I actually hope I'm wrong, but I'm guessing 1 more live and mabe 2 more studio??

how many songs have they recorded that are still "in the can"? i wanna hear all of the unreleased material.

.... my bet is on one more really good one, a surprise,,, within a year.. just a hunch

Tom Petty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I actually hope I'm wrong, but I'm guessing 1 more
> live and mabe 2 more studio??



I guessed the exact same thing.

In 1975.

I would'nt bet on another studio album.

A live one? Absoloutley! It's almost a tradition.

one live album and dvd before december and next summer 1 studio album.
then... the last world tour and bye bye adios compadros
sad, but true jeroen

Big Al Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would'nt bet on another studio album.

For how much do you want to place a bet?!

Depends on health, obviously...

If their health holds up after this tour then I'd say at least one more new studio album... probably have to wait a couple years at least for it...

If not, then probably none...

In a way the most interesting "phase" of the history of this band may yet be what they do when they are all in their 70's!!

Assuming their health holds up, which is a big assumption, I really expect great things a-la the latter days of muddy waters and the other blues greats!

I'd say about 4 studio albums.

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.

JumpingKentFlash

Obviously I hope I am wrong but I think there wuill be another Live album, but no more studio albums. Maybe, one more truncated affair, that has 1 or 2 new numbers. Again - I would bet $10 on it, and it would be a tenner I would love to part with.

"...no longer shall you trudge 'cross my peaceful mind."

As for live, give me a perfect mix of Glasgow and I'll be jumping, jumping with joy! What a show...

Depends if you mean new material or archive releases.

As Hendrix is releasing 11 CDs this week and he only managed 3 studio albums in his lifetime I guess as far as the Stones go the skys the limit.

In the last 25 years they have managed to release only six albums of new material. Even if Mick is recording Stones albums when he is 80 (and by that time he may well be the only remaining member of the current lineup), we can expect no more than three or four new studio albums credited to The Rolling Stones or Mick Jagger and The Rolling Stones or The Rolling Stones Featuring Original Vocalist Mick Jagger.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-09-16 15:30 by tatters.

25 years only six albums???
25 years ago was 1981.

Tattoo You
Undercover
Dirty Work
Steel Wheels
Voodoo Lounge
Bridges To Babylon
A Bigger Bang

That's 7 albums.
And not to mention the big handful of b-sides we got, and Little Baby on Stripped.

JumpingKentFlash

One more album for the road...I think.

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 25 years only six albums???
> 25 years ago was 1981.
>
> Tattoo You
> Undercover
> Dirty Work
> Steel Wheels
> Voodoo Lounge
> Bridges To Babylon
> A Bigger Bang
>
> That's 7 albums.
> And not to mention the big handful of b-sides we
> got, and Little Baby on Stripped.


in the last 25 years (as of today) its six. Tattoo You came out in August 1981. he means in the 25 years since that record.

Six in that time is a pretty paltry amount, when you consider that when you look at the 44 years of their career as a whole, 1984 is the mid-point.

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.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-09-16 18:27 by Gazza.

my only comment is that they should only bother if they are truly interested (all of them) - for my money ABB sounds like an album that was put together by a couple of guys who needed to put an album out rather than a work of an inspired band...

Isn't their Virgin deal up after the next album? Which would mean no more studio albums and one more contractual obligation live album.

They've got as many albums in them as they want to do

Nikolai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Isn't their Virgin deal up after the next album?
> Which would mean no more studio albums and one
> more contractual obligation live album.

No..its up now...it was for 3 studio albums - VL, BTB and ABB

I would imagine that any extra albums such as live releases were 'optional'. I cant imagine anyone being signed to a record label and being obliged to release four live albums as part of their contract

If we've learnt anything from their career, it must be, you just can never tell when the game is up.

I totally agree with Gazza second above statement. As I have pretty few knowledge about that industry, I don't know if they could sign a spot contract to distribute one or two albums including one with vaults. But I don't expect them to do more than one album. Characteristics of that is the fact that they don't push their new albums, don't play them live, build their setlist around 64 - 71 period. Like they have drawn a line on their commercial appeal. ABB is a great testimony. Could they realistically record something better if they don't have a Start Me Up included ? As long as Keith don't want to invest on a new Keith song, it's gone.

Going back to September of 81' is a little misleading since you could easily go back a little more and you would add TY and ER. That would give you eight ablums since 1980.

These days bands don't come out with albums as frequently as in the 60's and 70's. Counting Crows have been around for 12 years with four studio albums so the Stones aren't doing too bad for an older band.

Also ABB and VL had 31 songs on the cd versions. That would be the equivalent of THREE studio albums from the eightees- not to mention the four new songs on Forty Licks.

I agree about the Stones not getting a huge contract since they are an older band but I'm sure they can get a one or two record deal that would probably be a lot less money than the last contract.

One more live album and a Tatoo You style hybrid drawn from VL, B2B and Paris 2002. On a personal note I woukld love to see a blues album in similar vein to Eric Clapton's From The Cradle.

Iam sure they have alredy hundreds of left overs. 10 more studio albums at least. who can tell that "Biggest misstake" for example wasnt written 15 years ago. and a LOT of live recordings.

I totally agree with STod

"my only comment is that they should only bother if they are truly interested (all of them) - for my money ABB sounds like an album that was put together by a couple of guys who needed to put an album out rather than a work of an inspired band..."

and I'll add that ......... putting out a new album emnabled them to tour again on a seemingly fresh ticket ........ but (as Esky said) we got a Licks Part Two

without the special numbers and the special venues

without much material from the new album which gave the 'new' tour it's title.

And now they've got the nerve to keep this Biggest Deceit going for two more legs.

I hope they don't make another album as an excuse for another tour, with a Bigger Stage and larger venues and more expensive tickets and even worse sound.

They should call it a day, (as a band) ..... mainly cos I don't want to see Blondie playing all Keith's parts in 2010. If he lives that long, I don't think Keith will be really up to playing good guitar as the basis of this band, let alone going on an extended tour.

If they were a working band they would spend more studio time together, enjoying the vibe. Then you'd expect albums.

The next album will be a live one, and I suspect that they'll try and make it credible with some 'new' material. Which will also ensure Bigger Sales.

Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Iam sure they have alredy hundreds of left overs.
> 10 more studio albums at least. who can tell that
> "Biggest misstake" for example wasnt written 15
> years ago. and a LOT of live recordings.



They may have "hundreds" of leftovers but a jam with a rough vocal and gibberish, unfinished lyrics is not something that I'd personally wish to see them put their name to when it comes to an official release. And a high % of what has surfaced so far is little more than that

Most leftovers stay in the can for a couple of valid reasons. One - theyre unfinished and two - theyre bloody awful.

If they were to put something out from their archives, its important that its not barrel-scraping. No way is there ten studio albums worth of releasable material. I'd be surprised if there was enough for a 3-disc boxed set.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-09-16 22:44 by Gazza.

I think two . . . one standard "Stones" album over the next year or so and then one which will come as a surprise 3 or 4 years down the line, maybe a blues album to come full circle.

I think 2007 will be it for touring, though. I don't think they'll ever actually break up, but post-2007 I can see them doing occasional one-offs & odd things (a bunch of shows at the same venue, almost like a residency, for a couple of weeks - stuff like that) until one of 'em shuffles off this mortal coil.