Gazza, I am happy to see someone else at least realistically grounded about this mystical treasure trove in the vault. Some people tout the commercial success a vault release of old live shows would have. Well, the plain truth is that even a cleaned up commerical release of the legendary Brusseld Show (which is a bit over rated IMO, its good but so are a lot of other boots)is not going to sell to any major new audience ; the same people buying Stones Albums now will buy the vaults.

And people never seem to realize that the majority of stuff in the vaults is not commercaily viable polished material. If vault material was good, doesn't any one think that MS ONO LENNON and SIR PAUL would be scrubbing them clean to milk the Beatles Legacy? They found two songs that with heavy re-working they coud put on the Anthology. The Stones vault is probably pretty much the same. We already have two "vault" releases; Metamorphosis and TY. The first cannot be claimed to be a GREAT album by anyone, and the second took considerable re-working of the gems by the band. Its not like they just went and pulled a half dozen tracks out and said these will do.

4

4, eh? at 8 year intervals, charlie will by 96 when the last one is recorded....

ABB was definitely the last. Why record more albums if their songs are not played on the specific tour??? Nevertheless I don't wanna miss ABB, not to be misunderstood.

just to name two tracks which are easily better than some tracks on Metarmophosis, and thus ready for release imo are Goodbye Girl (from Bill Wyman)
and Reelin' and Rockin'(both chess sessions).
No exuses, they have enough interesting material (more than what was in the Beatles vaults)
What about the early version of Steet Fighting Man? The Beggars Banquet version of Love In Vain? (yes it exists!)

I think they will do 1 more studio album in about 3 to 4 years. They will take a couple years off before thinking about that.
And then "50 Licks" is coming up a few years after that. I think they will want to do something for 50 that tops 40 licks in some way.
I think they will tour to back both.

you SERIOUSLY believe the Stones are going to tour in 2012?

I'd be amazed if all four of them are still around by then, let alone in any fit state to spend a year on the road

no- i think they'll take 2012 off and make a return in 2016.

StonesTod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 4, eh? at 8 year intervals, charlie will by 96
> when the last one is recorded....


thats right. then they'll quit doing albums and just tour at that point.

they'll be going strong, but we'll all be long dead...figures

I don't think they will do a year on the road in the future. I think their tours will be more like several nights in major cities. Probably arenas but maybe could be stadiums too if there are fewer shows.

The Stones will never take up a "residency"anywhere, of that I am sure

I bought one of those 1 GB keychain flash drives today. If one of the Stones swallowed it, they'd have about ten albums in them.

Tom Petty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Stones will never take up a
> "residency"anywhere, of that I am sure

I don't mean, like, "every Monday night in August with all-you-can-eat wings", more like 7 shows at MSG or someplace in a major city (NYC, London, Paris) over a two week period. That kind of thing. Clapton does it every year at RAH - it's certainly not unheard of.

livewithme Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think they will do 1 more studio album in about
> 3 to 4 years. They will take a couple years off
> before thinking about that.
> And then "50 Licks" is coming up a few years after
> that. I think they will want to do something for
> 50 that tops 40 licks in some way.
> I think they will tour to back both.

I agree. One more studio album and tour, then 50 Licks and the 50th anniversary/farewell tour in 2012.

.... my read is a reallly new good album within a year or about,, done for two solid reasons,,, its the end of the game, ego and money for there estates ... this is with the stones as we know them today, and the reality is the chances of change increase with every passin' month...
touring? you have to be kidding, from many posts here within, i deduct many think its real easy being sixtish an touring, doing the same show in essence cause it basically works since steel wheels , , try it, see how you hold up... . ... remember whats his face camera'd up opening al capones vault, and nothin' in it but 'dirtywork..... hope not

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> you SERIOUSLY believe the Stones are going to tour
> in 2012?

I do. It's only six years from now. And they already have tour plans for 2007 - it's only five years from then. If you had asked me in 1989 if I thought they had 17 more years in them (and counting) I wouldn't have believed it. They are a persistent bunch.

> I'd be amazed if all four of them are still around
> by then

All four of them might not be around, but I bet Jagger and Richards will be and I bet they'll still call it the Rolling Stones. I'm not sure if that would be a good idea or not but I feel sure they would do it if either Charlie or Ronnie drops out or dies.

> let alone in any fit state to spend a year on the road

True, they might not be up to a year at that point. They may just do two or three months like in the '70s.

StonesTod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 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...

I don't agree. I quite like it overall. It's their best since at least Tattoo You.

JuanTCB Wrote:
> I don't mean, like, "every Monday night in August
> with all-you-can-eat wings", more like 7 shows at
> MSG or someplace in a major city (NYC, London,
> Paris) over a two week period. That kind of
> thing. Clapton does it every year at RAH - it's
> certainly not unheard of.


yeah but the RAH holds 4,000. MSG holds almost 20,000.
And Clapton isnt charging anywhere near the prices the Stones charge

At these prices, the days of a run of multi-night sellouts in large arenas are over.

ohnonotyouagain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gazza Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > you SERIOUSLY believe the Stones are going to
> tour
> > in 2012?
>
> I do. It's only six years from now. And they
> already have tour plans for 2007 - it's only five
> years from then. If you had asked me in 1989 if I
> thought they had 17 more years in them (and
> counting) I wouldn't have believed it. They are a
> persistent bunch.
>

True, but theres a world of difference between being in your mid 40's and being in your mid 60's.

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.

I meant in the 25 years since Tatoo You, which was, in fact, released in August 1981. 25 years and ONE MONTH ago.

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> yeah but the RAH holds 4,000. MSG holds almost
> 20,000.
> And Clapton isnt charging anywhere near the prices
> the Stones charge
>
> At these prices, the days of a run of multi-night
> sellouts in large arenas are over.

All true. But if the Stones were to do, say, two weeks at MSG in 2008 or 2009 and nowhere else in North America, people would come from all over the U.S., Canada, & Europe (not to mention Latin America) since a) they wouldn't have played in the U.S. for a couple of years, and b) everyone would know that time was essentially running out (just reading between the lines - moreso, obviously, if the band bills it as some sort of "farewell" event). The key is to do it some place which is both easy to get to and also somewhere where people would have other things to do/see as well. NYC would be the perfect place for that for this side of the pond . . . London most likely for Europe.

They could also roll back the prices a bit if Mick & Cohl are sufficiently humbled by the potential disaster that Fall '06 might turn out to be. Or if the economy goes down the shitter.

Lots of variables in place here. It'd probably never happen, but I like speculating.

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 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.

Right. That's what I meant. More depressingly, they have released only THREE albums in the last 17 years, again, counting from just after the release of Steel Wheels, in August 1989.

soundcheck Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i deduct many think its real
> easy being sixtish an touring

I don't know, there are lots of people in their 60s still working, many with more physically demanding jobs - working in factories, restaurants, etc., jobs where people have to stand on their feet and do physical labor all day. The retirement age for getting social security benefits in the U.S. is 66, and some have to work beyond that.

If they can do it, the Stones can continue to work. Sure, they are putting forth a tremendous amount of energy for two hours at a time every three days or so, but the rest of the time they are incredibly pampered. The best food and hotels, exercise equipment and personal trainers if they want them, personal physicians and plenty of people to basically cater to their every whim. Sounds like a pretty cushy job, actually!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-09-17 05:16 by ohnonotyouagain.

I think one more. I have no basis for that guess, but it just seem like the most plausible answer.

A live album right before Christmas......

Mick will empty the vaults once Keef passes or they can no longer tour.....which is probably the same event.

don't give me that ole one two, one two three four

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?

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

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?

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.

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.