sorry. I meant damned. That's it for me with trying to talk text I'm too old I have to get a better hook up and find out how to set settings. I'm sorry. I will clean these up and not use this anymore until I can get consistently accurate.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
GetYerAngie

Quote
Doxa
These @#$%& double standars in this site. These bloody "Keith Richards is the second coming of Christ" people. When I said something controversial in that Keith Richards solo album thread, that was a reason to screaem and shout "oh that horrible Doxa isn't he bad, he is spoiling our party?". Dandelion Powderman was so angry that he not just delated all of his posts in that thread but he also kicked me out of (his) IORR band (that supposed to play next month in Amsterdam). Now I am sure anything as bitching and propaganda-like people like Hairball are saying is perfectly allright by our Dandelinion Powderman. Because it is only about Mick Jagger.

Thank you jeezus richards almighty! I simply hate double standards.


And @#$%& you!

- Doxa

Yeah energitic Dandie Powergame and his selfrightiousness and dopplestandards are 90% of the time no gain for this site, and Hairball neither. It's sad but understandable that you take yet another pause. Your posts will be missed.

What did I do now...

you're just being you...you can't help it.

BBD-bring back doxa

I can't help being self-righteous, with double standards... Yes, I'm sure that's why Doxa left.

Nice to see a serious and heartfelt post from you again. Thanks.

Quote
35love
P.S. The goofy Dad joining the band only to play the cowbell... reminded me of the HTW cowbell jokes I've read here...

And this has reminded me of when Keith and Mick were on the Simpsons back in 2002.
I haven't watched the Simpsons probably since this episode aired, but it used to be a funny show.

Here's a 1:00 clip:
Keith and Mick on Simpsons




"the family takes Homer to a Rock 'n Roll Fantasy Camp, run by the Rolling Stones. At the camp, Homer and a bunch of other Springfield citizens learn about rock music,
from instructors Mick Jagger and Keith Richards, Elvis Costello, Lenny Kravitz, Tom Petty and Brian Setzer. Finally, the wannabe-rockstars have a mock rock concert, with Homer as the lead guitarist and singer"

How I Spent My Strummer Vacation

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

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Can't really see a difference between the two cuts. I;m glad Mick put out couple of new tracks, but they are pretty lame. I wonder - who really does he see them appealing to? Young people? Old Stones fans?

Based on what my 22 year old niece just said, can't see young people getting into these - not sure they want to hear an old man preaching and shouting politics at them.
As for old Stones fans liking them ...evidently the new tunes speak to a certain element, but that particular group seemingly finds joy and something positive in anything Stones related.
Would be interesting to read an honest critique from someone not obsessed with the Stones, and maybe someone younger who is more familiar with what is hip to the younger generation.

Excellent post Hairball. One of the reasons I visit iorr less and less is the blind faith which borders on musical evangelism when it comes to anything they do these days. I'm as big a stones fan as anyone, but if something is formulaic shite, then it needs to be called out and yes it's about opinions, but I find it hard to beleive anyone could consider these two offerings anything other than at best very mediocre.

It really has long since past the time when the any member of the Stones should be trying to be current, it just makes them look ridiculous and the only people who will like it, are likely to be not the yoof, but ageing men and women looking for a glimmer of a long dead fire.

But who said this is for the younger audience?I don,t think this is meant for a younger audience at all.But these songs are really not good,i cant really understand why he come up with these.There are no melody there,just a rhytm

Quote
harlem shuffle
But who said this is for the younger audience?I don,t think this is meant for a younger audience at all.But these songs are really not good,i cant really understand why he come up with these.There are no melody there,just a rhytm

Maybe it's the dance-heavy beat and the extensive use of keyboards and effects that lead people to believe these songs are not first and foremost for the older fans?

IMO, they sound like 90s dance tracks, beefed up with a little guitars.

I like what Mick wants to get across lyrically. Those lyrics are probably not for potential young fans, though...

..............Gotta Get a Grip .............



ROCKMAN

Quote
crumbling_mice

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Can't really see a difference between the two cuts. I;m glad Mick put out couple of new tracks, but they are pretty lame. I wonder - who really does he see them appealing to? Young people? Old Stones fans?

Based on what my 22 year old niece just said, can't see young people getting into these - not sure they want to hear an old man preaching and shouting politics at them.
As for old Stones fans liking them ...evidently the new tunes speak to a certain element, but that particular group seemingly finds joy and something positive in anything Stones related.
Would be interesting to read an honest critique from someone not obsessed with the Stones, and maybe someone younger who is more familiar with what is hip to the younger generation.

Excellent post Hairball. One of the reasons I visit iorr less and less is the blind faith which borders on musical evangelism when it comes to anything they do these days. I'm as big a stones fan as anyone, but if something is formulaic shite, then it needs to be called out and yes it's about opinions, but I find it hard to beleive anyone could consider these two offerings anything other than at best very mediocre.

It really has long since past the time when the any member of the Stones should be trying to be current, it just makes them look ridiculous and the only people who will like it, are likely to be not the yoof, but ageing men and women looking for a glimmer of a long dead fire.

Although I take a backseat to no one when it comes to hatred of The Rolling Stones, I could not disagree more.

In my opinion:

1) The music is incredibly-Stones-y and not at all "hip," "edgy," or experimental. I'm not being a smartass when I say that I honestly can imagine either of these songs on any Stones album released post-Tattoo You.

2) Mick Jagger is many things but he's not an idiot. He is more likely painfully aware of his ancient band's position in the current pantheon of popular music.

3) Mick's a musician who writes songs. Presumably he'd like to record and release these songs in order to "get them out there" for people to either dig or not. What are his current choices? He can wait around for his band to agree on a "direction" for their forthcoming (?) Supposed Album ... or he can have some fun using today's distribution tools and bring his songs to an audience with much the same immediacy that he did as a very young man at the beginning of his career ... and have some fun in the process. I guess you can turn that into an exercise in Peter Pannish patheticization ... but why interpret it that way? That may reveal more about our needs than his intentions.

Quote
harlem shuffle
But who said this is for the younger audience?I don,t think this is meant for a younger audience at all.But these songs are really not good,i cant really understand why he come up with these.There are no melody there,just a rhytm

I posted that a day or two after release I believe, and that portion of my post was originally based on the fact that Skepta and Tame Implala's Dave Parker were involved in the remixes.
Both of them are young relatively speaking and in comparison to Mick who is 74 (Skepta age 34 ,Parker 31), so it seemed the aim was to reach a younger audience.
Now the dust has settled and we've all had time to see the results...they're really not reaching much of any audience, be they young or be they old - give or take a few of course.

Quote
crumbling_mice

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Can't really see a difference between the two cuts. I;m glad Mick put out couple of new tracks, but they are pretty lame. I wonder - who really does he see them appealing to? Young people? Old Stones fans?

Based on what my 22 year old niece just said, can't see young people getting into these - not sure they want to hear an old man preaching and shouting politics at them.
As for old Stones fans liking them ...evidently the new tunes speak to a certain element, but that particular group seemingly finds joy and something positive in anything Stones related.
Would be interesting to read an honest critique from someone not obsessed with the Stones, and maybe someone younger who is more familiar with what is hip to the younger generation.

Excellent post Hairball. One of the reasons I visit iorr less and less is the blind faith which borders on musical evangelism when it comes to anything they do these days. I'm as big a stones fan as anyone, but if something is formulaic shite, then it needs to be called out and yes it's about opinions, but I find it hard to beleive anyone could consider these two offerings anything other than at best very mediocre.

It really has long since past the time when the any member of the Stones should be trying to be current, it just makes them look ridiculous and the only people who will like it, are likely to be not the yoof, but ageing men and women looking for a glimmer of a long dead fire.

____________________________________________________________________________________________


edit: As for my comment that starts with "As for old Stones fans liking them ..." I should clarify that by adding "generally speaking"...even though I said "a certain element" which I thought would make it clear, didn't intend to label every Stones fan who likes or loves these tunes as blind followers of the band, though there are certainly some who fit that category.

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



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2017-08-07 01:48 by Hairball.

At last someone who speaks with a positive intelligent view ...... thank you longbeach



ROCKMAN

Quote
crumbling_mice

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Can't really see a difference between the two cuts. I;m glad Mick put out couple of new tracks, but they are pretty lame. I wonder - who really does he see them appealing to? Young people? Old Stones fans?

Based on what my 22 year old niece just said, can't see young people getting into these - not sure they want to hear an old man preaching and shouting politics at them.
As for old Stones fans liking them ...evidently the new tunes speak to a certain element, but that particular group seemingly finds joy and something positive in anything Stones related.
Would be interesting to read an honest critique from someone not obsessed with the Stones, and maybe someone younger who is more familiar with what is hip to the younger generation.

Excellent post Hairball. One of the reasons I visit iorr less and less is the blind faith which borders on musical evangelism when it comes to anything they do these days. I'm as big a stones fan as anyone, but if something is formulaic shite, then it needs to be called out and yes it's about opinions, but I find it hard to beleive anyone could consider these two offerings anything other than at best very mediocre.

It really has long since past the time when the any member of the Stones should be trying to be current, it just makes them look ridiculous and the only people who will like it, are likely to be not the yoof, but ageing men and women looking for a glimmer of a long dead fire.

I call myself a fan, but maybe ( read: obviously) I cannot claim to be so big or worthy a fan as, for instance, you are. But I am one who thinks that these two songs are better than " at best very mediocre". It means that persons with such, apparently ridiculous, views exist.

As my right to praise these two songs seemingly will be based on my not praising everything from the last decades, I must repeat my words in a possibly irritating way, for which I apologize to those who have read them very recently: I acknowledge that Keith's album CROSSEYED HEART may be clever, but I experience it as quite boring. And, in addition, in former days I was displeased by how the album TATTOO YOU came to sound. So I don't praise anything Stones-related. Obviously, one reason that I can't be taken as serious by those who feel them capable of defining what a Rolling Stones fan must be, will be uncorrect critique when I apply it to that last mentionned album.

As I became aware of the Rolling Stones about 1964, but still wish the Rolling Stones or members of the band to expand what Rolling Stones-related music may comprise, also therefore I am probably one of those ageing persons not to be taken seriously, just like the verdict would have been if I instead had been quite young.

Edit: Grammatical error.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-08-07 01:52 by Witness.

No worries Witness - I edited my post above as to not stereotype or pigeonhole anyone:
Here it is again:

As for my comment that starts with "As for old Stones fans liking them ..." I should clarify that by adding "generally speaking"...even though I said "a certain element" which I thought would make it clear, didn't intend to label every Stones fan who likes or loves these tunes as blind followers of the band, though there are certainly some who fit that category.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-08-07 01:49 by Hairball.

ok; posted this incorrectly on aother thread. yikes have to go back there and deal with that but.....


....someone posted something about the anok, alok, ot whatever mix so I dipped in; this is what I got::

Yep that one's better. I finally decided to give it another go. Wish I had listened to this one first. As I was listening the first-time I was also posting here...most of that would be the same impressions. I liked it a lot at first, including the drum sounds, the hypnotic rhythym...My issues was it went nowhere, sorta...it didn't change or move or open up or resolve or anything. I don't feel that way about a lot of the more hard core and general 'hip hop' I listen to; I mean you can't avoid it and I don' ttry to..I'd rather lean into something the culture all around me is expressing itself with and etc....

...so i'm starting fresh with this. It's good to hear Mick; he sounds vital. I'm gonna drop back from wholesale ignoring it....there is a rock band playing outside the bouldvard; so i'm gonna go out and groove; it's so great...life is beautiful; they are playing Midnigh Special ; i can hear it from the window...super...

so yeh Mick; congratulations....i'm starting from scratch with this; under three minutes to0!!! word.
......not dragging me thru four and half minutes of frustration and hyper word jam that more puts up a barrier, for me, than invited me in, or took me some place....

there's no right or wrong. peeps here way ahead of me finding this mix right off the bat; saving themselves a minutes and a half of terror each time they listen. hey that adds up... winking smiley thanks Mick!! yep the posters here have it right; like LongBeach; keep putting out whatever; keep working; keep engaging yourslef no matter what kind of tragedy you guys go through personally because you're spoiled brats....love you anyway...

Quote
hopkins
ok; posted this incorrectly on aother thread. yikes have to go back there and deal with that but.....


....someone posted something about the anok, alok, ot whatever mix so I dipped in; this is what I got::

Yep that one's better. I finally decided to give it another go. Wish I had listened to this one first. As I was listening the first-time I was also posting here...most of that would be the same impressions. I liked it a lot at first, including the drum sounds, the hypnotic rhythym...My issues was it went nowhere, sorta...it didn't change or move or open up or resolve or anything. I don't feel that way about a lot of the more hard core and general 'hip hop' I listen to; I mean you can't avoid it and I don' ttry to..I'd rather lean into something the culture all around me is expressing itself with and etc....

...so i'm starting fresh with this. It's good to hear Mick; he sounds vital. I'm gonna drop back from wholesale ignoring it....there is a rock band playing outside the bouldvard; so i'm gonna go out and groove; it's so great...life is beautiful; they are playing Midnigh Special ; i can hear it from the window...super...

so yeh Mick; congratulations....i'm starting from scratch with this; under three minutes to0!!! word.
......not dragging me thru four and half minutes of frustration and hyper word jam that more puts up a barrier, for me, than invited me in, or took me some place....

there's no right or wrong. peeps here way ahead of me finding this mix right off the bat; saving themselves a minutes and a half of terror each time they listen. hey that adds up... winking smiley thanks Mick!! yep the posters here have it right; like LongBeach; keep putting out whatever; keep working; keep engaging yourslef no matter what kind of tragedy you guys go through personally because you're spoiled brats....love you anyway...

That's the spirit Hopkins.

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

Yeah Hopkins ... you know the old sayings.....



Engage Brain Before Putting Mouth In Gear

or in this case

Play six times before you listen ....



ROCKMAN

It took me awhile. The first turning point was after learning Ronnie and Charlie were on the tracks. Suddenly what I had convinced myself was a drum machine (because it's what I read here and expected given Matt Clifford's involvement) was now obviously Charlie's steady drumming. The guitars which seemed so modern and deconstructed that I was sure it was Kevin Parker playing, now sound obviously like Ronnie playing with Mick. The production still throws me. I still see it as experimental compared to what I expected, but I realize "Gotta Get a Grip" is experimental the same way U2 were experimental in the 1990s.

The thing is, over time (including staying away from them for a few days), I have to admit I like "Gotta Get a Grip" more than "Doom and Gloom" and "Rough Justice" (neither of which did the trick for me, to be fair). "England Lost" is close enough to "Rain Fall Down" (but not as good), but it's a nice slice of funk with bluesy harmonica. Mick's Cockney character which reminded me of Bill Wyman's solo excursions now seems like Mick. I don't know if it's a good or bad sign when further exposure makes the foreign suddenly seem familiar. Neither song is amazing, but both are better than I told myself at first and, honestly, better than I expected. I am intrigued as to where this leads as far as other new music is concerned.

Good ta read Rocky .... think I read on here somewhere things like played it half way through and wont ever listen again .... HUH!!!!

Like all Stones things ya gotta live with 'em for awhile ... let 'em seep into ya bones ...



ROCKMAN

I tried diversion and I tried coercion
Mediation and medication
LA culture and aquapuncture
Overeating and sex in meetings
Induced insanity, Christianity
Long walks and fast drives
And wild clubs and low dives
I pushed and I strived
But I can't get you, can't get you
Can't get you out of my mind
Gotta get a grip



ROCKMAN

Yeah Hopkins, I think I like the Alok version best, glad I was able to swing your attention that way. I listened to the others too and they all have something interesting to bring to the song, even if it's not sustained throughout. It's cool that Mick is experimenting this way - reminds me of what Kanye did with the various Life of Pablo mixes. England Lost doesn't quite Grip me the same, but kudos to Mick for putting his music out there and I hope the critics don't discourage him from releasing more tracks.

Quote
Rockman
Yeah Hopkins ... you know the old sayings.....



Engage Brain Before Putting Mouth In Gear

or in this case

Play six times before you listen ....

Yes Rockman; agreed; I'd stand up for myself tho; not out of ego; I wasn't wholesale wrong as far as I'm concerned. I think you sorta know me well enough to know I'm not protecting any old stance; or stuck in a place I can't move from, if something opens me up; All thsse various mixes were confusion as to what exactly was being presented. 'deep fans,' or rather 'collectivists' are naturally attacted to the arcane; any tiny little burp of difference in a printing, or mistake etc...so have a ball and all that; not my scene tho....

that first link to the four and half minute version was and is painful. I will not go back to it, even to make more objectibve analsis; i'm not fascinated and not into it. The mix I heard a spresented was a dull-on bore...i'm not gonna re-criticize the lyrics, they're stupid. a lot of rock songs i love have stupid lyrics tho...so...i'm already getting into deep.....

yeah under three minutes kinda changes things a little, ya think? that's like a whole different deal to crawl though; seriously that IS a major factor; uhhh yeh clip a full third (33% or more) off it and it's a whole different frame of reference....

....it's like the difference between getting beaten by a hammer with a bag over your head, in a jet-engine factory for a hopeless, endldess, grinding, miserable sustained period of endless desperate time, and letting a cool pop song into the air and seeing wattup.....

Fans who live it here? like Sister 35 and others. I am honestly thrileed and happhy for them. I treiede to get my friend da DJ to spin 'Get a Grip' at a really great block party alternatinb live bands with DJs...cool in itself that concept!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Guys a damn good friend of mine adn 27...the request didn't even register past his eyebrows it was so irrelevant...I got the nice 'look-away' and all that....haha...i mean...he wasn't gonna go there...

which made me more 'helpful' because i am that type of a-hole heh heh....
Hey Joe, I found it on your computer...just click into your set here...

....he's drinking the 8 dollar coffee I bought him that made him so happy he hugged me a few minutes before this...hahhaaa. now i get the nice but a bit destracted "old man look" from him; I was laughing so hard...i mean i had a GREAT time...sure he'd heard of him but......
lol

...so for fans here that like it, that is MORE than fine; I encourage and SUPPORT that! but others here, and me too; well if you have a similar response to me to that one...

...(it's laborious and not the worth the trip was my feeling; exhausted unbeliveable at the end of four and half minutes plus of the same beat and riff and poly-syllabic whatever....

..... It' invites cyncicims; no ones saying it's a top notch thing here; well almost no one....

and after four minutes with still no end in sight; or hope for and accent or change just to add dynamics....nope..

everytime someone listens to that four and a half minutes plus; on that mix...well it should ahave a warning sticker...

the consideration that he is alive and recording music; regardless of anybody elses expectations or opinions, including me own of course, is a good thing !!\\

I am not dissing the original 'grip' i heard first, again here, to justify a partuclar position already stated, or thinking that I have to save face here; that's a long dead hope hahaaaa...
....
....."englands lost" is a almost offensive; doh i try to avoid that...

....as for grip today...

...; i'm relieved to find something that attracted me to the three minute alok, anuk...mix; i'll get his name right and look him up tonight or tomorrow....i'm please to WANT to go back and spend another three or six minutes with Mick's new record; now that i know what the eff it is; and i'ts not forcing me to sit in concrete with a pneumatic drill and someone blathering about shit for a half an hour going nowhere....yeee hawwwwww; i'm back!!! ;-)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-08-07 05:29 by hopkins.

David Bowie said to Rolling Stone Magazine in 1983 : "Mick really wanted to do something different a few years ago. I remember him crying. 'Am I gonna be saddled with the Rolling Stones for the rest of my life?' But I don't know what he'll ever do now. You've got to make a move. If you miss your chance, then you settle for what you've got."

If David is a DJ at heaven’s radio station Mick’s new singles are probably in heavy rotation.

....Yeah he'd be swayin' ta Grip ....



ROCKMAN

Quote
Swayed1967
David Bowie said to Rolling Stone Magazine in 1983 : "Mick really wanted to do something different a few years ago. I remember him crying. 'Am I gonna be saddled with the Rolling Stones for the rest of my life?' But I don't know what he'll ever do now. You've got to make a move. If you miss your chance, then you settle for what you've got."

If David is a DJ at heaven’s radio station Mick’s new singles are probably in heavy rotation.

One person's heaven is another person's hell with Mick's new singles on repeat...

Ahem. "Saddled with The Rolling Stones."

Quote
TeddyB1018
Ahem. "Saddled with The Rolling Stones."

Jagger is saddled with Mick Jagger

Quote
crumbling_mice

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Can't really see a difference between the two cuts. I;m glad Mick put out couple of new tracks, but they are pretty lame. I wonder - who really does he see them appealing to? Young people? Old Stones fans?

Based on what my 22 year old niece just said, can't see young people getting into these - not sure they want to hear an old man preaching and shouting politics at them.
As for old Stones fans liking them ...evidently the new tunes speak to a certain element, but that particular group seemingly finds joy and something positive in anything Stones related.
Would be interesting to read an honest critique from someone not obsessed with the Stones, and maybe someone younger who is more familiar with what is hip to the younger generation.

Excellent post Hairball. One of the reasons I visit iorr less and less is the blind faith which borders on musical evangelism when it comes to anything they do these days. I'm as big a stones fan as anyone, but if something is formulaic shite, then it needs to be called out and yes it's about opinions, but I find it hard to beleive anyone could consider these two offerings anything other than at best very mediocre.

It really has long since past the time when the any member of the Stones should be trying to be current, it just makes them look ridiculous and the only people who will like it, are likely to be not the yoof, but ageing men and women looking for a glimmer of a long dead fire.

Nót every 22-year old was into the Stones (and/or likewise sounds or bands) 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 55 years ago; so why would (or should) thàt be the case now ?!

I, on my part, am quite sure the Stones are somewhat the only +35 year old band that really does attract new twenty-somethingers audience on a 'daily' (so to speak...) basis.

All due(-d?) respect to your 22-year old niece, Hairball - but: I don't see why she 'd be qualified to 'model' a generation... (Rest assured: I know that's not exactly what you meant, but I'm trying to counter the tendency to 'generalize' your point a bit here, upfront.)

There's plenty of 20'ers that I know that DO get into the Stones these days...
(Obviously not as many as there used to be; but still.)

Just sayin'...

"generalizing" a synonym of "posting" here sometimes, anyway

None of us alas has any objective claim on the "truth" about anything. We're each of us bundles of contradictions, neuroses, biases, and preconceptions ... just trying to make sense of things on this swiftly tilting planet.

Hairball, while professing an open mind, probably can't ultimately resist a certain resistance to Mick solo. I swab my posts with a thick coat of pseudo-reasonable 'authority,' and yet I have no interest in Keith solo ... and so each of our observations ought to be taken with the requisite 'pinch' of salt.

As always in matters of art and the heart, perhaps the most useful disclaimer: your mileage may vary.

Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa

Quote
crumbling_mice

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Can't really see a difference between the two cuts. I;m glad Mick put out couple of new tracks, but they are pretty lame. I wonder - who really does he see them appealing to? Young people? Old Stones fans?

Based on what my 22 year old niece just said, can't see young people getting into these - not sure they want to hear an old man preaching and shouting politics at them.
As for old Stones fans liking them ...evidently the new tunes speak to a certain element, but that particular group seemingly finds joy and something positive in anything Stones related.
Would be interesting to read an honest critique from someone not obsessed with the Stones, and maybe someone younger who is more familiar with what is hip to the younger generation.

Excellent post Hairball. One of the reasons I visit iorr less and less is the blind faith which borders on musical evangelism when it comes to anything they do these days. I'm as big a stones fan as anyone, but if something is formulaic shite, then it needs to be called out and yes it's about opinions, but I find it hard to beleive anyone could consider these two offerings anything other than at best very mediocre.

It really has long since past the time when the any member of the Stones should be trying to be current, it just makes them look ridiculous and the only people who will like it, are likely to be not the yoof, but ageing men and women looking for a glimmer of a long dead fire.

Nót every 22-year old was into the Stones (and/or likewise sounds or bands) 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 55 years ago; so why would (or should) thàt be the case now ?!

I, on my part, am quite sure the Stones are somewhat the only +35 year old band that really does attract new twenty-somethingers audience on a 'daily' (so to speak...) basis.

All due(-d?) respect to your 22-year old niece, Hairball - but: I don't see why she 'd be qualified to 'model' a generation... (Rest assured: I know that's not exactly what you meant, but I'm trying to counter the tendency to 'generalize' your point a bit here, upfront.)

There's plenty of 20'ers that I know that DO get into the Stones these days...
(Obviously not as many as there used to be; but still.)

Just sayin'...

Ahhh, yet she is in to the Stones and loves them very much, as much as a 22 year old can anyways. She's just not interested in Jagger's new solo tunes.
I took her to see the Stones when she was 17 during the 50 and Counting tour (with Mick Taylor) at Anaheim. To paraphrase her "the best concerts I've ever seen...but why didn't they let the best guitar player on stage play on more than three songs" (lol - the latter part is fictitious ), but she LOVED it and ended up buying a bunch of pre-'82 Stones albums with the guidance of her uncle (which would be me).

As for the new tunes, she mentioned people her age not wanting to listen to an old men yelling and preaching about current politics (can't really blame them ), and that's probably why she doesn't like U2. I don't know how she feels about the rest of Mick's solo catalogue, but doubt she's had time to dig that deep as she mainly listens to whatever your average 22 year old listens to today, and goes out to clubs. That said, she really loved Crosseyed Heart for the most part (especially the Norah Jones collab), but wasn't much in to the Stones blues covers..."oldies" she called it. Not saying she's "the voice" of all 22 year olds, just repeating what she said. Being a recent college graduate and having four years experience surrounded by people her age, her opinion carries some weight.

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

a weight that incidentally suits her uncle views 100% ;-)