Quote
NilsHolgersson
This year we had No Filter Tour (unfortunately it had to be cancelled ofcourse), One World: Together at Home performance, Living in a Ghost Town, Goats Head Soup reissue with Criss Cross, Scarlet & All the Rage, Steel Wheels Live album, Mick's film The Burnt Orange Heresy, there's now a Stones shop on Carnaby Street, the Stones brand is still very active, I'm sure there's room for a new album next year

There's been room for a new album for years now, yet the question is whether they can come up with the goods. Most people (including Charlie) would answer "of course, whats the big deal?",
yet somehow they've come up empty-handed as far as a brand new album. Seems there's been disagreements over the direction of material between Keith and Mick (Getta Grip, etc.), hitting the wall,
and the logistics of meeting at the studio which has only become much more difficult with the pandemic restrictions. Ghost Town and a variety of snippets released from Mick via twitter have been promising,
yet some of those ideas might already be forgotten and/or obsolete. Looking forward to a new single (or two) some day...maybe the 60th anniversary.........

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-11-10 02:57 by Hairball.

Yes, the Band has turned into a Brand. And that's where it went wrong.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
NilsHolgersson
This year we had No Filter Tour (unfortunately it had to be cancelled ofcourse), One World: Together at Home performance, Living in a Ghost Town, Goats Head Soup reissue with Criss Cross, Scarlet & All the Rage, Steel Wheels Live album, Mick's film The Burnt Orange Heresy, there's now a Stones shop on Carnaby Street, the Stones brand is still very active, I'm sure there's room for a new album next year

There's been room for a new album for years now, yet the question is whether they can come up with the goods. Most people (including Charlie) would answer "of course, whats the big deal?",
yet somehow they've come up empty-handed as far as a brand new album. Seems there's been disagreements over the direction of material between Keith and Mick (Getta Grip, etc.), hitting the wall,
and the logistics of meeting at the studio which has only become much more difficult with the pandemic restrictions. Ghost Town and a variety of snippets released from Mick via twitter have been promising,
yet some of those ideas might already be forgotten and/or obsolete. Looking forward to a new single (or two) some day...maybe the 60th anniversary.........

most likely it will result in something like Grrr…, i.e. another greatest hits collection featuring two or maybe three newer songs… grrrrrrrrrrr

Quote
slewan

Quote
Hairball

Quote
NilsHolgersson
This year we had No Filter Tour (unfortunately it had to be cancelled ofcourse), One World: Together at Home performance, Living in a Ghost Town, Goats Head Soup reissue with Criss Cross, Scarlet & All the Rage, Steel Wheels Live album, Mick's film The Burnt Orange Heresy, there's now a Stones shop on Carnaby Street, the Stones brand is still very active, I'm sure there's room for a new album next year

There's been room for a new album for years now, yet the question is whether they can come up with the goods. Most people (including Charlie) would answer "of course, whats the big deal?",
yet somehow they've come up empty-handed as far as a brand new album. Seems there's been disagreements over the direction of material between Keith and Mick (Getta Grip, etc.), hitting the wall,
and the logistics of meeting at the studio which has only become much more difficult with the pandemic restrictions. Ghost Town and a variety of snippets released from Mick via twitter have been promising,
yet some of those ideas might already be forgotten and/or obsolete. Looking forward to a new single (or two) some day...maybe the 60th anniversary.........

most likely it will result in something like Grrr…, i.e. another greatest hits collection featuring two or maybe three newer songs… grrrrrrrrrrr

Yes slewan, based on the new quote from Keith in the Associated Press: "I think we have about half an album done", anything more than two or three songs seems to be a very unrealistic hope.
That said, looking forward to a Grrr pt. II...or maybe a HONK pt. II...or maybe a compilation titled 60 Licks to coincide with the 60th anniversary with a couple of new tunes thrown in...




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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-11-10 20:15 by Hairball.

Quote
paulspendel
Yes, the Band has turned into a Brand. And that's where it went wrong.

I guess it is not as easy as that. For when did the band not turn from band to brand, but rather double from band into band AND brand? Probably at the height of their career after the artistic turn in their development!

And where something went wrong, it was many years later, and it was not through somebody's unprovoked fault, but instead when the aging audiences, despite several renewals of their fanbase, were not longer capable of following the Stones. To me that was much related to the reception of UNDERCOVER. As a consequence the band almost disbanded during the complicated run of the following years.

Somehow, I wonder if it even was the brand that eventually saved the band from break up. Not as it often presented, out of the band's socalled greed as quite many will have it, but because their brand made it possible for them to go on living as rock musicians, even if they have had their long breaks of private life away from the limelight.

But the return, involving the professional turn of their career, especially live, had its cost and did not recover the thread of the musical development that they formerly had been in, and also was not without conflicts as to musical development.In addition, the band were given few incentives from outside to work hard in the studios with albums of new music.

The question now, however, is whether the band at the moment would be able AND willing to fulfill an album, say on the quality level of "Living in A Ghost Town". I belong to those that have that dream surpassing all wishes of experiencing further concerts. Well, setlists thoroughly inspired by such an album could completely change my attitude to attend more live concerts with the Stones than one.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2020-11-10 23:21 by Witness.

They all get branded ...bands..solo acts ...$$$
And I bet ya many of em wish they had that tongue logo ....



ROCKMAN

I don't think you see them coming back in full stadium mode....now maybe the rest has done them well but man it will be over a year + and they aren't 50 anymore. Maybe arena shows...more intimate focus on the songs.

I'm waiting on their 75th Anniversary Tour.

Hey YEAH .... The Diamond Anniversary Tour .....



ROCKMAN

A 60 track hits comp seems inevitable, and throw in the ridiculous deluxe edition with 80 tracks and on and on, like they did with that stupid one in 2012.

The picture of the band on the couch then with Keith wearing shoes with the logo and below it FIFTY LICKS seems to hint that it was a possible continuance of that theme. Highly unlikely a 2022 hits comp would be called SIXTY LICKS. This is the band that, with all of their various (yet MADE IN THE SHADE and SUCKING IN THE SEVENTIES were reissued). Sure, JUMP BACK was new product... in Europe, and eventually released in the US after FORTY LICKS was out (and by UMe in 2009).

Kind of odd, considering that people love greatest hits compilations and if something was released only digitally with the same songs but in a slightly different order you know people are gonna stream it because it's new.

At least they added Living In A Ghost Town to (the second most ridiculously titled Stones hits comp) HONK.

No more greatest hits compilations, please. The first handful were legitimate, and then what followed after that was just milking the market for all it's worth. Capitalism and all that, I get it. But at the same time I find it embarrassing.

Like one day you are going to switch on the TV at 2:00 AM and there is going to be an hour-long infomercial on Rolling Stones hits compilations for the retirement home set. Remember those golden years? Call in the next 15 minutes and you can get Made in the Shade at 20% off...

With the Rona's effects world wide and the Stones ages and health concerns, touring may be over or significantly delayed. Delay for men 75+yo can be devastating. If there is no 2021 tour and unstable rona world wide, what becomes the next Stones project? What if touring is not back until 2023? What project can be culled together for the band to release in lieu of a 2021 or 2021 tour or a project to have in stores to tour behind? I am hoping its not a greatest hits thing.

Maybe they will cover the Beach Boys' "Help Me Ronna" and have Ronna Wood do the guitar parts?

jb

Quote
MileHigh
No more greatest hits compilations, please. The first handful were legitimate, and then what followed after that was just milking the market for all it's worth. Capitalism and all that, I get it. But at the same time I find it embarrassing.

Like one day you are going to switch on the TV at 2:00 AM and there is going to be an hour-long infomercial on Rolling Stones hits compilations for the retirement home set. Remember those golden years? Call in the next 15 minutes and you can get Made in the Shade at 20% off...

I agree with you, but hee, all established artists/bands do the same, so why make a fuzz. It's the record companies that milk the contracts, that's all. I simply don't buy all that extra-extra compilation stuff and focus on the really interesting stuff. The Rolling Stones made a big time record contract with Universal and part of it is the delivery of a number of new albums. The new one is still to come and will come, so it's all a matter of patience

Quote
georgie48

Quote
MileHigh
No more greatest hits compilations, please. The first handful were legitimate, and then what followed after that was just milking the market for all it's worth. Capitalism and all that, I get it. But at the same time I find it embarrassing.

Like one day you are going to switch on the TV at 2:00 AM and there is going to be an hour-long infomercial on Rolling Stones hits compilations for the retirement home set. Remember those golden years? Call in the next 15 minutes and you can get Made in the Shade at 20% off...

I agree with you, but hee, all established artists/bands do the same, so why make a fuzz. It's the record companies that milk the contracts, that's all. I simply don't buy all that extra-extra compilation stuff and focus on the really interesting stuff. The Rolling Stones made a big time record contract with Universal and part of it is the delivery of a number of new albums. The new one is still to come and will come, so it's all a matter of patience

AC/DC has never issued a greatest hits comp. Metallica doesn't have one. NIN, Beck and QOTSA don't have one either.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
georgie48

Quote
MileHigh
No more greatest hits compilations, please. The first handful were legitimate, and then what followed after that was just milking the market for all it's worth. Capitalism and all that, I get it. But at the same time I find it embarrassing.

Like one day you are going to switch on the TV at 2:00 AM and there is going to be an hour-long infomercial on Rolling Stones hits compilations for the retirement home set. Remember those golden years? Call in the next 15 minutes and you can get Made in the Shade at 20% off...

I agree with you, but hee, all established artists/bands do the same, so why make a fuzz. It's the record companies that milk the contracts, that's all. I simply don't buy all that extra-extra compilation stuff and focus on the really interesting stuff. The Rolling Stones made a big time record contract with Universal and part of it is the delivery of a number of new albums. The new one is still to come and will come, so it's all a matter of patience

AC/DC has never issued a greatest hits comp. Metallica doesn't have one. NIN, Beck and QOTSA don't have one either.

These aren't acts with many hits, though. I point this out, as there can be a distinct difference between a ‘Greatest Hits’ and a ‘Best-Of’ If they had the latter, I may be more inclined to investigate their music.

Quote
Witness

Quote
paulspendel
Yes, the Band has turned into a Brand. And that's where it went wrong.

I guess it is not as easy as that. For when did the band not turn from band to brand, but rather double from band into band AND brand? Probably at the height of their career after the artistic turn in their development!

And where something went wrong, it was many years later, and it was not through somebody's unprovoked fault, but instead when the aging audiences, despite several renewals of their fanbase, were not longer capable of following the Stones. To me that was much related to the reception of UNDERCOVER. As a consequence the band almost disbanded during the complicated run of the following years.

Somehow, I wonder if it even was the brand that eventually saved the band from break up. Not as it often presented, out of the band's socalled greed as quite many will have it, but because their brand made it possible for them to go on living as rock musicians, even if they have had their long breaks of private life away from the limelight.

But the return, involving the professional turn of their career, especially live, had its cost and did not recover the thread of the musical development that they formerly had been in, and also was not without conflicts as to musical development.In addition, the band were given few incentives from outside to work hard in the studios with albums of new music.

The question now, however, is whether the band at the moment would be able AND willing to fulfill an album, say on the quality level of "Living in A Ghost Town". I belong to those that have that dream surpassing all wishes of experiencing further concerts. Well, setlists thoroughly inspired by such an album could completely change my attitude to attend more live concerts with the Stones than one.

The only difference between us and the Beatles is that we're still going. So, unlike the Beatles' greatest-hits set [1] we felt we had to put on two or three new tracks in a "to be continued" kind of spirit. I didn't want it to be all just nostalgia.

- Keith Richards, July 2002

That seems like something Mick would say.

Mick: I think what's important to me is that I'm personally writing new songs and the band is cutting new songs...

(There's an) old- fashioned idea that you can only be good while you're unknown, and hopefully not having any money, and even better, slightly mentally ill. AND a drug addict - always helpful. That makes you interesting. It doesn't necessarily make your WORK more interesting. It tends to drop off if you're older and a drug addict and don't work hard. So if you become too bourgeois and only want to live a comfortable life, can you be bothered to get up in the morning and write a song? That's a valid criticism. I don't think it applies to me. Because I love writing songs - whether they're good or not is another matter - and I love working really, really hard. In the last five years, I've been working like a dog.

Certainly other artists love writing. Maybe Billy Joel has 300 hundred songs written. Etc. The criticism of older artists releasing new albums and that the material is whatever, well, it's no different from any other album - just a snapshot of the moment.

And... at least they released something new.


Clearly things have changed, though, in regard to them wanting to do new material. This might sum it up, the post-BABYLON Stones:


(W)e've got (new tracks) in the can, and in a way I'm going to try to work on them and see if there's an album in there or the beginnings of an album or what. It seems like there's a lot there and it was a very profitable and prolific month in Paris, so I'm not going to just let them sit in the can and forget about them. But at the moment I can't do anything but this. But once this tour gets going, maybe I'll find some time to start working on them.

- Keith Richards, August 2002

[timeisonourside.com]

[timeisonourside.com]

Priorities. The 2002 LICKS sessions aside, since they apparently didn't seem to get back to those sessions, they went from 1997 to 2004 in regard to working on a new album. That's quite a gap and now it's into the longest gap ever, 16 years in September. As much as a Stones fan might grumble about that, for the Stones, it's been going on for so long they probably don't even notice, especially since they have 300 albums out and they've been doing their own Beach Boys tours the last 20 years or whatever.

Beach Boys tours, GLS? Which Beach Boys? There have been a couple of Beach Boys going around, right? As an old Stones fan I understand your feelings toward the Rolling Stones. Patience is a damn difficult thing to deal with, for anybody. But it's all a matter of trust and confidence for us fans when it comes to what the Stones have in mind. There was, is, and always will be one (rock 'n roll) band called the Rolling Stones (not like Mike Love and his Sandy Boys calling themselves the Beach Boys, my goodness).

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Witness

Quote
paulspendel
Yes, the Band has turned into a Brand. And that's where it went wrong.

I guess it is not as easy as that. For when did the band not turn from band to brand, but rather double from band into band AND brand? Probably at the height of their career after the artistic turn in their development!

And where something went wrong, it was many years later, and it was not through somebody's unprovoked fault, but instead when the aging audiences, despite several renewals of their fanbase, were not longer capable of following the Stones. To me that was much related to the reception of UNDERCOVER. As a consequence the band almost disbanded during the complicated run of the following years.

Somehow, I wonder if it even was the brand that eventually saved the band from break up. Not as it often presented, out of the band's socalled greed as quite many will have it, but because their brand made it possible for them to go on living as rock musicians, even if they have had their long breaks of private life away from the limelight.

But the return, involving the professional turn of their career, especially live, had its cost and did not recover the thread of the musical development that they formerly had been in, and also was not without conflicts as to musical development.In addition, the band were given few incentives from outside to work hard in the studios with albums of new music.

The question now, however, is whether the band at the moment would be able AND willing to fulfill an album, say on the quality level of "Living in A Ghost Town". I belong to those that have that dream surpassing all wishes of experiencing further concerts. Well, setlists thoroughly inspired by such an album could completely change my attitude to attend more live concerts with the Stones than one.

The only difference between us and the Beatles is that we're still going. So, unlike the Beatles' greatest-hits set [1] we felt we had to put on two or three new tracks in a "to be continued" kind of spirit. I didn't want it to be all just nostalgia.

- Keith Richards, July 2002

That seems like something Mick would say.

Mick: I think what's important to me is that I'm personally writing new songs and the band is cutting new songs...

(There's an) old- fashioned idea that you can only be good while you're unknown, and hopefully not having any money, and even better, slightly mentally ill. AND a drug addict - always helpful. That makes you interesting. It doesn't necessarily make your WORK more interesting. It tends to drop off if you're older and a drug addict and don't work hard. So if you become too bourgeois and only want to live a comfortable life, can you be bothered to get up in the morning and write a song? That's a valid criticism. I don't think it applies to me. Because I love writing songs - whether they're good or not is another matter - and I love working really, really hard. In the last five years, I've been working like a dog.

Certainly other artists love writing. Maybe Billy Joel has 300 hundred songs written. Etc. The criticism of older artists releasing new albums and that the material is whatever, well, it's no different from any other album - just a snapshot of the moment.

And... at least they released something new.


Clearly things have changed, though, in regard to them wanting to do new material. This might sum it up, the post-BABYLON Stones:


(W)e've got (new tracks) in the can, and in a way I'm going to try to work on them and see if there's an album in there or the beginnings of an album or what. It seems like there's a lot there and it was a very profitable and prolific month in Paris, so I'm not going to just let them sit in the can and forget about them. But at the moment I can't do anything but this. But once this tour gets going, maybe I'll find some time to start working on them.

- Keith Richards, August 2002

[timeisonourside.com]

[timeisonourside.com]

Priorities. The 2002 LICKS sessions aside, since they apparently didn't seem to get back to those sessions, they went from 1997 to 2004 in regard to working on a new album. That's quite a gap and now it's into the longest gap ever, 16 years in September. As much as a Stones fan might grumble about that, for the Stones, it's been going on for so long they probably don't even notice, especially since they have 300 albums out and they've been doing their own Beach Boys tours the last 20 years or whatever.

Apparently it is that word procrastinate. Without a tour the band seems to be utterly unable to go in the studio to work on songs. With an ongoing tour on the other hand they are willing and eager. But to what? To procrastinate. Because then it is always another concert. And relaxation during days in between. A tour is a wonderful time to procrastinate recording.

A later edit: After having posted, I gradually got a feeling that I had read a reference to procrastination before in the context of a new Rolling Stones album, even if was the quote from Keith that made me think that way now.

But searching, I found that Hairball used the verb in the New album thread in a post on April 23, 2018, 05:23, page 166 of that thread.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2021-02-09 04:12 by Witness.

Quote
georgie48
Beach Boys tours, GLS? Which Beach Boys? There have been a couple of Beach Boys going around, right? As an old Stones fan I understand your feelings toward the Rolling Stones. Patience is a damn difficult thing to deal with, for anybody. But it's all a matter of trust and confidence for us fans when it comes to what the Stones have in mind. There was, is, and always will be one (rock 'n roll) band called the Rolling Stones (not like Mike Love and his Sandy Boys calling themselves the Beach Boys, my goodness).

LOL Mick's had a thing about not being compared to the Beach Boys (Mike Love's idiocy) yet... that's pretty much what they've done - the tried and true oldies. That's why I quoted their bits about LICKS and then, cool, we got BANG... but that tour devolved from the new songs to just one or two... and with exception to Doom And Gloom for a tour and a half... lots of room for some new material, the nice sidetrack of BLUE AND LONESOME, and then more new material, which they've worked on, yes... and we got the fantastic Living In A Ghost Town.

I guess it's just about their motivation: it doesn't concern them like it used to to have new material out.

They've got plenty to choose from for their tours but it only ends up being two or three 'others'.

If I'm not mistaken I think there was a general sentiment that Mick's heart surgery might get them to be a little more serious about finishing the new album. But nahhhh. They certainly had time to do that after the tour in 2019. So it's back to a few years between a tour (and what would be for an album), the only thing is... they're getting close to 80 years old. Charlie will be in June.

Wanting and doing are two different things.

I don't know if Mick and Keith/the band have the patience and the wherewithal to put whatever song segments they've written together into coherent wholes that satisfy them, or to start from scratch on new tunes. I am happy that they released LIAGT, and would so much enjoy hearing it live.

I hope at this point that we will see them do another tour or series of shows.

~"Love is Strong"~

Quote
Big Al

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
georgie48

Quote
MileHigh
No more greatest hits compilations, please. The first handful were legitimate, and then what followed after that was just milking the market for all it's worth. Capitalism and all that, I get it. But at the same time I find it embarrassing.

Like one day you are going to switch on the TV at 2:00 AM and there is going to be an hour-long infomercial on Rolling Stones hits compilations for the retirement home set. Remember those golden years? Call in the next 15 minutes and you can get Made in the Shade at 20% off...

I agree with you, but hee, all established artists/bands do the same, so why make a fuzz. It's the record companies that milk the contracts, that's all. I simply don't buy all that extra-extra compilation stuff and focus on the really interesting stuff. The Rolling Stones made a big time record contract with Universal and part of it is the delivery of a number of new albums. The new one is still to come and will come, so it's all a matter of patience

AC/DC has never issued a greatest hits comp. Metallica doesn't have one. NIN, Beck and QOTSA don't have one either.

These aren't acts with many hits, though. I point this out, as there can be a distinct difference between a ‘Greatest Hits’ and a ‘Best-Of’ If they had the latter, I may be more inclined to investigate their music.

AC/DC put out a box-set + live album(s)...

the box set is probably way too much AC/DC for a lot of people (and not cheap)

however, AC/DC Live is basically the same thing as a "Greatest Hits" (or "Best Of")....try that one! (there's BonFire for those more inclined to the Bon Scott Era)

As per Stones: I'm fine w/ another GRR or Licks w/ 2-3 new tunes....as long as I don't have to buy the entire album to get them.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-02-09 18:08 by stickyfingers101.

There are a fair number of artists who seem to find writing and recording rewarding enough to keep doing it without regard to commercial or cultural impact (Paul Simon, Neil Young) and others, like the Stones, who seem to need the culture and the marketplace to be interested for them to continue.

Quote
stickyfingers101

Quote
Big Al

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
georgie48

Quote
MileHigh
No more greatest hits compilations, please. The first handful were legitimate, and then what followed after that was just milking the market for all it's worth. Capitalism and all that, I get it. But at the same time I find it embarrassing.

Like one day you are going to switch on the TV at 2:00 AM and there is going to be an hour-long infomercial on Rolling Stones hits compilations for the retirement home set. Remember those golden years? Call in the next 15 minutes and you can get Made in the Shade at 20% off...

I agree with you, but hee, all established artists/bands do the same, so why make a fuzz. It's the record companies that milk the contracts, that's all. I simply don't buy all that extra-extra compilation stuff and focus on the really interesting stuff. The Rolling Stones made a big time record contract with Universal and part of it is the delivery of a number of new albums. The new one is still to come and will come, so it's all a matter of patience

AC/DC has never issued a greatest hits comp. Metallica doesn't have one. NIN, Beck and QOTSA don't have one either.

These aren't acts with many hits, though. I point this out, as there can be a distinct difference between a ‘Greatest Hits’ and a ‘Best-Of’ If they had the latter, I may be more inclined to investigate their music.

AC/DC put out a box-set + live album(s)...

the box set is probably way too much AC/DC for a lot of people (and not cheap)

however, AC/DC Live is basically the same thing as a "Greatest Hits" (or "Best Of")....try that one! (there's BonFire for those more inclined to the Bon Scott Era)

As per Stones: I'm fine w/ another GRR or Licks w/ 2-3 new tunes....as long as I don't have to buy the entire album to get them.

The wonders of the internet.

Quote
Send It To me
There are a fair number of artists who seem to find writing and recording rewarding enough to keep doing it without regard to commercial or cultural impact (Paul Simon, Neil Young) and others, like the Stones, who seem to need the culture and the marketplace to be interested for them to continue.

If Mick acted on his own observation about new songs in 1975 regarding the marketplace interest then BLACK AND BLUE would've been their last album!

Rolling Stones caskets,dog food,crotch less underpants etc
But no new music!

The best and only future of this band is their present time.

Yes ... one should always live for now



ROCKMAN

Quote
Send It To me
There are a fair number of artists who seem to find writing and recording rewarding enough to keep doing it without regard to commercial or cultural impact (Paul Simon, Neil Young) and others, like the Stones, who seem to need the culture and the marketplace to be interested for them to continue.

This is true indeed. One way to put it is to have an audience or not. Or to play for themselves or for the audience. The Stones always seem to have an audience in mind. They are doing it for people. Since signing with ALO, their music has done to attract big crowds, to make a difference, or a cultural impact and the marketplace, you name it. Once they tasted that apple they would not reduce their act to smaller crowds. Like Charlie once put it, nothing is more horrible than to play jazz in a small club, having an audience of couple of people, some of them your relatives. However, it was from the club circuit from where the Stones, even before ALO, understood what it is all about: to make the audience go wild, to move their asses. With ALO and record contract all of that just grew bigger, but the function remained the same: they are there to make a difference. All kind of artistic integrity or whatever is there just to serve that purpose. ALO forced Mick and Keith to write their own material because that was a necessary condition for them to survive (and pointing out that the true money is in there). They did wonderful hits when that was needed. They made wonderful albums when that was needed. There was a time when true artsitic integrity was a fundamental part of a proper rock and roll band, and of thw whole pop music business. In order to be hot you needed to release every four months a hot single or every year a new hot album. That was the nature of their game back then. Decades ago.

As far as releasing new music go, I think the biggest obstacle for the Stones being not so profilic for years (almost decades) is that there really isn't any longer such a marketplace/true interest/audience for it any longer. Surely, that's the nature of record business in genaral, but they also have their own intrinsic problems there: is not just them not to able reach new audience any longer, it is also their old audience are too spoiled by great past to attract any longer (which is natural: how the men in their senior years could actually compete with their younger selves when they were full of energy, passion and determinition, and the times were on their side). Yeah, the fans will buy out of loyalty any of their new recors, listen it a couple of times, and then - let's be honest - forget it. If the material is played in concert casual fans don't give a shit, while the loyal fans try to accept it, even though in the deep in their hearts they wish they would play something else (from the great back catalogue full of hidden gems).

I think it all boils down to fact any performer or a professional artist faces: does what I do mean something - do people actually care of what I do. Some people with ego big enough do not give a shit about it. That's the old romantic idea of artistry. They are just doing it for the sake of doing it, no matter whatever anyone thinks of it. Like their 'inner self' forces them to show artistic expression. Oh yeah. In a way a guy like Mick Jagger is more a pure artist in that sense than, say, Neil Young or Paul Simon is. Namely, he seemingly writes all the time, makes demos and whatever (since enjoying it, that is, having a natural tendency on it), but is such arrogant '@#$%&' that keeps all it with him, and releases next to nothing. Why to bother relaese anything if it doesn't mean anything? Just to show 'I am alive' or 'showing artistic integrity just in the sake of it' or 'this something I supposed to do, because I once did it for living and for survival'. Probably Mick self-esteem is not so low and his ambition and motivation is much higher. Besides, most of all, he can.

However, in regard to their legendary contemporaries who are more 'profilic', The Stones did something last year none of them could: relaesed a song that actually attracted an audience in a way that it is listened like their old hits do. That's actually a bigger achievement than releasing no matter many meaningless albums that are basically forgotten the day when they are released. I am sure that pleased very much the band itself - that people actually listen their stuff - which I hope might inspire them to release some more. (We have to also note that the last time The Stones actually released an album that turned out to be a huge commercial hit, selling in quantities no any other of their contemporaries can even imagine - doing that by a covers blues album was also a kind make good old Stonesian effort of making a difference).

The Stones are a huge, commercial pop music phemenonen, probably the biggest rock band ever, not any avantgarde act by any means. I think the problem is that many of us fans tend to see the band as some kind of avantgarde act, just out there from an artistic inspiration, not what it actually is. I guess it much easier to be diehard fan for a lesser act (as a huge Dylan fan I know it personally).

It's only rock'n'roll.

- Doxa



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2021-02-21 01:13 by Doxa.

Woody has some tunes I bet. Get your act together and put and album out. Lazy guys