear that way.
Say something please, enlighten me. Do you have a theory, a disagreement, an idea, or do you just go out of your way to be a wise-ass.

I guess I've been called worse than a primitive dim-witted wise-ass, so I'll take it with some grace and humor, stone4ever. I'm not interested in trading insults, I'll just say that I'm old enough to have had more than my fair share of compromise in my own relationships so I think I do understand nuance when it's said. I didn't see it in your post - I thought it was somewhat insulting to both Mick and Keith - so I responded in anger. I'm not angry anymore, it's just words and just your opinion, which you are certainly entitled to express. And no, I really don't go out of my way to be a wise-ass. A bit cheeky perhaps, but that's usually the extent. But maybe I'm losing my touch...

Haha its all good Latebloomer. I'll be taking a rest from here, so over to posters who don't insult Mick and Keith. ( i love keith BTW ) Surprised that you haven't picked up on that. I didn't say you was Dim witted, you came to that conclusion all on your own Sorry couldn't resist that one. When i say Keith is lazy or his songs are not as good as Micks, i'm being slightly sarcastic, its the tone we get from some posters on here, like keith does generic music by numbers and that Mick makes all the new exciting sounds Its my way of drawing people into discussion because if i don't bring Keith down to their opinion of him or relate to him in that manner they will not enter the conversation. Personally i don't think Mick or keith do justice to their talents as solo artists, it was nice for them to do solo albums but the results only served as proof they needed the other ones gifts to Capitalize on their considerable talents.
At the end of the day i just want discussion, i learn from debate and other peoples opinions, i just saw your posts as a distraction to discussion, but i can see you was being sincere in your anger over my comments. Thanks for being honest with me, no hard feelings i hope.

Aaaah, un agent provocateur par excellence!!! You're not actually Jane Rose by coincidence? I really wondered why you changed your opion about the new Jagger tracks from "shit-I actually like GGAG-garbage-I actually like the tracks-garbage" (at least that's how I recall it) every couple of hours or so. It makes your posts a bit uneven and a bit difficult to take you serious.

Also your accusations against people like Doxa (and me?) are a bit off the tracks. In can speak only for me, but I don't blame anybody for the lack of creativity (or "classic quality") in the Stones output of recent decades. If anything, maybe the truth is that for every artist the time comes when everything is said and done. Keith and Mick are obviously following different routes to escape this trap. Plus, who's to blame when musical interests develop into different directions over the decades? These are not the teenagers anymore who met on the platform of Dartford Station. It happens, these are human beings after all. I played in bands decades ago where (almost) every member shared the same musical interests - and nowadays it's sometimes hard to impossible to agree on a number of songs to play, even when it's just for fun.

In the end, we know nothing about the new Stones album. The Jagger solo tracks are just that - solo tracks. So for anybody who does not like them, I'd say it's too early to fear doom... One would think that the Stones don't start a project like this without having agreed on a modus operandi beforehand...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-08-03 21:23 by retired_dog.

Quote
mr_dja

Quote
Maindefender
Keith is his "Wendy Lady"

Or maybe his Captain Hook. There is the pirate aspect to consider after all!

Peace,
Mr DJA

Yeah Mr DJA probably a better comparison unfortunately. I'm a hopeless romantic I guess.....

Quote
Maindefender

Quote
mr_dja

Quote
Maindefender
Keith is his "Wendy Lady"

Or maybe his Captain Hook. There is the pirate aspect to consider after all!

Peace,
Mr DJA

Yeah Mr DJA probably a better comparison unfortunately. I'm a hopeless romantic I guess.....

No blood, no foul... Romanticism is a good thing in my book! We just need a pic of a certain ballerina to represent Wendy and, who knows, maybe there's more romance than we know about!

Peace,
Mr DJA

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
stone4ever
I think people like you need things explained in the most primitive way or it goes over your head. If it isn't in black and white you can't understand whats being said. Things are more complex than black or white. Nothing regarding Mick and Keith is simple or straight forward. It might appear that way.
Say something please, enlighten me. Do you have a theory, a disagreement, an idea, or do you just go out of your way to be a wise-ass.

I guess I've been called worse than a primitive dim-witted wise-ass, so I'll take it with some grace and humor, stone4ever. I'm not interested in trading insults, I'll just say that I'm old enough to have had more than my fair share of compromise in my own relationships so I think I do understand nuance when it's said. I didn't see it in your post - I thought it was somewhat insulting to both Mick and Keith - so I responded in anger. I'm not angry anymore, it's just words and just your opinion, which you are certainly entitled to express. And no, I really don't go out of my way to be a wise-ass. A bit cheeky perhaps, but that's usually the extent. But maybe I'm losing my touch...

Haha its all good Latebloomer. I'll be taking a rest from here, so over to posters who don't insult Mick and Keith. ( i love keith BTW ) Surprised that you haven't picked up on that. I didn't say you was Dim witted, you came to that conclusion all on your own Sorry couldn't resist that one. When i say Keith is lazy or his songs are not as good as Micks, i'm being slightly sarcastic, its the tone we get from some posters on here, like keith does generic music by numbers and that Mick makes all the new exciting sounds Its my way of drawing people into discussion because if i don't bring Keith down to their opinion of him or relate to him in that manner they will not enter the conversation. Personally i don't think Mick or keith do justice to their talents as solo artists, it was nice for them to do solo albums but the results only served as proof they needed the other ones gifts to Capitalize on their considerable talents.
At the end of the day i just want discussion, i learn from debate and other peoples opinions, i just saw your posts as a distraction to discussion, but i can see you was being sincere in your anger over my comments. Thanks for being honest with me, no hard feelings i hope.

Hmmm...well, maybe you're the one having trouble seeing beyond black and white cause it sure seems to me you were calling me stupid or slow or..dimwitted. But no, no hard feelings. Cheers Stones4ever, I'm outta here too. I'll wade on over to a thread with calmer waters.

Quote
Honestman

Moves like Jagger...



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

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Maindefender

Quote
georgelicks
I can tell from my source that both songs were from the Stones' sessions for the new album, both Ronnie and Charlie are on it but Keith refused to play, just like he did not play on Saint Of Me.

Both songs were re-worked as Mick Jagger solo songs, Universal wanted something out to test the market and keep the hype about the new album and Mick was happy to put something out.

There are more songs like these from the 15 or so new songs recorded so far, but it looks like Keith wants a classic Rolling Stones sounding album, no dance or experimental stuff on it so there's the fight for the final cut of the new album.

A Bridges To Babylon situation again, but 20 years later.

Woof.......Thanks George

Yes, thank you George. If the reports are to be believed, Keith and Mick are both committed to the album and, it's clear that they each have their own vision of how it should sound. That doesn't necessarily mean that the final product will be a disappointment. Maybe putting these songs out relieves some of the pressure on both of them and they can finish strong.

Possibly but Keith has no material of interest ("dynamite riffs" like Low Down and OMS? Great...) so apart from the usual Mick trashing and dragging his feet what does he have to offer? That album is not going to happen in these conditions...Hopefully it won't have a negative impact on the NF cash grab (as if they needed it).

What didn't work for the VL writing sessions in Barbados in 1993 would work in 2017? Unlikely at best!

@Rocky - what's this "contract" you're referring to for Charlie and Ronnie? A specific contract with UMG to appear on Mick rexordings?

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio

Quote
Hairball
But has the party already ended? Other than here on this IORR thread, I see and hear nothing about these tunes. There's a local "classic rock" radio station nearby based in Santa Barbara that plays what it wants with real live DJ's. They played tunes from Crosseyed Heart and Blue and Lonesome from the minute they were released and for quite awhile afterwards (Crosseyed Heart lasted much longer tha B&L on their playlist though). They even occasionally play "deep" Stones cuts such as Rain Fall Down and Saint of Me amongst others. So far - and I listen to this station every day for at least a couple of hours - no sign of Getta Grip/England Lost. Being that there's similarities to Rain Fall Down, I would have thought they would have jumped all over these new releases, but so far NADA (nothing). Has anyone anywhere heard either of these on a radio station? I seriously doubt they'd be played on a teeny bopper top 40 station that plays only contemporary/cutting edge hits, but maybe they are? Also, still wondering if Mick will unleash these live on Fallon or SNL...or maybe he'll take the Keith Crosseyed Heart route and let them hibernate for eternity.

Some US radios playing Gotta Get A Grip:

WXRT (Chicago)
WXPN (Philadelphia)
KGSR (Austin)
KPND (Spokane)
KCMP (Minneapolis)
WNCS (Burlington, VT)
KCSN (Los Angeles)
WBJB (Brookdale Community College, NJ)
WFIV (Knoxville, Tennessee)

All are Adult album alternative radios, sadly no other format will play a new song by a 74 years old guy in the US.

Quote
gotdablouse
@Rocky - what's this "contract" you're referring to for Charlie and Ronnie? A specific contract with UMG to appear on Mick recordings?

Sorry for not being more clear with my speculation. My reasoning is this...the solo single is copyrighted by Promotone and published by Promopub. Mick had been using Jagged Recordings and Jagged Music for copyrighting sound recordings and publishing solo songs. These two tracks apparently fall under the band's current contract with Universal Music Group. Charlie and Ronnie (as well as Keith) will profit to some extent since it is essentially "Rolling Stones Records" in as much as it is their companies and not only Mick's company. The interesting thing is that not only Keith, but Don Was had nothing to do with these tracks nor Krishna Sharma (who's been engineering the band).

Our old friend Revvie, gone but not forgotten, has a conspiracy theory that Mick's single was meant to flop which seems a bit silly to me. I understand the suggestion it is to test market the new Stones album. No label throws promotional money on two music videos and remixes for a tax write-off. That said, there is something coordinated in all of this. I don't think it's as simple as Keith didn't like it and sat it out as on "Saint of Me" because these aren't Jagger/Richards songs and Don Was isn't producing. It is an interesting situation. Anyone looking for the truth from Mick or Keith is likely foolish.

So speaks the Minister of Propaganda...

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
stone4ever
I think people like you need things explained in the most primitive way or it goes over your head. If it isn't in black and white you can't understand whats being said. Things are more complex than black or white. Nothing regarding Mick and Keith is simple or straight forward. It might appear that way.
Say something please, enlighten me. Do you have a theory, a disagreement, an idea, or do you just go out of your way to be a wise-ass.

I guess I've been called worse than a primitive dim-witted wise-ass, so I'll take it with some grace and humor, stone4ever. I'm not interested in trading insults, I'll just say that I'm old enough to have had more than my fair share of compromise in my own relationships so I think I do understand nuance when it's said. I didn't see it in your post - I thought it was somewhat insulting to both Mick and Keith - so I responded in anger. I'm not angry anymore, it's just words and just your opinion, which you are certainly entitled to express. And no, I really don't go out of my way to be a wise-ass. A bit cheeky perhaps, but that's usually the extent. But maybe I'm losing my touch...

Haha its all good Latebloomer. I'll be taking a rest from here, so over to posters who don't insult Mick and Keith. ( i love keith BTW ) Surprised that you haven't picked up on that. I didn't say you was Dim witted, you came to that conclusion all on your own Sorry couldn't resist that one. When i say Keith is lazy or his songs are not as good as Micks, i'm being slightly sarcastic, its the tone we get from some posters on here, like keith does generic music by numbers and that Mick makes all the new exciting sounds Its my way of drawing people into discussion because if i don't bring Keith down to their opinion of him or relate to him in that manner they will not enter the conversation. Personally i don't think Mick or keith do justice to their talents as solo artists, it was nice for them to do solo albums but the results only served as proof they needed the other ones gifts to Capitalize on their considerable talents.
At the end of the day i just want discussion, i learn from debate and other peoples opinions, i just saw your posts as a distraction to discussion, but i can see you was being sincere in your anger over my comments. Thanks for being honest with me, no hard feelings i hope.

Aaaah, un agent provocateur par excellence!!! You're not actually Jane Rose by coincidence? I really wondered why you changed your opion about the new Jagger tracks from "shit-I actually like GGAG-garbage-I actually like the tracks-garbage" (at least that's how I recall it) every couple of hours or so. It makes your posts a bit uneven and a bit difficult to take you serious.

Also your accusations against people like Doxa (and me?) are a bit off the tracks. In can speak only for me, but I don't blame anybody for the lack of creativity (or "classic quality") in the Stones output of recent decades. If anything, maybe the truth is that for every artist the time comes when everything is said and done. Keith and Mick are obviously following different routes to escape this trap. Plus, who's to blame when musical interests develop into different directions over the decades? These are not the teenagers anymore who met on the platform of Dartford Station. It happens, these are human beings after all. I played in bands decades ago where (almost) every member shared the same musical interests - and nowadays it's sometimes hard to impossible to agree on a number of songs to play, even when it's just for fun.

In the end, we know nothing about the new Stones album. The Jagger solo tracks are just that - solo tracks. So for anybody who does not like them, I'd say it's too early to fear doom... One would think that the Stones don't start a project like this without having agreed on a modus operandi beforehand...

We all do it, we feel easier about things if we put people into boxes, it helps you understand me or helps you think you understand me if you can put me into a compartment. Your paranoia and obsession with following my posts runs so deep that you actually think i might me Jane Rose.
I can assure you i am no more than a fan of this band, i have no contacts , no insiders and nothing to gain from spending my time on here discussing this band. I find some posters on here like hopkins Rocky and Doxa fascinating, there are some great people on this site. I do change my mind about things and i'm sorry if that makes me confusing. I did like GGAG, then really liked it, then got bored with it and now i'm just enjoying the new remixes, been listening to the Keven Parker remix today. I'm beginning to understand this whole thing better now. I loved the One Hit To The Body remix all those years ago. I really can't stand England lost and i can't see that my mind will change on that one. I don't think Doxa minds me challenging his thoughtful views, i have a lot of respect for the man and i think he likes me even though i disagree with a lot of what he says. I do try to provoke people into commenting and venting their feelings about this band and its members, i like to think i increase the traffic flow a little here when i'm around. At the end of the day i know so much more about this band than i did two years ago. Its a healthy obsession i guess. I don't know what to say to you retired dog, i have no opinion of you , i don't know you and you don't know me, so lets keep it cool and just stay out of each others way if you are going to get silly and think that i'm Jane Rose. Man i hope you are kidding me !!
To be honest i'm sick and tired of running into people who cross me each day on here, its like a persecution. They just jump down your throat because they think they hate what i just said but they can't even be bothered to read the previous two pages to understand what i am saying in the right context.
Its stressful, i enjoy the conversations and discussions but can't be doing with people taking my views personally all the time. If i think England lost is a pile of shit why would that cause a poster to go all defensive and be personal towards me.. Mick Jagger is successful enough and rich enough to take criticism from an ass hole like me on a fan site.