Reflecting on the fact that post-Beatles breakup the Stones kept going for a long productive time before hitting real turbulence in the 80s. Surprising to me that Mick never tried putting out a solo record during the mid-70s: Keith was battling addiction, sales of IORR & Black and Blue were not earth shattering, his individual profile rose, etc.

What do you think kept him devoted to the Stones? He no doubt realized that Keith as a writing partner was huge, as was the Stones brand, but still odd he waited until '84-'85 to try out his own thing, in his early 40s. At that point, he was not tied into the youth market anymore.

Glad it worked out the way it did, but just wondering what others takes are. And if he had done it earlier, how would history be different.

When would that have happened then? The brand of music the band represented were part of the youth culture (screaming girls, radio hits and so on) maybe up and till 1970.
Then other phenomena took over. I can't see him leaving the band after the 1969 US tour... But you're right - when he finally decided to try a solo career it was too late really.

I think Yetnikoff tried to convince him he could make him a bigger star outside the band, sort of like a Michael Jackson outside the Jacksons.

And you had stars like Bowie and Tina Turner in their early middle age doing fabulously so I think that was part of the lure for MJ.

But those two were established solo artists and what you had with Mick was a lot of grumpy Stones fans not excited to see WWIII. Plus, let's face it the material wasn't overwhelmingly good on those first two albums (sure, a few awesome songs, but they weren't even the singles).

The thing is...he couldn't come up with anything better than what the band already delivered years ago. So, what was the point then?
Producing the same kind of music, with professional session musicians (top of the crop), but just not as good?

Quote
treaclefingers
I think Yetnikoff tried to convince him he could make him a bigger star outside the band, sort of like a Michael Jackson outside the Jacksons.

And you had stars like Bowie and Tina Turner in their early middle age doing fabulously so I think that was part of the lure for MJ.

But those two were established solo artists and what you had with Mick was a lot of grumpy Stones fans not excited to see WWIII. Plus, let's face it the material wasn't overwhelmingly good on those first two albums (sure, a few awesome songs, but they weren't even the singles).

also to be fair she's the boss and primitive cool weren't much better or worse then the albums the stones were putting out in the mid to late 80's

i seems to me that mick in the second half of the 80's was kinda spent creatively and that's reflected in his two solo albums and dirty work and steel wheels

if he had gone solo in the mid to late 70's though when he was still writing better material and was more culturally relavent and seen as less of a dinosaur by young people he may have had a better chance at being successful as a solo artist

especially if had someone to collaborate with like perhaps his friend david bowie kinda like the way bowie worked with iggy pop

if mick had bowie to help him write and perhaps produce his music it could have been much more successful for him

So Low....omphhhh

Quote
Munichhilton
So Low....omphhhh

you joke but it brings me to another thought

part of mick's interest in going solo is that he wanted to explore new kinds of music that he wasn't able to do with the stones

well that would have certainly made bowie the perfect collaborater since the he was always open to and exploring new kinds of music particularly in the late 70's

seriously no ones curious what a mick bowie collaboration during bowie's berlin period would have produced?

Quote
Send It To me
Reflecting on the fact that post-Beatles breakup the Stones kept going for a long productive time before hitting real turbulence in the 80s. Surprising to me that Mick never tried putting out a solo record during the mid-70s: Keith was battling addiction, sales of IORR & Black and Blue were not earth shattering, his individual profile rose, etc.

What do you think kept him devoted to the Stones? He no doubt realized that Keith as a writing partner was huge, as was the Stones brand, but still odd he waited until '84-'85 to try out his own thing, in his early 40s. At that point, he was not tied into the youth market anymore.

Glad it worked out the way it did, but just wondering what others takes are. And if he had done it earlier, how would history be different.

A good question. There was an interview done during 1973 tour in which he said he might do a solo album (and that at least Mick Taylor will contribute there). Was that Jagger having fun or was there really some substance I don't know. Now in retrospect that would have been a perfect timing - just before the Stones hitting both commercially and creatively the 'low' period of mid-70's and Mick's personal star was probably shining its brightest. And we have to remember that at least one of the reasons Taylor left was that he didn't thought the Stones would stand that long anymore. He thought leaving the ship before it sinks.

But the fact remains that Jagger remained loyal to the Stones through all those difficult years. Even when there was a real threat that Keith might face a long jail sentence in 1977 Mick seemed to think the Stones will go on (there is a claim that he contacted Taylor to replace Keith in the case).

My personal quess is that Mick was devoted to the Stones since he saw the Stones as his natural vehicle of expression. The whole band was in his lead. Whatever Mick wanted to test or try the band was able to do that (and do that well). He or the new trends of the day weren't that far from Keith's taste or vision musically, or Keith at least was pretty willing to do anything Mick wanted (it was good deal for Keith: he didn't need to worry anything since Mick provided him a haven in where he could enjoy his lifestyle in safe. Just to show up with a guitar, pose nicely and provide a couple of good riffs and some musical insights from his good intuition. Leave the rest to Mick).

But by the 80's a lot of things had changed. Already in 1980 (while promoting EMOTIONAL RESCUE) Mick said that he is not so sure if the Stones could survive the 80's and he might do that better on his own. He was partly right: as the 80's really started to happen, it seemed the 80's trends went way beyond the scope of the Stones (add there the personal difficulties within the band and especially with Keith who has not any longer that easy to handle as he had replaced the hard stuff with booze and having built an ego). But the decade gave also Mick a lesson: he himself - even alone and surrounded by different musicians - couldn't any longer adapt convincingly to the trends and his star wasn't that huge any longer. The 80's were hard times for 'old' 60's stars and the nostalgia market for 'classic rock' was not commercially that big yet. But soon it was. But that's another story.

But let me repeat my answer: during the 70's Mick's musical visions and the scope and ability of the band went hand in hand. The Rolling Stones was his natural musical home. I believe he thought that he could not do that so well in any other way - so why to change and risk anything? Mick's always been a pragmatist. And that's why he also tried to go solo in the following decade.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2025-07-29 11:28 by Doxa.

Perhaps the answer lies in an interview with Jimmy Rip about Primitive Cool and Wandering Spirit: Jagger lives a live a extreme luxury, travelling the world from exotic Island to the great cities of this world, all backed up organized by a huge organization and a very willing record company. With his solo efforts he really had to do it all by himself, and his power to make things happen was far less than with the Stones. With Wandering Spirit Jagger had no power -the record label chose what to release as singles, and did hardly promote the album and did not back up a tour. Jagger found out the Stones were much bigger than him in every respect -according to Jimmy Rip Jagger was called to a meeting with Richards about making new album, and that was the end of the Wandering Spirit solo effort.

Mathijs

What Doxa says is absolutely true. During the 70s Jagger could fully express himself in the Stones (most of the songs were his idea, he arranged them, he even produced the albums, he managed the band) and became a millionaire by doing so.

Besides, I can't think of many members of established bands of the 60s who chose to pursue a solo career.

One that comes to mind is Rod Stewart. Probably Clapton too.

Ex Beatles don't count - I think - because the band collapsed not for the decision of one.

The 80s were a completely different scenario.


C

Quote
Mathijs
Perhaps the answer lies in an interview with Jimmy Rip about Primitive Cool and Wandering Spirit: Jagger lives a live a extreme luxury, travelling the world from exotic Island to the great cities of this world, all backed up organized by a huge organization and a very willing record company. With his solo efforts he really had to do it all by himself, and his power to make things happen was far less than with the Stones. With Wandering Spirit Jagger had no power -the record label chose what to release as singles, and did hardly promote the album and did not back up a tour. Jagger found out the Stones were much bigger than him in every respect -according to Jimmy Rip Jagger was called to a meeting with Richards about making new album, and that was the end of the Wandering Spirit solo effort.

Mathijs

Interesting, don't remember that interview, is it available somewhere ? I remember that Mick's "excuse" at the time for not touring WS was that he'd taken too long to finish it and that he'd committed to get together with Keith to start working on the next album...I also remember an article by Philippe Manoeuvre where he explained that Ahmet Ertegun had gotten Mick to rework WS twice before giving it a go.

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio

Quote
gotdablouse

Quote
Mathijs
Perhaps the answer lies in an interview with Jimmy Rip about Primitive Cool and Wandering Spirit: Jagger lives a live a extreme luxury, travelling the world from exotic Island to the great cities of this world, all backed up organized by a huge organization and a very willing record company. With his solo efforts he really had to do it all by himself, and his power to make things happen was far less than with the Stones. With Wandering Spirit Jagger had no power -the record label chose what to release as singles, and did hardly promote the album and did not back up a tour. Jagger found out the Stones were much bigger than him in every respect -according to Jimmy Rip Jagger was called to a meeting with Richards about making new album, and that was the end of the Wandering Spirit solo effort.

Mathijs

Interesting, don't remember that interview, is it available somewhere ? I remember that Mick's "excuse" at the time for not touring WS was that he'd taken too long to finish it and that he'd committed to get together with Keith to start working on the next album...I also remember an article by Philippe Manoeuvre where he explained that Ahmet Ertegun had gotten Mick to rework WS twice before giving it a go.

This is one of them, there's plenty more on the net:

[ultimateclassicrock.com]

Mathijs

Quote
treaclefingers
I think Yetnikoff tried to convince him he could make him a bigger star outside the band, sort of like a Michael Jackson outside the Jacksons.

And you had stars like Bowie and Tina Turner in their early middle age doing fabulously so I think that was part of the lure for MJ.

But those two were established solo artists and what you had with Mick was a lot of grumpy Stones fans not excited to see WWIII. Plus, let's face it the material wasn't overwhelmingly good on those first two albums (sure, a few awesome songs, but they weren't even the singles).

What treacle said, plus "lead singer syndrome - I am the star and reason for our success".

"No Anchovies, Please"

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
treaclefingers
I think Yetnikoff tried to convince him he could make him a bigger star outside the band, sort of like a Michael Jackson outside the Jacksons.

And you had stars like Bowie and Tina Turner in their early middle age doing fabulously so I think that was part of the lure for MJ.

But those two were established solo artists and what you had with Mick was a lot of grumpy Stones fans not excited to see WWIII. Plus, let's face it the material wasn't overwhelmingly good on those first two albums (sure, a few awesome songs, but they weren't even the singles).

also to be fair she's the boss and primitive cool weren't much better or worse then the albums the stones were putting out in the mid to late 80's

i seems to me that mick in the second half of the 80's was kinda spent creatively and that's reflected in his two solo albums and dirty work and steel wheels

if he had gone solo in the mid to late 70's though when he was still writing better material and was more culturally relavent and seen as less of a dinosaur by young people he may have had a better chance at being successful as a solo artist

especially if had someone to collaborate with like perhaps his friend david bowie kinda like the way bowie worked with iggy pop

if mick had bowie to help him write and perhaps produce his music it could have been much more successful for him

I think looking back, you had this period, 1978-82 of unbelievable triumph, a second coming of sorts.

But the world is changing around them, all the new artists of the time dominating the charts, Culture Club, Duran Duran, The Police, U2 etc (I remember them even referring to it as the new "British Invasion"), and of course Prince and Michael Jackson, and in 1983 they land with a thud, with Undercover.

Now, I love this album. However the public didn't buy it. They had all sorts of new distractions. For Mick that must have been a little disorienting. So he teams up with Michael Jackson for "State of Shock", and then with Bowie for "Dancing In The Street" and the first solo album. He's trying to stay relevant. It sells moderately well, not better than Undercover.

In the meantime, Keith is dragging him back for a lacklustre new album for 1986. That doesn't work (partly because of Mick's lack of involvement), and he soldiers on to "Primitive Cool" and the possible career low point of any of the Stones with the release of the ludicrous "Let's Work".

AFTER WHICH, Keith comes out with the fabulous Talk Is Cheap.

Is Mick crying Uncle now? I think he is, so we get rapprochement and Steel Wheels, Vegas Stones and over 35 years of reliable touring with a few albums of new material sprinkled in.

In short, Mick finds his muse outside the band, with the occasional solo release, or duet but continues to be at the top of the industry.

I think with HD though, finally, he's rediscovered the Stones as a creative outlet.

Yeah, to me it was a bad sign that from the 90's on Mick started dividing his songs "suitable for The Stones" and those which were not. That sounded like Stones were like a closed box and he had a pretty clear picture of the musical boundaries of the band (and unfortunately the songs making Stones albums mostly sounded like that.). It also indicates that he didn't see much point in trying to add anything novel to Stones oeuvre. I don't see that as a very good starting point for inspiration and creativity. No ambition.

It is pretty hard to think that he would have thought that way during the 70's.

And yeah, maybe he is more like that nowadays again - he is seeing The Stones again as the only means of his artistic expression. If Keith vetoes strongly, he then goes and releases stuff solo ("Get A Grip"/"England Lost").

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025-07-29 16:24 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa
Yeah, to me it was a bad sign that from the 90's on Mick started dividing his songs "suitable for The Stones" and those which were not. That sounded like Stones were like a closed box and he had a pretty clear picture of the musical boundaries of the band (and unfortunately the songs making Stones albums mostly sounded like that.). It also indicates that he didn't see much point in trying to add anything novel to Stones oeuvre. I don't see that as a very good starting point for inspiration and creativity. No ambition.

It is pretty hard to think that he would have thought that way during the 70's.

And yeah, maybe he is more like that nowadays again - he is seeing The Stones again as the only means of his artistic expression. If Keith vetoes strongly, he then goes and releases stuff solo ("Get A Grip"/"England Lost").

- Doxa

...yes, and I get where Keith is coming from to a certain point. The Stones is and should be a collaboration so that not every idea that comes up necessarily ends up on the album, just the best. But given the variety on previous albums, that still leaves a huge amount of opportunity.

I think the constraining thing was that Keith's view on what is "Stones" was too narrow. Whether he's finally come around now, or just given up and "glad to be anywhere", this makes for more opportunity for Mick for creative expression within the band (within certain limits).

Anyway, so glad this has happened whatever the reason. It makes for great possibilities for the new release.

Thinking about it the right time for going solo would have been the early or mid 70s. Like another Mick did... But maybe this Mick would have been more successful?
At least he would have escaped Keith's worst drug trips...

In the seventies there still was so much creative energy inside the Stones that leaving might not have been an option. The Stones, and especially Jagger and Richards, depend on each other as musicians. The tension got worse and worse in the mid-eighties, so Jagger tried to break out. His strategy had to fail: Becoming a second Michael Jackson was impossible. All members of the Beatles had solo-hits which got airplay. Average rockfans who were around in the eighties and nineties may remember "Dancing in the streets", "Just another night" and "Sweet thing". Apart from fans of the Stones nobody knows who the Winos were. Jagger could have started a new career if he had invested incredible efforts, but he would not have achieved the success he had with the Stones. All other members would have gotten into financial trouble, if the 1989/90 tour had not happened.Then they established an increbibly lucrative business model and rode it for two decades. It is unbelievable: Richards and Wood were completely out of their minds during many ABB shows - yet it became one of the financially most successful tours ever.

Tours in
1970
1971
1972
1973
1975
1976
1978
1981
1982
On top of that
1974 album
1977 album
1980 album
1983 album
Not easy to go solo…

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
treaclefingers
I think Yetnikoff tried to convince him he could make him a bigger star outside the band, sort of like a Michael Jackson outside the Jacksons.

And you had stars like Bowie and Tina Turner in their early middle age doing fabulously so I think that was part of the lure for MJ.

But those two were established solo artists and what you had with Mick was a lot of grumpy Stones fans not excited to see WWIII. Plus, let's face it the material wasn't overwhelmingly good on those first two albums (sure, a few awesome songs, but they weren't even the singles).

also to be fair she's the boss and primitive cool weren't much better or worse then the albums the stones were putting out in the mid to late 80's

i seems to me that mick in the second half of the 80's was kinda spent creatively and that's reflected in his two solo albums and dirty work and steel wheels

if he had gone solo in the mid to late 70's though when he was still writing better material and was more culturally relavent and seen as less of a dinosaur by young people he may have had a better chance at being successful as a solo artist

especially if had someone to collaborate with like perhaps his friend david bowie kinda like the way bowie worked with iggy pop

if mick had bowie to help him write and perhaps produce his music it could have been much more successful for him

I think looking back, you had this period, 1978-82 of unbelievable triumph, a second coming of sorts.

But the world is changing around them, all the new artists of the time dominating the charts, Culture Club, Duran Duran, The Police, U2 etc (I remember them even referring to it as the new "British Invasion"), and of course Prince and Michael Jackson, and in 1983 they land with a thud, with Undercover.

Now, I love this album. However the public didn't buy it. They had all sorts of new distractions. For Mick that must have been a little disorienting. So he teams up with Michael Jackson for "State of Shock", and then with Bowie for "Dancing In The Street" and the first solo album. He's trying to stay relevant. It sells moderately well, not better than Undercover.

In the meantime, Keith is dragging him back for a lacklustre new album for 1986. That doesn't work (partly because of Mick's lack of involvement), and he soldiers on to "Primitive Cool" and the possible career low point of any of the Stones with the release of the ludicrous "Let's Work".

AFTER WHICH, Keith comes out with the fabulous Talk Is Cheap.

Is Mick crying Uncle now? I think he is, so we get rapprochement and Steel Wheels, Vegas Stones and over 35 years of reliable touring with a few albums of new material sprinkled in.

In short, Mick finds his muse outside the band, with the occasional solo release, or duet but continues to be at the top of the industry.

I think with HD though, finally, he's rediscovered the Stones as a creative outlet.

Fabulous Talk is Cheap...well well, he he

Quote
bobo

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
treaclefingers
I think Yetnikoff tried to convince him he could make him a bigger star outside the band, sort of like a Michael Jackson outside the Jacksons.

And you had stars like Bowie and Tina Turner in their early middle age doing fabulously so I think that was part of the lure for MJ.

But those two were established solo artists and what you had with Mick was a lot of grumpy Stones fans not excited to see WWIII. Plus, let's face it the material wasn't overwhelmingly good on those first two albums (sure, a few awesome songs, but they weren't even the singles).

also to be fair she's the boss and primitive cool weren't much better or worse then the albums the stones were putting out in the mid to late 80's

i seems to me that mick in the second half of the 80's was kinda spent creatively and that's reflected in his two solo albums and dirty work and steel wheels

if he had gone solo in the mid to late 70's though when he was still writing better material and was more culturally relavent and seen as less of a dinosaur by young people he may have had a better chance at being successful as a solo artist

especially if had someone to collaborate with like perhaps his friend david bowie kinda like the way bowie worked with iggy pop

if mick had bowie to help him write and perhaps produce his music it could have been much more successful for him

I think looking back, you had this period, 1978-82 of unbelievable triumph, a second coming of sorts.

But the world is changing around them, all the new artists of the time dominating the charts, Culture Club, Duran Duran, The Police, U2 etc (I remember them even referring to it as the new "British Invasion"), and of course Prince and Michael Jackson, and in 1983 they land with a thud, with Undercover.

Now, I love this album. However the public didn't buy it. They had all sorts of new distractions. For Mick that must have been a little disorienting. So he teams up with Michael Jackson for "State of Shock", and then with Bowie for "Dancing In The Street" and the first solo album. He's trying to stay relevant. It sells moderately well, not better than Undercover.

In the meantime, Keith is dragging him back for a lacklustre new album for 1986. That doesn't work (partly because of Mick's lack of involvement), and he soldiers on to "Primitive Cool" and the possible career low point of any of the Stones with the release of the ludicrous "Let's Work".

AFTER WHICH, Keith comes out with the fabulous Talk Is Cheap.

Is Mick crying Uncle now? I think he is, so we get rapprochement and Steel Wheels, Vegas Stones and over 35 years of reliable touring with a few albums of new material sprinkled in.

In short, Mick finds his muse outside the band, with the occasional solo release, or duet but continues to be at the top of the industry.

I think with HD though, finally, he's rediscovered the Stones as a creative outlet.

Fabulous Talk is Cheap...well well, he he

Don't you like it, or did you think I didn't like it?

For what it’s worth,and critic’s reviews aside,in America, She’s the Boss sold over a million and went platinum at number13 on the charts Talk is Cheap only went gold and sold500000.She’s the Boss is the best selling album of all Mick and Keith solo efforts. Goddess in a Doorway and Primitive Cool each outsold Main Offender.Wandering Spirit outsold all of Keith’s solo albums.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025-07-30 01:56 by Taylor1.

I'm sure you're right, Taylor 1. As a solo act Jagger was a bigger name than Richards (and Taylor). More commercial. Keith attracted the purists.

Quote
Taylor1
For what it’s worth,and critic’s reviews aside,in America, She’s the Boss sold over a million and went platinum at number13 on the charts Talk is Cheap only went gold and sold500000.She’s the Boss is the best selling album of all Mick and Keith solo efforts. Goddess in a Doorway and Primitive Cool each outsold Main Offender.Wandering Spirit outsold all of Keith’s solo albums.

But I'm sure you understand that as the "front man" the expectation would be that MJ would sell more. If he didn't that would have been quite embarrassing.

But that Keith with Talk Is Cheap outshone MJ's first 2 solo albums, which he was desperate to do and Keith only finally followed suit and did so with accolades, well must have been a bit of a gut punch for Mick.

That said, I think Wandering Spirit outdoes them all, and several Stones albums to boot. If Mick were able to deliver albums at that level I would have been comfortable without Voodoo Lounge, Bridges and ABB.

I know that's slightly heretical but it also didn't and would never happen.

Best Stones is when they can take ideas and bounce and bend them off each other, which even though Mick wrote most of HD, there is a Keith influence throughout.

Quote
Taylor1
For what it’s worth,and critic’s reviews aside,in America, She’s the Boss sold over a million and went platinum at number13 on the charts Talk is Cheap only went gold and sold500000.She’s the Boss is the best selling album of all Mick and Keith solo efforts. Goddess in a Doorway and Primitive Cool each outsold Main Offender.Wandering Spirit outsold all of Keith’s solo albums.

Goddess in the Doorway outsold Main Offender? Ouch. Goddess did not do well at all.

Quote
Taylor1
For what it’s worth,and critic’s reviews aside,in America, She’s the Boss sold over a million and went platinum at number13 on the charts Talk is Cheap only went gold and sold500000.She’s the Boss is the best selling album of all Mick and Keith solo efforts. Goddess in a Doorway and Primitive Cool each outsold Main Offender.Wandering Spirit outsold all of Keith’s solo albums.

Doesn't surprise me -Video Rewind, the videos for Undercover and Too Much Blood and then Just Another Night were huge at the time on MTV, with heavy rotation.

Mathijs