Quote
stone4ever

As for the half a dozen Mick songs in the past 11 years, i don't see any of them as being good enough for the Stones, Alfie included.
I did think Old Habits Die Hard was the best of a bad bunch, i really like that one.
As i say, Mick has an uncanny way of coming back when people write him off, so don't be surprised if he comes back strong when he finally gets into this new album.
MERRY CHRISTMAS GUYS

At the time I sort of liked what he did with Superheavy just little bit, but his vocals sounded forced - you know, the nasally stuff. Seemed a good platform for him to get some of that stuff off his chest, but definitely nothing worthy of the Stones. Can't really comment on Alfie or Old Habits Die Hard without revisiting them on youtube, but it's probably best if I don't as my memory tells me it's not worth the effort on this fine Christmas day. As for Getta Grip, if it would have been turned inside out with rewritten lyrics and less production, and throw in a few Keith riffs here and there giving it a more Stonesy vibe, it might have been worthy?

Merry Christmas stone4ever.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-12-26 00:26 by Hairball.

Quote
Witness

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Witness

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
keefriff99
The idea that Mick is creatively bankrupt while Keith isn't is a complete crock of dung.

Oh really.

I wonder why Mick hasn't made much music in 11 years. Mick certainly isn't lazy and to my knowledge he hasn't retired. Don Was said that Mick hit a wall and Blue And Lonesome was the result of that wall Mick hit i the studio.
Keith on the other hand has come up with a great solo album of original material.
I'm curious as to why Mick is holding back, he says he writes music all the time but is it good enough for release. Mick seems reluctant to finish the so called new album, i don't know man, its not looking good for Mick but he has a way of proving us wrong , hopefully he will do it again.

According to news reports (among them, BBC) on October 7, 2016, Don Was told that the Stones hit the wall in the studio. He said that "WE" hit the wall on day 3. No mentionning of Mick solely. (Unable to copy the link by my phone.) So if you with a reference to Don Was will present it as it was Mick, who hit the wall in the studio, please indicate some details of your source.

Edit: Language clumsiness

Maybe Mick and Keith are the wall. They can't agree on anything.
But Keith had no problems with hitting walls while making Crosseyed Heart with Steve Jordan not so long ago, and that's the point i have been making. Mick is more in question when it comes to writers block.

As for the half a dozen Mick songs in the past 11 years, i don't see any of them as being good enough for the Stones, Alfie included.
I did think Old Habits Die Hard was the best of a bad bunch, i really like that one.
As i say, Mick has an uncanny way of coming back when people write him off, so don't be surprised if he comes back strong when he finally gets into this new album.
MERRY CHRISTMAS GUYS

In other words, your latest post can be read to confirm that there does not exist any Don Was-quote as you earlier stated. But you still believe that Mick can be characterized by a writer's block. It seems that part of your foundation for that bold judgement is that you do not like his songs from more or less the last decade.


(Enjoy your Christmas.)

Correct, i don't like many of Micks songs over the last decade, and they are few and far between.
Its all down to what you believe is more likely, i believe its more probable the WALL that Don Was mentioned, was down to Mick rather than Keith. Don Was didn't specify if it was down to Mick or Keith in particular because he would have been fired if he did. But he did say they hit a wall and lets face it Mick and Keith are the song writing team, Don was not talking about anyone else hitting a wall.
I have already said that the wall might be that Mick and Keith can't agree on anything and therefor can't write music together, but doesn't Mick usually bring almost finished demos into the studio. Where were these demos when they hit this wall.

Is that not what goes on in the pages of iorr, we talk about what we believe to be probable, the way we see things as individuals, we read between the lines and make our own assumptions. I get it wrong and i get it right sometimes, i still think Mick has had trouble writing decent songs in the last decade with the exception Doom And Gloom and a couple others. For me personally every track on Crosseyed Heart is a gem and worthy of being on a Stones album. I don't see that coming from Mick and its a shame because i am really looking forward to a new Stones album and something is holding it up.

Yes i still think Mick might have writers block, or if he doesn't and as Mick has said himself he still writes music all the time, i wonder if these songs are not good enough to go on a Stones album. What is strange is that Mick hasn't released a solo album of his own for a long time either. Keith has already rejected two lame songs from Mick that Mick went on to release, GGAG and England Lost and they both bombed. I think Keith was right to reject those tracks, they were not suitable for a Stones album.
Look these are just my views, try not to take them personally.
Please give your views, they are meaningful i'm sure and we can all learn from them.

PS. Sorry Witness, you are correct, Don Was said they hit a wall, not specifically Mick hit a wall. I stand corrected thankyou.

I suppose we can only assume Mick and Keith hit a wall but that still means Mick hit a wall.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-12-26 02:25 by stone4ever.

You ask for my views after it turned out that you unawares happened to falsify Don Was' saying about the band hitting the wall on the third day in the studio on that occasion. After I also supposed that the primary base for your claim that Mick would have a writer's block, only would be your not liking his songs. Where you now flexibly can give an alternative interpretation at the moment to your hypothesis 'writer's block' that Mick's songs in your opinion are not good enough.

However, what gain is there in my trying to speculate? The context for your latest posts in this thread is that you in a quote earlier (reentered below and with parts in bold) 1) without question mark, set it forth as an apparently established fact that Mick ( indeed) has developed a writer's block, and even much more farreaching, 2) Mick is to have dried up creatively (you give it as something that has to be said, no uncertainty on your part there). And in your, (is it fair to call it) "rant", you conclude that it is time for Keith to move on.

Quote
stone4ever
I often think its a shame Keith doesn't have a more active song writing partner in the Stones over the last decade or so to push him on. Its clear from Crosseyed Heart ( whether you like it or not, weather you like Keith singing or not ) that Keith still has his musical genius in tact, but Keith is lazy and Mick is disinterested in working with him ( probably due to Micks writers block ), i feel its a terrible waste of talent that Keith has not made more music and collaborations recently.
Crosseyed Heart surprised me, its as good as anything Keith has written since Tattoo You and i'm sure he has lots left in the can. Perhaps Keith should give Steve Jordan another ring sometime soon. This new Stones album is taking an eternity to finish for some reason. Probably down to Mick imho.
Its time for Keith to move on now, Mick's dried up creatively, it has to be said.

I hardly think that what I could come up with, at best will gain more than a temporary flexible admission. But the context for your views will certainly remain this quote and one preceding that I am unable to enter by the phone, which I am writing on.

One source for the gap between Mick and Keith, though, is the following obvious one. Keith wants to make new music within comparatively more narrow limits for what Rolling Stones music may involve. Mick wishes that parts of the band's new studio music may expand those limits.

I probably will meet the answer that I have taken it personally. You may preferably reflect once more about what is deeply personal in this thread.

You would make an excellent lawyer Witness

For fear of repeating myself i will just say it's a bit late in the day for the Stones to go in a new direction, the lack of interest in GGAG and England Lost proves that point, that is not the type of music the majority of Stones fans want to hear.
The whole reason for my so called rant is that this album is taking a long time coming and i have suggested a few reasons why it's taking so long. Just my gut feeling, nothing else, no evidence to prove my thoughts, just conjecture.

I would be happy for someone to give other reasons why this album has been put back another year, i believe Don Was said it was unlikely to be finished in 2018.
Time is running out, very disappointing as the band could have toured behind a new album with new original songs to perform live, a missed opportunity.

Also being a big fan of Keith's music in particular i want more from Keith before it's too late, i think he has a lot more to offer, an album of old standards that are dear to his heart and of course a blues album of his own, and on the strength of CH i would love another Wino's album as well as a Stones album.
I think Keith is still in love with his music and it shows, he's not interested in trying to turn the teeny boppers on, he just wants to make the music he loves.

I thought at the time Crosseyed Heart came out that it would be a big blow to Mick's ego that Keith could come up with such a strong album without Mick's input.
It was a surprise to all of us on iorr, posters were saying Keith was washed up and was finished as a writer after his head injury etc. Keith was accused of having everything from dementia to his drug intake over the years frying his brain.
Well none of this proved to be true, Keith still had it, and it doesn't matter if you dislike Keith solo or not CH had brilliant reviews considering he was a man of 70 years old.

I took all that criticism of Keith before CH personally at the time, it was terrible, i don't WITNESS those sort of personal attacks on Mick.

It's possible that Mick has been intimidated by Crosseyed Heart, has it got to Mick, does he feel under pressure in the studio with Keith these days if keith is insisting they make some music together from scratch. Could this be why this album is taking so long.

It might have been a different story had Keith brought in 40 demos and Mick had 3 'dynamite' riffs to work on. But as Keith said, being prolific don't mean shit, and he focuses on his strengths rather than straying too far into 'experimental' territory to compete and be equated with the current youngsters who rule the charts. Mick is no spring chicken, and even if he came up with the greatest 'experimental' pop/dance track the world has ever known, it's highly doubtful many young people would suddenly start to idolize him. When I was young in the '70's, the last thing I wanted to listen to was pop music from someone my Great Grandfathers age.
Even Elvis the king of rock and roll seemed like an old fart to me at the time (and he was comparatively young) - someone my mom and Grandma liked...they used to rock out to Elvis' hit Burnin' Love from c.'72. I eventually grew to appreciate it and other '70's Elvis tunes, but definitely not at the time.

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

Quote
Hairball
It might have been a different story had Keith brought in 40 demos and Mick had 3 'dynamite' riffs to work on. But as Keith said, being prolific don't mean shit, and he focuses on his strengths rather than straying too far into 'experimental' territory to compete and be equated with the current youngsters who rule the charts. Mick is no spring chicken, and even if he came up with the greatest 'experimental' pop/dance track the world has ever known, it's highly doubtful many young people would suddenly start to idolize him. When I was young in the '70's, the last thing I wanted to listen to was pop music from someone my Great Grandfathers age.
Even Elvis the king of rock and roll seemed like an old fart to me at the time (and he was comparatively young) - someone my mom and Grandma liked...they used to rock out to Elvis' hit Burnin' Love from c.'72. I eventually grew to appreciate it and other '70's Elvis tunes, but definitely not at the time.

Interesting points, I have a different perspective.
I got into music in the early 60's by which time I felt Elvis had peaked. In fact, with a few exceptions I thought his 70's output was pretty dire.
And I never bothered about the AGE of an artist...so I could still get into Muddy Waters, Sleepy John Estes, Mahilia Jackson even if their 'time' was before I was born. Well, maybe not Muddy, but you see what I mean.
I think Frank Sinatra's music has a fair following amongst 'younger' people. Maybe because his songs have been re-interpreted by some of the new guard (of musicians)?

Quote
jlowe

Quote
Hairball
It might have been a different story had Keith brought in 40 demos and Mick had 3 'dynamite' riffs to work on. But as Keith said, being prolific don't mean shit, and he focuses on his strengths rather than straying too far into 'experimental' territory to compete and be equated with the current youngsters who rule the charts. Mick is no spring chicken, and even if he came up with the greatest 'experimental' pop/dance track the world has ever known, it's highly doubtful many young people would suddenly start to idolize him. When I was young in the '70's, the last thing I wanted to listen to was pop music from someone my Great Grandfathers age.
Even Elvis the king of rock and roll seemed like an old fart to me at the time (and he was comparatively young) - someone my mom and Grandma liked...they used to rock out to Elvis' hit Burnin' Love from c.'72. I eventually grew to appreciate it and other '70's Elvis tunes, but definitely not at the time.

Interesting points, I have a different perspective.
I got into music in the early 60's by which time I felt Elvis had peaked. In fact, with a few exceptions I thought his 70's output was pretty dire.
And I never bothered about the AGE of an artist...so I could still get into Muddy Waters, Sleepy John Estes, Mahilia Jackson even if their 'time' was before I was born. Well, maybe not Muddy, but you see what I mean.
I think Frank Sinatra's music has a fair following amongst 'younger' people. Maybe because his songs have been re-interpreted by some of the new guard (of musicians)?

I was specifically referring to pop/rock (not blues/gospel legends)...stuff that was currently being played on the radio. Or schmaltzy stuff from old time crooners ala Tony Bennet and Andy Williams (my mom's two favorites) who were still recording pop tunes. Generally speaking though amongst other genres, age didn't mean much to me either. I was a fan of classical composers like Mozart, Beethoven, and Bach, etc. - there was no escaping it in my household as my mom could play it all on the piano, and my older sister hacked away trying to learn it. Frank Sinatra and Tony Bennet seem to have a following amongst younger folks to some extenet, but it has more to do with nostalgia than any sort of contemporary/experimental music.

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

Born in 65 i found myself uninterested in the music of my generation, the 80's and instead listened to the Stones , Kinks, The Who, Pink Floyd, Led Zep, mostly music from the 60's and 70's.
Also loved the 50's Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, Everly brothers but not Elvis funny enough, so i'm with you on that one Hairball, but actually think he is brilliant now i am older.

Quote
stone4ever
Born in 65 i found myself uninterested in the music of my generation, the 80's and instead listened to the Stones , Kinks, The Who, Pink Floyd, Led Zep, mostly music from the 60's and 70's.
Also loved the 50's Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, Everly brothers but not Elvis funny enough, so i'm with you on that one Hairball, but actually think he is brilliant now i am older.

Born in '63, I always loved all the classic original Elvis '50's stuff along with the rest of the 50's rock music since I was a baby - they were legends. But I was referring to Elvis as the 'old guy' in the '70's whose current output of the time was not to my taste. Probably similar to how a 74 year old Mick might come across to the younger crowd of today - that was the point I was trying to make.

I've listened to music all my life - literally born and raised listening to the Beatles as their records were released, then glued to the radio in my pre-teens, picking up a guitar in my teens and starting what would become a massive record collection, and from there exploring every type of music I could get my hands on and wrap my head around. Having an older brother (four years older than me) was helpful in getting me to listen to Zeppelin/Hendrix/Black Sabbath/The Who, etc., etc., etc. in the early '70's, then punk/reggae in the late '70's. As for the '80s, I tend to look at it as the dark ages of music, but there's still some great stuff in there.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-12-26 21:35 by Hairball.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
stone4ever
Born in 65 i found myself uninterested in the music of my generation, the 80's and instead listened to the Stones , Kinks, The Who, Pink Floyd, Led Zep, mostly music from the 60's and 70's.
Also loved the 50's Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, Everly brothers but not Elvis funny enough, so i'm with you on that one Hairball, but actually think he is brilliant now i am older.

Born in '63, I always loved all the classic original Elvis '50's stuff along with the rest of the 50's rock music since I was a baby - they were legends. But I was referring to Elvis as the 'old guy' in the '70's whose current output of the time was not to my taste. Probably similar to how a 74 year old Mick might come across to the younger crowd of today - that was the point I was trying to make.

I've listened to music all my life - literally born and raised listening to the Beatles, then glued to the radio in my pre-teens, picking up a guitar in my teens and starting what would become a massive record collection, and from there exploring every type of music I could get my hands on and wrap my head around. Having an older brother (four years older than me) was helpful in getting me to listen to Zeppelin/Hendrix/Black Sabbath/The Who, etc., etc., etc. in the early '70's, then punk/reggae in the late '70's. As for the '80s, I tend to look at it as the dark ages of music, but there's still some great stuff in there.

Yes listening to the 80's sort of revival today in the UK it actually wasn't so bad as i remember it, i had no idea at the time how good it was with bands like New Order and Happy Mondays, Tears For fears the list is endless. I suppose it seems great today because today's music is so shit and soulless lol.

Quote
stone4ever
I took all that criticism of Keith before CH personally at the time, it was terrible, i don't WITNESS those sort of personal attacks on Mick.

It's possible that Mick has been intimidated by Crosseyed Heart, has it got to Mick, does he feel under pressure in the studio with Keith these days if keith is insisting they make some music together from scratch. Could this be why this album is taking so long.

LOl.
In a word, No.
What's more possible/plausible is that you took those minority posts personally, like you said, and are still holding some kind of strange grudge vowing to slam Mick in any way you can.

Quote
MisterDDDD

Quote
stone4ever
I took all that criticism of Keith before CH personally at the time, it was terrible, i don't WITNESS those sort of personal attacks on Mick.

It's possible that Mick has been intimidated by Crosseyed Heart, has it got to Mick, does he feel under pressure in the studio with Keith these days if keith is insisting they make some music together from scratch. Could this be why this album is taking so long.

LOl.
In a word, No.
What's more possible/plausible is that you took those minority posts personally, like you said, and are still holding some kind of strange grudge vowing to slam Mick in any way you can.

You just take a fraction of what i write in my posts and make a blanket statement over and over again.

I've said time and time again that Mick was everything to me, he was a genius, i put him up there with Keith up until around 84'.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-12-27 09:37 by stone4ever.

Quote
stone4ever

It's possible that Mick has been intimidated by Crosseyed Heart, has it got to Mick, does he feel under pressure in the studio with Keith these days if keith is insisting they make some music together from scratch. Could this be why this album is taking so long.

CH was a rambling mess...more disheveled KR than ever..

Quote
Rip This

Quote
stone4ever

It's possible that Mick has been intimidated by Crosseyed Heart, has it got to Mick, does he feel under pressure in the studio with Keith these days if keith is insisting they make some music together from scratch. Could this be why this album is taking so long.

CH was a rambling mess...more disheveled KR than ever..

That's your opinion though, a minority opinion among Keith fans.

I thought it was beautiful.

Can you express what you expected from Keith this late in the game, an album of duets with Beyonce and Jay Z perhaps ?

Yeah i'm interested in your thoughts Rip This.

Watched Under The Influence over the weekend. CH was not a ramblin' mess but it sure rambled along rather nicely!! Loved the jam at the end .....

Quote
Maindefender
Watched Under The Influence over the weekend. CH was not a ramblin' mess but it sure rambled along rather nicely!! Loved the jam at the end .....

yeah Keith's masterpiece , a masterclass in how its suppossed to be done.

Keep on Rocking Keith