Quote
treaclefingers



..and also surprisingly Bite Me Head Off, which I just saw as a bit of a throwaway rocker in the first place but it is such a great performance. Sort of in the tradition of a song like She's So Cold, which on paper isn't anything special but the performance takes it to a completely other level, so much so that they can't do it in concert and do it justice.

Haha, there we have a 'song' that is a pure middle finger comment towards any melodic finesses... an anti-thesis to proper song-writing actually. Even more fitting that Macca - of all people - plays in this particular track. Even Jagger's "Easy Sleazy", stemming also from SOME GIRLS era energetic, straight-forward punk influences, sounds like a pop song compared to it. I mean, in Mick's solo track the chorus with its melodic hook, is pretty catchy, even poppish in contrast to the raw attack of the verses. But here in "Bite My Head off" no mercy is given for a sec.... And that's what I find in it so fascinating: just shoot from the hip. Old men hammering like no tomorrow. Rocking like hell. No brains. A great moment captured on a recording - could be very well that it can't be that easily repeated on stage.

I need to say that also I had first doubts about the track. Probably it sounded way too raw and unpolished, even idiotic writing-wise. Just loud mess. But now I enjoy it very much and find it serving its function well - fitting damn well to the flow of the album. A right piece in a right place in that puzzle.

- Doxa

Hackney Diamonds is the winner of the 38th Japan Gold Disc Awards for 'Album of the Year (Western music)' - [www.Universal-Music.co.jp] , [www.GoldDisc.jp] .

Quote
Irix
Hackney Diamonds is the winner of the 38th Japan Gold Disc Awards for 'Album of the Year (Western music)' - [www.Universal-Music.co.jp] , [www.GoldDisc.jp] .

Wow, that's a fair amount of love, isn't it?!

Quote
treaclefingers
I find it interesting that with the start of the tour now less than 2 months out, that there's no album promotion or likely singles still to emerge.

Was that badly timed? I mean there's nothing quite like a new album and a single on the charts while the band is touring it. It's still on the charts (though falling) in places like Germany but in the US/Canada it disappeared long ago.

Could the timing have been better for release?

Or might they have something up their sleeve before the tour kicks off...my head would explode if they dropped something else before April 28 - not that that is likely, but hey, Mick said it was 3/4s done!

All the promotional forces were in the pre-sale with the enormous number of vinyl variants (although unfortunately none come with bonus tracks that would have generated many additional sales), the release of the album live on YouTube, Angry's video, interviews and TV appearances in the United States, but the band disappeared from the radar after October, no more interviews, no additional TV appearances and of course no additional live shows. The band had months to promote the album on TV, they could have played on any TV show, they were even offered to open this year's Grammy's and they didn't want to do it.

Sadly, they are one of the most anti-TV artists that exist, there are very successful shows on British and North American TV that they never went to, not even individually, those shows are excellent for generating sales and the band never appeared.

Without promotion there are no sales so it is not surprising that after Christmas sales of the album plummeted, apparently the company and the band are more than happy with the almost 1.3 million they have sold so far.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Irix
Hackney Diamonds is the winner of the 38th Japan Gold Disc Awards for 'Album of the Year (Western music)' - [www.Universal-Music.co.jp] , [www.GoldDisc.jp] .

Wow, that's a fair amount of love, isn't it?!

It's an awards ceremony, not for actual sales.

Hackney Diamonds has sold close to 70,000 in Japan, the Gold Award level for albums is 100,000 copies sold.

Quote
georgelicks

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Irix
Hackney Diamonds is the winner of the 38th Japan Gold Disc Awards for 'Album of the Year (Western music)' - [www.Universal-Music.co.jp] , [www.GoldDisc.jp] .

Wow, that's a fair amount of love, isn't it?!

It's an awards ceremony, not for actual sales.

Hackney Diamonds has sold close to 70,000 in Japan, the Gold Award level for albums is 100,000 copies sold.

Yes I gathered that it was not for sales per se, but wow, sales were pretty low in Japan.

Further to your other post Georgelicks, it's almost startling that they started with such uber-hype in September and October and then basically nothing after. I don't quite understand that.

Even the releases after the Angry single/video were sad. The great duet with Gaga didn't get an official video release...that's operator error, and the Mess It Up single had no physical release and the video itself was sort of boring with no band shots at all.

I don't know who's making those calls but after the incredible launch the whole promo strategy just seemed to peter out.

Maybe they just know the market.


They know the size of the market for a Rolling Stones record and just want to help it chart better by ensuring that we all buy it at once ...

...and that some of us buy it several times

Quote
georgelicks

Quote
treaclefingers
I find it interesting that with the start of the tour now less than 2 months out, that there's no album promotion or likely singles still to emerge.

Was that badly timed? I mean there's nothing quite like a new album and a single on the charts while the band is touring it. It's still on the charts (though falling) in places like Germany but in the US/Canada it disappeared long ago.

Could the timing have been better for release?

Or might they have something up their sleeve before the tour kicks off...my head would explode if they dropped something else before April 28 - not that that is likely, but hey, Mick said it was 3/4s done!

All the promotional forces were in the pre-sale with the enormous number of vinyl variants (although unfortunately none come with bonus tracks that would have generated many additional sales), the release of the album live on YouTube, Angry's video, interviews and TV appearances in the United States, but the band disappeared from the radar after October, no more interviews, no additional TV appearances and of course no additional live shows. The band had months to promote the album on TV, they could have played on any TV show, they were even offered to open this year's Grammy's and they didn't want to do it.

Sadly, they are one of the most anti-TV artists that exist, there are very successful shows on British and North American TV that they never went to, not even individually, those shows are excellent for generating sales and the band never appeared.

Without promotion there are no sales so it is not surprising that after Christmas sales of the album plummeted, apparently the company and the band are more than happy with the almost 1.3 million they have sold so far.

Are there any statistics about how the release of HD fuelled the sales of their back catalog and merchandise? Because that was part of their plan if I understood Universal correctly.

Quote
retired_dog

Are there any statistics about how the release of HD fuelled the sales of their back catalog and merchandise? Because that was part of their plan if I understood Universal correctly.

Always

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
georgelicks

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Irix
Hackney Diamonds is the winner of the 38th Japan Gold Disc Awards for 'Album of the Year (Western music)' - [www.Universal-Music.co.jp] , [www.GoldDisc.jp] .

Wow, that's a fair amount of love, isn't it?!

It's an awards ceremony, not for actual sales.

Hackney Diamonds has sold close to 70,000 in Japan, the Gold Award level for albums is 100,000 copies sold.

Yes I gathered that it was not for sales per se, but wow, sales were pretty low in Japan.

And how exactly did you you ‘gather it was not for sales per se?’

Oh never mind about that. I live in Japan, btw. A couple of months ago I was drinking with a Japanese friend of mine and – this may be of some interest to IORRers who keep track of sales - when the subject of music came up I learned he was a big Beatles fan. He was also into the Foo Fighters and other Western bands in his college days but was not very familiar with the Stones for some reason. He asked me to recommend a few Stones records in order to ‘expand his musical horizons’ as they say. So I did. Naturally I didn’t mention Hackney Diamonds which should come as no surprise to you. But what surprised ME was that HE didn’t mention HD. In other words, I’m fairly certain he had no idea that the Stones had recently released a new album. So yeah, no promotion, no sales.

There was certainly some promotion of HD in Japan because folks were posting photos of it on here.

Maybe it was largely restricted to record shops ?

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
georgelicks

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Irix
Hackney Diamonds is the winner of the 38th Japan Gold Disc Awards for 'Album of the Year (Western music)' - [www.Universal-Music.co.jp] , [www.GoldDisc.jp] .

Wow, that's a fair amount of love, isn't it?!

It's an awards ceremony, not for actual sales.

Hackney Diamonds has sold close to 70,000 in Japan, the Gold Award level for albums is 100,000 copies sold.

Yes I gathered that it was not for sales per se, but wow, sales were pretty low in Japan.

Further to your other post Georgelicks, it's almost startling that they started with such uber-hype in September and October and then basically nothing after. I don't quite understand that.

Even the releases after the Angry single/video were sad. The great duet with Gaga didn't get an official video release...that's operator error, and the Mess It Up single had no physical release and the video itself was sort of boring with no band shots at all.

I don't know who's making those calls but after the incredible launch the whole promo strategy just seemed to peter out.

Because they are 80 years old.
They have other priorities.
Mick and Ronnie were clearly proud of the album and the band did the usual rounds to put it out there but that's as far as it goes.

Quote
georgelicks

Quote
treaclefingers
I find it interesting that with the start of the tour now less than 2 months out, that there's no album promotion or likely singles still to emerge.

Was that badly timed? I mean there's nothing quite like a new album and a single on the charts while the band is touring it. It's still on the charts (though falling) in places like Germany but in the US/Canada it disappeared long ago.

Could the timing have been better for release?

Or might they have something up their sleeve before the tour kicks off...my head would explode if they dropped something else before April 28 - not that that is likely, but hey, Mick said it was 3/4s done!

All the promotional forces were in the pre-sale with the enormous number of vinyl variants (although unfortunately none come with bonus tracks that would have generated many additional sales), the release of the album live on YouTube, Angry's video, interviews and TV appearances in the United States, but the band disappeared from the radar after October, no more interviews, no additional TV appearances and of course no additional live shows. The band had months to promote the album on TV, they could have played on any TV show, they were even offered to open this year's Grammy's and they didn't want to do it.

Sadly, they are one of the most anti-TV artists that exist, there are very successful shows on British and North American TV that they never went to, not even individually, those shows are excellent for generating sales and the band never appeared.

Without promotion there are no sales so it is not surprising that after Christmas sales of the album plummeted, apparently the company and the band are more than happy with the almost 1.3 million they have sold so far.

Well, maybe that of them not promoting the the album personally that longer is simply question of their age. They put all the energy they wanted to use into promotion to the early stages, including the club gig. That was their bit. Just to gather, rehearse and whatever to do some Grammy appearance asks too much. Probably they've been just resting to be ready mentally and physically for the tour. That's where their true income is. Maybe heart and mind too.

More odd is the attitude of their record company. This album is their payday, and one might imagine they would do everything to milk any penny out of it. Besides, weren't they talking about spending the next 9 months or so to the album? Now it looks like all the interest disappeared after Christmas sales. But yeah who knows, maybe they actually are satisfied with its sales by now (and they are great by today's standards), and probably calculating that it is not worth the investment to try to put more money on its promotion. Cold-hearted business realism.


- Doxa



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-15 12:30 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
georgelicks

Quote
treaclefingers
I find it interesting that with the start of the tour now less than 2 months out, that there's no album promotion or likely singles still to emerge.

Was that badly timed? I mean there's nothing quite like a new album and a single on the charts while the band is touring it. It's still on the charts (though falling) in places like Germany but in the US/Canada it disappeared long ago.

Could the timing have been better for release?

Or might they have something up their sleeve before the tour kicks off...my head would explode if they dropped something else before April 28 - not that that is likely, but hey, Mick said it was 3/4s done!

All the promotional forces were in the pre-sale with the enormous number of vinyl variants (although unfortunately none come with bonus tracks that would have generated many additional sales), the release of the album live on YouTube, Angry's video, interviews and TV appearances in the United States, but the band disappeared from the radar after October, no more interviews, no additional TV appearances and of course no additional live shows. The band had months to promote the album on TV, they could have played on any TV show, they were even offered to open this year's Grammy's and they didn't want to do it.

Sadly, they are one of the most anti-TV artists that exist, there are very successful shows on British and North American TV that they never went to, not even individually, those shows are excellent for generating sales and the band never appeared.

Without promotion there are no sales so it is not surprising that after Christmas sales of the album plummeted, apparently the company and the band are more than happy with the almost 1.3 million they have sold so far.

Well, maybe that of them not promoting the the album personally that longer is simply question of their age. They put all the energy they wanted to use into promotion to the early stages, including the club gig. That was their bit. Just to gather, rehearse and whatever to do some Grammy appearance asks too much. Probably they've been just resting to be ready mentally and physically for the tour. That's where their true income is. Maybe heart and mind too.

More odd is the attitude of their record company. This album is their payday, and one might imagine they would do everything to milk any penny out of it. Besides, weren't they talking about spending the next 9 months or so to the album? Now it looks like all the interest disappeared after Christmas sales. But yeah who knows, maybe they actually are satisfied with its sales by now (and they are great by today's standards), and probably calculating that it is not worth the investment to try to put more money on its promotion. Cold-hearted business realism.


- Doxa

And that really is what I was getting at. Putting out a video of the recording session for SSoH or the physical single for Mess It Up or WWW don't require much from the band but perhaps that was the issue, the record company were satisfied.

I do recall someone from the record company saying this was an 18 month campaign, which I thought was exceptionally long. Maybe she meant 18 week.

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Doxa

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
matxil
I am happy about Keith's version of Waiting For The Man, though. Maybe it's time for another solo-album?

Judging from what one hears, they are already (or still) working on the next Stones album, then there's the upcoming tour(s). I don't see much of a time window for Keith to seriously work on another solo album in anytime soon.

Also, I wonder if he has so many songs in stock he considers not fitting for the Stones. And he doesn't seem to work on songs in his spare time as systematically as Mick does.

I'd rather prefer they make headway in completeing the next Stones album (a good deal of which is already in the can, if we are to believe them).

I guess one can never write Keith off. He always seem to find some extra gear when one least expects that. So who knows how many active years he might still have.

But yeah, realistically speaking, it looks like it is The Stones he is putting his energy on at the moment. Like always The Stones seem to be his priority number one. But I wouldn't count out a some kind of new solo album/project some day. The Reed track is a nice indication of that possibility.

- Doxa

Honestly, what for? Time and cost consuming writing and recording processes for (very) limited returns? If anything, full album releases of solo material would realistically only make sense for their heirs - to give them something to chew on and to keep the brands alive. That's probably when we will see Keith's Toronto 1977 stuff or Mick's Red Devils blues album and whatever other suitable demos they have recorded over the years in their home studios finally released. But during their lifetimes, I can only see single solo tracks every once in a while like Waiting For The Man or Strange Game from now on.

Well, just for fun and for art's sake... I mean, if Keith finds out that he enjoys being with the 'boys' in the studio, likes working there - I have had the impression that has been the case lately - he has afford to do that. Despite knowing that it isn't economically wise or that his music doesn't reach an audience bigger than hardcore base. The sales will be poor and the album will be forgotten in a couple of weeks. But his image and ego stands that. As I think the case been with the legacy artists for years now: whatever they do is just a footnote, and will affect anyway to their legacy. They release those just out of routine, despite the meaning of them artistically or economically has left the building a long ago, and most they do is to make an old hardcore fanbase happy (thinking people like Neil Young, Van Morrison, Clapton, the Who etc - probably Macca tries harder and is able somehow to make a bigger impact, and Dylan is above criticism; he always get a free-pass just for the sake of being Dylan).

I think your description fits better to Mick. I think he might consider the economical factors and there is a big risky that there is no audience for his solo album. Beside that the awereness that his career does not really need to prove anything. But a singular song here and there - when the muse calls - is a nice option.

So I think the effort Mick put on HACKNEY DIAMONDS - not accepting easy solutions, that is, whatever comes out of random sessions, no matter how many years it takes - speaks volumes that he is after all these years after big fishes. A Stones album cannot be 'just another meaningless album' but it needs to make an impact, be big news. Like it used to be. Otherwise, no point. And I think they did succeed in that, once again. Not that it made news, topped the charts, it had a something non-typical to catalogue artists: a chart run. It didn't follow the typical pattern of 'first week: a top ten position, second week: some two or three number position, the third week: gone - reflecting the sales based on hardcore fans getting their copy. No, it managed to stay at charts for weeks in good position. That is to say there were people interested buying their copy outside the devoted ones. That's pretty hard to achieve nowadays.

It is this unique attitude, together with ambition, Sir Mick has that has lead this band into incredible results and success during their long career. Still do. He just never seem to get enough - to sit on his laurels, have the luxury to enjoy the fruits of his past success. It almost feels like many of us - including me - would like to see him cool down, sit down, pick up an acoustic guitar, and plays sweet safety zone traditional stuff for us. 'Mick, my man, you don't need to prove anything, we love and admire you all the same. At least act to your age, or of ours, at least.'. But no, he always has that competitive nature, chasing new success, not giving up. Most likely had it been up to Keith, they scale of their doings had been played down a very long time ago, and they would have had just a cult following of hardcore believers - and I am pretty sure Keith is aware of this. That doesn't need mean Keith hadn't his say in Stones doings. He surely has - like you mentioned above the 'this is no Stones stuff' comment on Mick's solo tracks a few years ago - and Mick surely recognizes Keith's essential contribution - but I am pretty sure Keith trusts generally Mick's instincts and judgment in leading the band into new adventures. I mean, who wouldn¨t? It's helluva ride; the results speak for themselves...

I sometimes feel like the success of the Stones works, and the dynamics of The Glimmer Twins go, like Keith taking care of the interest of the hardcore fan base, while Mick takes care of the casual fan interest. For The Stones to roll they need both factors. But also for this reason, I believe Mick is an easy target to blame by both Keith and by a certain hardcore fan block - and the criticism is many times justified. But, however, this criticism is a kind of luxury criticism, based on taking some essential traits as granted, while in reality they are not. According to it, in some other alternative reality, in the realm of fancy, there exists an ideal version of the Rolling Stones just to please the taste of a certain hardcore fan base. But this dream is only possible to dream when an entity called The Rolling Stones exists in the first place, in the realm of hard facts as they really are. And that entity exits works according to some hard logic and with nothing else. We know the brains behind it. Besides, unlike Keith, Mick never been that hardcore fan-friendly, and always remained a pretty distant and cold figure. He doesn't really think of us. But thanks to his attitude, there still is that thing called the Rolling Stones.

The problem for us die-hard fans has been that the band of this magnitude in impact and success has always been much more than our band. They mean so many things, and for so many people, and within such a long time frame. I sometimes feel it goes beyond grasp - at least mine. But probably that's why I am so fascinated by them.

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Well, just for fun and for art's sake...

[...]
Keith taking care of the interest of the hardcore fan base, while Mick takes care of the casual fan interest
[...]

But probably that's why I am so fascinated by them.

- Doxa

Interesting text.
However, I sometimes wonder whether the Stones might get more general success outside their hardcore fanbase if they would try to please less and be more hardcore. But with hardcore, I don't mean just playing old-school blues, rock n roll and country. I mean going a bit crazy, doing something weird and out-of-the-ordinary. Something honestly raw and spontaneous.
Most people in my environment don't care about the Stones and most of them don't even know there is a new album. On this forum it sometimes seems HD is a big event, but in the real world it's been on the news one day and then forgotten.
Most of my friends think the Stones are an outdated rock band with nothing new to show. Keith's solo albums didn't impress people outside the hardcore base either, so to attract the general music-loving crowd, they'd need something else.

Quote
matxil

Quote
Doxa

Well, just for fun and for art's sake...

[...]
Keith taking care of the interest of the hardcore fan base, while Mick takes care of the casual fan interest
[...]

But probably that's why I am so fascinated by them.

- Doxa

Interesting text.
However, I sometimes wonder whether the Stones might get more general success outside their hardcore fanbase if they would try to please less and be more hardcore. But with hardcore, I don't mean just playing old-school blues, rock n roll and country. I mean going a bit crazy, doing something weird and out-of-the-ordinary. Something honestly raw and spontaneous.
Most people in my environment don't care about the Stones and most of them don't even know there is a new album. On this forum it sometimes seems HD is a big event, but in the real world it's been on the news one day and then forgotten.
Most of my friends think the Stones are an outdated rock band with nothing new to show. Keith's solo albums didn't impress people outside the hardcore base either, so to attract the general music-loving crowd, they'd need something else.

Yesterday, I watched an online discussion between two record collectors with huge collections and they both agreed that of any artist, no matter how great they are, they usually have no more than app. 6 "go-to" albums and everything else is just filling the space, like, who really needs 48 Neil Young albums or a similar amount of stuff by Hendrix, Van Morrison, Deep Purple, Lynyrd Skynyrd, Dylan, Elvis, or (fill in the blanks).

I think there is more than just some truth in that.

The problem with all these elder statesmen of Rock is that there's so much music already out there that new albums in general appeal only to the hardcore fans but leave the outside word relatively cold. The fact that HD did relatively well so far had a lot to do with it being their first studio album (of originals) since 2005. Had they released new albums every couple of years like a lot of their contemporaries, sales likely would have been considerably lower. But even in the case of HD I know a lot of people, classic rock fans, and some of them don't even know about a "new Stones album" and of those who do, many haven't listened to it yet, despite its online availability.

Yeah, "going a bit crazy, doing something weird and out-of-the-ordinary, something honestly raw and spontaneous" like you propose seems like a good idea, but what it could possibly be in this apparently saturated world of rock music at least I've got no idea...

...or, wait a second, maybe releasing something like "Continental Drift" as the first single from their next album to indicate that "this one's not gonna be your typical Stones album"?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-16 15:14 by retired_dog.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Doxa

Quote
doitywoik

Quote
matxil
I am happy about Keith's version of Waiting For The Man, though. Maybe it's time for another solo-album?

Judging from what one hears, they are already (or still) working on the next Stones album, then there's the upcoming tour(s). I don't see much of a time window for Keith to seriously work on another solo album in anytime soon.

Also, I wonder if he has so many songs in stock he considers not fitting for the Stones. And he doesn't seem to work on songs in his spare time as systematically as Mick does.

I'd rather prefer they make headway in completeing the next Stones album (a good deal of which is already in the can, if we are to believe them).

I guess one can never write Keith off. He always seem to find some extra gear when one least expects that. So who knows how many active years he might still have.

But yeah, realistically speaking, it looks like it is The Stones he is putting his energy on at the moment. Like always The Stones seem to be his priority number one. But I wouldn't count out a some kind of new solo album/project some day. The Reed track is a nice indication of that possibility.

- Doxa

Honestly, what for? Time and cost consuming writing and recording processes for (very) limited returns? If anything, full album releases of solo material would realistically only make sense for their heirs - to give them something to chew on and to keep the brands alive. That's probably when we will see Keith's Toronto 1977 stuff or Mick's Red Devils blues album and whatever other suitable demos they have recorded over the years in their home studios finally released. But during their lifetimes, I can only see single solo tracks every once in a while like Waiting For The Man or Strange Game from now on.

Well, just for fun and for art's sake... I mean, if Keith finds out that he enjoys being with the 'boys' in the studio, likes working there - I have had the impression that has been the case lately - he has afford to do that. Despite knowing that it isn't economically wise or that his music doesn't reach an audience bigger than hardcore base. The sales will be poor and the album will be forgotten in a couple of weeks. But his image and ego stands that. As I think the case been with the legacy artists for years now: whatever they do is just a footnote, and will affect anyway to their legacy. They release those just out of routine, despite the meaning of them artistically or economically has left the building a long ago, and most they do is to make an old hardcore fanbase happy (thinking people like Neil Young, Van Morrison, Clapton, the Who etc - probably Macca tries harder and is able somehow to make a bigger impact, and Dylan is above criticism; he always get a free-pass just for the sake of being Dylan).

I think your description fits better to Mick. I think he might consider the economical factors and there is a big risky that there is no audience for his solo album. Beside that the awereness that his career does not really need to prove anything. But a singular song here and there - when the muse calls - is a nice option.

So I think the effort Mick put on HACKNEY DIAMONDS - not accepting easy solutions, that is, whatever comes out of random sessions, no matter how many years it takes - speaks volumes that he is after all these years after big fishes. A Stones album cannot be 'just another meaningless album' but it needs to make an impact, be big news. Like it used to be. Otherwise, no point. And I think they did succeed in that, once again. Not that it made news, topped the charts, it had a something non-typical to catalogue artists: a chart run. It didn't follow the typical pattern of 'first week: a top ten position, second week: some two or three number position, the third week: gone - reflecting the sales based on hardcore fans getting their copy. No, it managed to stay at charts for weeks in good position. That is to say there were people interested buying their copy outside the devoted ones. That's pretty hard to achieve nowadays.

It is this unique attitude, together with ambition, Sir Mick has that has lead this band into incredible results and success during their long career. Still do. He just never seem to get enough - to sit on his laurels, have the luxury to enjoy the fruits of his past success. It almost feels like many of us - including me - would like to see him cool down, sit down, pick up an acoustic guitar, and plays sweet safety zone traditional stuff for us. 'Mick, my man, you don't need to prove anything, we love and admire you all the same. At least act to your age, or of ours, at least.'. But no, he always has that competitive nature, chasing new success, not giving up. Most likely had it been up to Keith, they scale of their doings had been played down a very long time ago, and they would have had just a cult following of hardcore believers - and I am pretty sure Keith is aware of this. That doesn't need mean Keith hadn't his say in Stones doings. He surely has - like you mentioned above the 'this is no Stones stuff' comment on Mick's solo tracks a few years ago - and Mick surely recognizes Keith's essential contribution - but I am pretty sure Keith trusts generally Mick's instincts and judgment in leading the band into new adventures. I mean, who wouldn¨t? It's helluva ride; the results speak for themselves...

I sometimes feel like the success of the Stones works, and the dynamics of The Glimmer Twins go, like Keith taking care of the interest of the hardcore fan base, while Mick takes care of the casual fan interest. For The Stones to roll they need both factors. But also for this reason, I believe Mick is an easy target to blame by both Keith and by a certain hardcore fan block - and the criticism is many times justified. But, however, this criticism is a kind of luxury criticism, based on taking some essential traits as granted, while in reality they are not. According to it, in some other alternative reality, in the realm of fancy, there exists an ideal version of the Rolling Stones just to please the taste of a certain hardcore fan base. But this dream is only possible to dream when an entity called The Rolling Stones exists in the first place, in the realm of hard facts as they really are. And that entity exits works according to some hard logic and with nothing else. We know the brains behind it. Besides, unlike Keith, Mick never been that hardcore fan-friendly, and always remained a pretty distant and cold figure. He doesn't really think of us. But thanks to his attitude, there still is that thing called the Rolling Stones.

The problem for us die-hard fans has been that the band of this magnitude in impact and success has always been much more than our band. They mean so many things, and for so many people, and within such a long time frame. I sometimes feel it goes beyond grasp - at least mine. But probably that's why I am so fascinated by them.

- Doxa

Excellent post. Well, "just for fun and for art's sake..." - don't fall in the trap of their public image like many here do, Doxa! Like "Keith is like this, while Mick is like that" - when it comes to business, they're both on the same page. I vividly remember a tour announcement (Licks? A Bigger Bang?) when they were asked about the high ticket prices and it was Keith who, with a sharp look in his eyes, snippishly replied: "Well, you can keep your money, pal!" - a truly unmasking moment in my book. That wasn't the friendly, romantic pirate that some people here still dream of...

...It was the Steel Wheels press conference...

Ps Keith defends his band no matter what. So I wouldn't draw any conclusions from that other than that he is very protective about the band. Ds



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-16 16:17 by Stoneage.

Basically, albums don't matter to them since they are mainly a touring act since decades. They have a big back catalogue so they don't need new hits to sell out tours.
And the big money is in tours these days. No wonder, considering the ticket prices...

Quote
Stoneage
...It was the Steel Wheels press conference...

Ps Keith defends his band no matter what. So I wouldn't draw any conclusions from that other than that he is very protective about the band. Ds

I think he "defended" the band's business decisions here more than anything else, and the band's business decisions are also his business decisions. He could have been much more polite and diplomatic like "well, you don't know our production costs and calculations so I understand your question!" but he chose a different route 'cause the question obviously caught him on the wrong foot. Jane Rose must have sunk into the ground in shame...

you can have the money, pal!

2005 -Julliard School of Music Press Conference Bigger Bang



ROCKMAN

Quote
Doxa
Conosciamo le menti dietro a tutto ciò. Inoltre, a differenza di Keith, Mick non è mai stato così amichevole con i fan, ed è sempre rimasto una figura piuttosto distante e fredda. Non pensa davvero a noi .

Mick is Mick the rock star, if he weren't like that he wouldn't be Mick!
His detachment from the fans makes him an idol.

Wasn't there also a HD making of documentary announced when the album first came out? Can't recall any talk about it lately. Mabe the docu will be the next step in the HD promo campaign? Although such a docu is rather for te hardcore fan base. They could sell it in a package together with the album and thus generate also a few more album sales (i.e. sell the album again to people who already have several other versions already.)

For a moment I was thinking they might release the docu around the start of the tour (or a potential upcoming European tour) so the tour would support the docu and the album but that makes sense only if they play more than just two of the new songs.

Quote
doitywoik

Wasn't there also a HD making of documentary announced when the album first came out? Can't recall any talk about it lately.

Recent talks about 'The Stones: Still Rolling' documentary - [iorr.org] .

Quote
Doxa

Quote
treaclefingers



..and also surprisingly Bite Me Head Off, which I just saw as a bit of a throwaway rocker in the first place but it is such a great performance. Sort of in the tradition of a song like She's So Cold, which on paper isn't anything special but the performance takes it to a completely other level, so much so that they can't do it in concert and do it justice.

Haha, there we have a 'song' that is a pure middle finger comment towards any melodic finesses... an anti-thesis to proper song-writing actually. Even more fitting that Macca - of all people - plays in this particular track. Even Jagger's "Easy Sleazy", stemming also from SOME GIRLS era energetic, straight-forward punk influences, sounds like a pop song compared to it. I mean, in Mick's solo track the chorus with its melodic hook, is pretty catchy, even poppish in contrast to the raw attack of the verses. But here in "Bite My Head off" no mercy is given for a sec.... And that's what I find in it so fascinating: just shoot from the hip. Old men hammering like no tomorrow. Rocking like hell. No brains. A great moment captured on a recording - could be very well that it can't be that easily repeated on stage.

I need to say that also I had first doubts about the track. Probably it sounded way too raw and unpolished, even idiotic writing-wise. Just loud mess. But now I enjoy it very much and find it serving its function well - fitting damn well to the flow of the album. A right piece in a right place in that puzzle.

- Doxa

I love it! When Macca activates that switch on the bass and lets it rip in absolute ball swinging synch with Jordan… Well they do the Watts/Wyman rhythm combo great justice.

JumpingKentFlash

I don’t hear anything special with his bass playing on that song.If it wasn’t McCartney I doubt you would even notice it

I see BMHO more in the tradition of 'Rip This Joint' i.e. The band captured a sense of spontaneity in the moment. She's So Cold sounds much more restrained, even measured to my ears, while BMHO is full on, balls-to-the-wall.

Quote
Taylor1
I don’t hear anything special with his bass playing on that song.If it wasn’t McCartney I doubt you would even notice it

I would claim that it would be pretty hard to NOT notice that bass solo no matter who came up with it...

One of those WTF moments on a Stones recording..

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-03-17 21:28 by Doxa.

Quote
bakersfield
I see BMHO more in the tradition of 'Rip This Joint' i.e. The band captured a sense of spontaneity in the moment. She's So Cold sounds much more restrained, even measured to my ears, while BMHO is full on, balls-to-the-wall.

I wasn't suggesting that they sounded similar. What I was saying is that what otherwise might be an average song is taken to uber heights by a superlative performance. SSC was the example I gave because the album version is just the best performance of that song and it is amazing.