one more official studio release that's more like a Tatoo You album that was mostly previously conceived/recorded...after that the vaults get opened a couple of times...one double album with a lot of stuff we know and then one with stuff most of us have never even heard of at all...oh, and perhaps a live album with their "greatest live performances over 45 years"

ABB live CD perhaps, but more likely is a real farewell mini-tour (yes, they will say goodbye and do it officially and mean it!) and an accompanying CD/DVD.

We'll see them reunite (perhaps not the present 5 at one time) for a benefit here and there.

For these reasons, I suspect they'll return to Europe and then the US for the finale between 2007-2008...at that point...it'll be over, except for the rare benefit appearance. Get your tix now! :-)

ohnonotyouagain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gazza says there's only 3 CDs worth of good stuff,
> and he oughta know because he's really Mick
> Jagger.



I think one of the last men to trust about the quality of the vaults is Jagger. Didn't he say in the Rarities booklet or something that most of the stuff in the vaults isn't very good, which is obviously not true?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-09-17 07:18 by it's_all_wrong.

ohnonotyouagain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> it's_all_wrong Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ChelseaDrugstore Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Much of this thread is mindboggling. These
> guys
> > > are old men. Surely this tour is it. They are
> > > extending it; probaly because they know that
> > this
> > > is the last time. I am thinking how so many
> are
> > > expoecting 4 guys at 68-70 to bust out new
> > rocking
> > > tunes, a Blues album (where has this idea
> come
> > > from???) and a couple Live shows. Plus
> > releasing
> > > these finished unheard gems. With all the
> > booting
> > > we do havent we heard 99% of it?
> >
> >
> >
> > There's oceans of stuff in the vaults. We
> haven't
> > even heard 80% of it.
>
> Gazza says there's only 3 CDs worth of good stuff,
> and he oughta know because he's really Mick
> Jagger.

So that's why the Stones haven't done more studio albums in the recent past- because Mick Jagger (A.K.A. Gazza) has been spending too much time in this forum instead of writing songs.

How did the Stones release so many albums in the sixties and seventees with all their tours? Didn't they write songs on the road? I know some bands do. If these guys are only playing two or three concerts per week they should be writing songs in their spare time.

kahoosier Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OK Gazza, agree with ya once, now time to disagee.
> I would bet even money at least on some sort of
> "50 Licks Tour." As long as MJ and at least one
> other of the four is alive and willing, MJ will
> take "the Rolling Stones" out for the milestone I
> am sure. And if that one or MORE includes
> Keith...well Keith I think is really going to be
> gung ho for it, or it would just undo the myth he
> has created for himself of "taking this thing as
> far as it will go." He has spent over 40 years
> telling us he will do this until he dies, so u bet
> he will do the 5oth.
>
> And the Glimmers will undoubtedly do it without
> Ronnie or Charlie if need be no matter what the
> rest of us think.
>
> NOw back to the post...don't know why, and admit
> that especailly without a contract its dim, but I
> think the guys will put out one more studio
> effort, and proabbaly sooner than later. But then
> again considering thier time between
> releases...sooner may still be 2-3 years away.
>
> How old was John Lee Hooker when he recorded his
> last?
>
> How old is BB King, still recording? Jerry Lee
> Lewis?


thats one person. Easier for a solo artist to do that than for a group, which requires all members to want to/be able to participate

To get back to your original point. I dont think that Mick or Keith would retire, but whether they'd milk this thing as "The Rolling Stones" for another few albums with a reduced or changed line-up, is another issue. Personally, I dont think they will (and I'd hope they wouldnt) - and personally, I feel that this is the last time they'll tour extensively as we know them now.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-09-17 16:03 by Gazza.

it's_all_wrong Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChelseaDrugstore Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Much of this thread is mindboggling. These guys
> > are old men. Surely this tour is it. They are
> > extending it; probaly because they know that
> this
> > is the last time. I am thinking how so many are
> > expoecting 4 guys at 68-70 to bust out new
> rocking
> > tunes, a Blues album (where has this idea come
> > from???) and a couple Live shows. Plus
> releasing
> > these finished unheard gems. With all the
> booting
> > we do havent we heard 99% of it?
>
>
>
> There's oceans of stuff in the vaults. We haven't
> even heard 80% of it.


True - but do you think its releasable? I seriously doubt it. Most stuff they record gets jettisoned long before the stage where the songs are finished. In other words, at a stage where its something thats NOT releasable.

FrankM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>>
> How did the Stones release so many albums in the
> sixties and seventees with all their tours? Didn't
> they write songs on the road? I know some bands
> do.

Yes - they did. But then they didnt have financial security then, were younger and hungrier


If these guys are only playing two or three
> concerts per week they should be writing songs in
> their spare time.


Why 'should' they? They dont owe anyone another record, least of all us. They're at an age where most people are thinking about retiring - or , considering THEIR wealth, have already long done so.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-09-17 16:02 by Gazza.

..... ohnonot, , those sixties factory workers on there feet all day dont have a half a billion bucks ta lean on, ,

soundcheck Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ..... ohnonot, , those sixties factory workers on
> there feet all day dont have a half a billion
> bucks ta lean on, ,

Yes, but as Mick said in his solo song Don't Tear Me Up "you make a lot of money, but you just want more."

there is little if any incentive for them to release an album particularly in the wake of the bigger bang fiasco... i say fiasco because commercially it did not do much.. the only incentive would be to prove that they still have it and can make music that moves people the way their classic sides do..the problem is that they probably realize that they can't.. they did not go in to cut bigger bang hoping to cut an album of largely forgettable songs that after the media broohaha blew over would mean little... in a few years you will be as likely to hear rough justice on the radio as you are of hearing mixed emotions..not very likely.... mick knows that... he knows him and keith are just not able right now to write those songs....

the stones make their money touring and they can continue to do that... people in boston may be tired of seeing them live but they won't be in two years..

my advice to them: get in the studio with rick rubin or someone like rick rubin (there has to be dozens of suitable producers like rubin and not was) and cut an album of 10 blues/early rock and roll covers in three days while doing shots of tequila (i assume their drugging days are over)....i think it would work.... mr pitiful is great live..cut that.... add a chuck berrry tune or two.... its not that hard! i bet people would like that.... i'm betting mick thinks the idea is completely ridiculous ..he'll probably want to hire the hot shot producer of the minute but thats exactly what not to do... heck.. why not get jerry wexler or some body from the great atlantic record days and go ..oh well.. i'm dreamin' but i think the stones should stop running away from their past..

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It all depends on the contract I think. They
> are
> > done with their Virgin contract by now, but
> they
> > could get tons of money if they made a new deal
> > with some label. That would then be the label
> for
> > the future handling of their stuff. And then
> some
> > new albums don't seem too far away.
>
>
> what label is going to give a multi-album contract
> to a band in their 60's, with several of the
> members in questionable health, and who make (on
> average) a new record every five years or so?
>
> What swayed the deal with Virgin was the rights to
> repackage their back catalogue from 1971 onwards.
> With that cash cow having been well and truly
> milked to death, they dont exactly have that
> bargaining tool anymore either. That, plus the
> fact that their new albums dont sell as well as
> they should for a band of their reputation - and
> if theyre not touring behind a new record (which
> is likely the case as their future touring plans
> post 2007 are likely to be limited) , thats not
> going to help sales either
>
> Basically, as far as record deals are concerned,
> the Stones' options are fairly limited as far as
> big advances or long-term arrangements are
> concerned. Their best options for new deals in the
> long term is likely to be centred around whats in
> their vaults
>
> Even a package of archive material would have
> limited commercial appeal, but they'd have no
> problem finding a label to issue them. Whether
> there would be a problem with who owns the rights,
> however, I dont know.


I think today, as in 1993 too, the record company that signs them does it mainly for the back catalogue. And who wouldn't want that? All the 1971 - to today albums could be repackaged and remastered like the sixties back catalogue. I guarantee you it will sell as long as the advertisement for it is good enough.

About the vaults set: The dream is that they make a deal with Klein as they did with Forty Licks. In other words: A complete vaults set. If they do it they could easily make a very large CD set. 3 discs of vaults easily. And you seem to forget the possibility to take live shows in there too. Imagine a disc from each tour with a live show. That would indeed be something. But, as I said before, they should wait until they're done IMO.

JumpingKentFlash

it's not a question of quantity...as in, how many more can they make.

it should be a question of quality... can they make an album that matters?
that people will talk about, one which will endure and add to their legacy, one which will blow away, not only the sycophantic hardcore but also
the critics, musos in general and casual fans, alike.

An album of enduring appeal and quality, of the likes, made by Cash in his last years, and the new Dylan record. It's within their grasp.
That's if, if they can be bothered.

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I think today, as in 1993 too, the record company
> that signs them does it mainly for the back
> catalogue. And who wouldn't want that? All the
> 1971 - to today albums could be repackaged and
> remastered like the sixties back catalogue. I
> guarantee you it will sell as long as the
> advertisement for it is good enough.
>

Theyve already done that barely a decade ago. the albums that were first released on CBS were remastered and repackaged by Virgin in 1993-94. To expect fans to buy a third copy of a CD that most of them already owned on vinyl anyway is stretching credibility a bit and a prospect that is hardly going to tempt would-be record labels to shell out for a big advance. Theres not much more you can do with what we already have on the Virgin reissues.

The only way those albums could sell again would be if they came with bonus tracks or bonus discs. The labels are also handicapped by the fact that they dont have rights to the 60's material and would have to start any reissue series with bonus tracks from Sticky Fingers onwards, missing out on most of what the general public considers the Stones golden era.

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Theres not much more
> you can do with what we already have on the Virgin
> reissues.
>
> The only way those albums could sell again would
> be if they came with bonus tracks or bonus discs.
word. remaster is usually a dirty word standing for max. compression, over-EQ & NR, but the virgin reissues are one of the very few times where they got it right.

I truly believe that any band worth a shit are constantly developing new songs.
The Stones, always more of a live band, have undoubtedly taken a huge step backwards in the recording area of their career. I think this is a mistake both financially and artistically. Although I love nothing more than seeing this band live I still get excited on hearing a new song or a rare track for the first time. They need to start recording a new album immediately. There is no reason they could not release a quality album every 2 years between now and "the end". Perhaps laziness? They still have a chance to regain the mastery they once displayed in the studio. However, if they only release one or two more albums I would be really disappointed for them. It would be more like the last ambers of a fag end than a Bigger Bang. Come on lads give us some new stuff, play around with different genres, and shut some of the critics up!

0 or 1

So pessimistic. I think we're in for a Stones renaissance!