For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
GazzaQuote
buttons67
gazza, the stones have a helluva big barrel to scrap though.
The quality isnt the issue. Filling an album with 20 year old leftovers is insane and smacks of utter desperation. Who else would do that? Thankfully the Stones wont. They'd be better just giving up if they were that bereft of inspiration.
That stuff belongs on 'anthology' style releases. Not on a 2020 'studio' album.
Quote
GazzaQuote
buttons67
gazza, the stones have a helluva big barrel to scrap though.
The quality isnt the issue. Filling an album with 20 year old leftovers is insane and smacks of utter desperation. Who else would do that?
Quote
dcbaQuote
GazzaQuote
buttons67
gazza, the stones have a helluva big barrel to scrap though.
The quality isnt the issue. Filling an album with 20 year old leftovers is insane and smacks of utter desperation. Who else would do that?
Tool just did that : they released an album including some riffs that go back to the mid-90's. The result? The album is average at best. The "funny part"? This is their 1t album in 13 years so one might think they had the time to cook up new music instead of re-heating old music that sounds stale.
C'mon Mick by hook or by crook finish this album!
Quote
LazarusSmithQuote
nickQuote
24FPS
I think the Stones non-participation in promoting any ABKCO new product says everything. ABKCO probably releases exactly what it legally is allowed to. Without their Stones catalogue, ABCKCO would be practically irrelevant. I wish they'd get this mess cleaned up before I'm Knock, Knock, Knockin' at Heavens Door.
The majority of Warhorses played at the concerts helps Abkco's product plenty.
It's kind of a fascinating way to look at the current band. I did some quick back-of-the-napkin figuring: They played 329 selections on the most recent leg of No Filter: 176 (53%) were ABKCO; 153 (47%) were later.
I think "Play With Fire" was the oldest ABKCO tune (Feb/March 1965) they played; the Let It Bleed songs (Dec 1969) were the newest ABCKO songs performed. That means that over half of their current setlist comes from songs released during a 4.5 year window out of a nearly 60-year history!
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
LazarusSmithQuote
nickQuote
24FPS
I think the Stones non-participation in promoting any ABKCO new product says everything. ABKCO probably releases exactly what it legally is allowed to. Without their Stones catalogue, ABCKCO would be practically irrelevant. I wish they'd get this mess cleaned up before I'm Knock, Knock, Knockin' at Heavens Door.
The majority of Warhorses played at the concerts helps Abkco's product plenty.
It's kind of a fascinating way to look at the current band. I did some quick back-of-the-napkin figuring: They played 329 selections on the most recent leg of No Filter: 176 (53%) were ABKCO; 153 (47%) were later.
I think "Play With Fire" was the oldest ABKCO tune (Feb/March 1965) they played; the Let It Bleed songs (Dec 1969) were the newest ABCKO songs performed. That means that over half of their current setlist comes from songs released during a 4.5 year window out of a nearly 60-year history!
You forgot about the publishing of all the 9 original songs on STICKY FINGERS, of which 7 have been played on various tours over the years, and the 4 on EXILE, of which all 4 get played on various tours.
Quote
liddas
The Deluxe albums did not work for me.
I didn't like the Frankenstein songs, and the untouched ones were so few that it was just a tease!
As far as the Frankenstein songs go, they should have re recorded and released a selection of them from scratch, a-la Stripped.
That would have been an interesting project.
C
Quote
24FPSQuote
liddas
The Deluxe albums did not work for me.
I didn't like the Frankenstein songs, and the untouched ones were so few that it was just a tease!
As far as the Frankenstein songs go, they should have re recorded and released a selection of them from scratch, a-la Stripped.
That would have been an interesting project.
C
Some of those 'Frankenstein' songs were great. Re-recorded? With who? How would you replace Wyman's bass on Plundered My Soul? Darryl? Ah, ha, ha. The reason those 'Frankenstein' tracks are great is because most are Golden Age, Original Rolling Stones' rhythm team of Wyman and Watts. Have you ever heard groups 're-record' their old songs? If any of them were any good they would be the exception to the rule. Sure, 2019 Keith would be MUCH better on guitar than 1972 Keith.
Quote
Rocky Dijon
Clapton's Beard, Father Ted! That would be worse than what Andrew did to his tracks on METAMORPHOSIS!
Mind you, as a tribute album, it's an idea with merit so long as it wasn't released as The Rolling Stones.
Quote
liddas
On the others, I just can't get used to hear what you call the "Golden Age, Original Rolling Stones" tone, paired with Jagger's nowadays singing style, and mixed way upfront too! Re-record, why not?
Quote
Rocky DijonQuote
liddas
On the others, I just can't get used to hear what you call the "Golden Age, Original Rolling Stones" tone, paired with Jagger's nowadays singing style, and mixed way upfront too! Re-record, why not?
The reason for what Terry recently termed the "cut and paste approach" was to avoid having to bring the band together. Keith was hardly playing guitar at that time and was finishing up his book. Relations between Keith and Mick were at a new low. Ronnie was still a mess and not yet with Sally. Charlie did come and play with Mick at Le Fork for at least some of the reworked SOME GIRLS tracks.
Quote
liddasQuote
24FPSQuote
liddas
The Deluxe albums did not work for me.
I didn't like the Frankenstein songs, and the untouched ones were so few that it was just a tease!
As far as the Frankenstein songs go, they should have re recorded and released a selection of them from scratch, a-la Stripped.
That would have been an interesting project.
C
Some of those 'Frankenstein' songs were great. Re-recorded? With who? How would you replace Wyman's bass on Plundered My Soul? Darryl? Ah, ha, ha. The reason those 'Frankenstein' tracks are great is because most are Golden Age, Original Rolling Stones' rhythm team of Wyman and Watts. Have you ever heard groups 're-record' their old songs? If any of them were any good they would be the exception to the rule. Sure, 2019 Keith would be MUCH better on guitar than 1972 Keith.
The only Frankenstein song I truly like is Plundered my Soul, and this for great new vocals (Jagger + BU), certainly not for the music.
On the others, I just can't get used to hear what you call the "Golden Age, Original Rolling Stones" tone, paired with Jagger's nowadays singing style, and mixed way upfront too!
Re record, why not?
Who cares if other bands did it?
And who cares if Bill's not there any more.
The point is not to recreate the sound of the 70s. The point would be to select good unfinished musical ideas from the vaults - a hook, a riff, a melody - and develop it today, as if they would play it today.
Stripped is a great example.
None of the stripped versions are better or worse than the originals. They are different. It is better world with both the old and new guitar arrangement of Horses, with the new versions of Love in Vain and Slipping Away.
And, just to be clear, I L O V E, Bill.
C
Quote
nick
Is that VH album any good?
Quote
nick
Is that VH album any good?
Quote
Father Ted
Our boys being our boys will undoubtedly have other ideas for their unreleased stuff. I just can't see them doing a straight Anthology release, it's too predictable and obvious for them. All their old peers have been down that road. They'll want to try and find a fresh angle. And while they're still raking the cash in from touring, there's no urgency to do an anthology either.
Quote
liddasQuote
24FPSQuote
liddas
The Deluxe albums did not work for me.
I didn't like the Frankenstein songs, and the untouched ones were so few that it was just a tease!
As far as the Frankenstein songs go, they should have re recorded and released a selection of them from scratch, a-la Stripped.
That would have been an interesting project.
C
Some of those 'Frankenstein' songs were great. Re-recorded? With who? How would you replace Wyman's bass on Plundered My Soul? Darryl? Ah, ha, ha. The reason those 'Frankenstein' tracks are great is because most are Golden Age, Original Rolling Stones' rhythm team of Wyman and Watts. Have you ever heard groups 're-record' their old songs? If any of them were any good they would be the exception to the rule. Sure, 2019 Keith would be MUCH better on guitar than 1972 Keith.
The only Frankenstein song I truly like is Plundered my Soul, and this for great new vocals (Jagger + BU), certainly not for the music.
On the others, I just can't get used to hear what you call the "Golden Age, Original Rolling Stones" tone, paired with Jagger's nowadays singing style, and mixed way upfront too!
Re record, why not?
Who cares if other bands did it?
And who cares if Bill's not there any more.
The point is not to recreate the sound of the 70s. The point would be to select good unfinished musical ideas from the vaults - a hook, a riff, a melody - and develop it today, as if they would play it today.
Stripped is a great example.
None of the stripped versions are better or worse than the originals. They are different. It is better world with both the old and new guitar arrangement of Horses, with the new versions of Love in Vain and Slipping Away.
And, just to be clear, I L O V E, Bill.
C
Quote
ukcal
The who - Pete says in his book he has over 400 unreleased songs, some are demos, part recoreded etc....what a waste...must be 10 great songs ...but then again the blurb for the new album says he wrote all but two in 2018
Quote
buttons67
yes but what an artist throws away and didnt want to be seen might interest some one else in later life.
some of the stones throwaways are better than what many bands keep.