Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I love the song but 60 year old bands just dont
> have hit singles.


60 year old? Have I missed 15 years somewhere?

JumpingKentFlash

I didnt say rock doesnt have a place on the radio or TV. I said the Stones dont - because theyre perceived as an oldies act. The rock acts youve mentioned are still no older than their mid 40's. All of them make records on a regular basis and stay in the public eye. The Stones dont fall into that category. The eight year break hurt them big time from a media perspective because the way music is marketed has changed so much in that time. Artists of their age dont tend to bother with singles because in terms of thjem getting anywhere they may as well piss into the wind.

Youre right about Rough Justice - but the same collective yawn from the masses would have also happened regardless of what they had released as a single.

First single is important cause of the follow up album but other than that its worthless.
Name a single Claptons put out in the last five years?
I don't think its the Stones problem but the charts just aint the same as they were 15 years ago.
Does anyone care who's number one?

Whether or not it would be a hit is irrelevant. What do they have to prove? However, If an artist is not moving forward, they are dead. Simple as that. Mick and Keith should be writing, recording, performing and designing all the time. Not in blocks of a few months here and there. I know they have families and lives that keep them apart. But the urge to create should get stronger for any artist.

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gazza Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I love the song but 60 year old bands just dont
> > have hit singles.
>
>
> 60 year old? Have I missed 15 years somewhere?


bands in their 60's, if you must insist

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gazza Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I love the song but 60 year old bands just
> dont
> > > have hit singles.
> >
> >
> > 60 year old? Have I missed 15 years somewhere?
>
>
> bands in their 60's, if you must insist


I mustn't.

JumpingKentFlash

Not in the public eye Gazza? Really? I think you know better!

I think I know what you were trying to say. But come on.... they are the biggest band in the world. They STILL are.

It's my strong belief that IF the Stones made a record that was really good, it would sell through the roof at this point. Maybe not hit number one - but would do as well as a release from the bands I mentioned before. People WANT the Stones to put out a good record - not one which takes months of effort to pour over, or one that seems great on paper - but one with DECENT SONGWRITING.

I've said this a gazillion times - they COULD do this, they just DON'T.

JaggerFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not in the public eye Gazza? Really? I think you
> know better!

Eight years without a studio album is a pretty bizarre way of keeping yourself in the public eye. The music world has moved on.


> I think I know what you were trying to say. But
> come on.... they are the biggest band in the
> world. They STILL are.

Not in terms of record sales, airplay and TV exposure theyre not. Far from it. Ticket sales and tour grosses - yes. That however isnt enough to get you hit singles. Or even multi million selling albums.



>
> It's my strong belief that IF the Stones made a
> record that was really good, it would sell through
> the roof at this point. Maybe not hit number one -
> but would do as well as a release from the bands I
> mentioned before. People WANT the Stones to put
> out a good record - not one which takes months of
> effort to pour over, or one that seems great on
> paper - but one with DECENT SONGWRITING.

decent songwriting is irrelevant to having a hit record. Marketability and timing is more important. Seriously - if the Stones as they are now (ie in their 60s) were to release a brand new song called Jumpin Jack Flash, the impact would be minor.

JaggerFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not in the public eye Gazza? Really? I think you
> know better!
>
> I think I know what you were trying to say. But
> come on.... they are the biggest band in the
> world. They STILL are.
>
> It's my strong belief that IF the Stones made a
> record that was really good, it would sell through
> the roof at this point. Maybe not hit number one -
> but would do as well as a release from the bands I
> mentioned before. People WANT the Stones to put
> out a good record - not one which takes months of
> effort to pour over, or one that seems great on
> paper - but one with DECENT SONGWRITING.
>
> I've said this a gazillion times - they COULD do
> this, they just DON'T.


I'm right with you there. For whatever reason, Mick has turned into a songwriting factory. He can pump them out all day long and they sound very competent an professional but but real inspiration is sadly lacking.

The only thing that Keith seems to get excited about are torch ballads which would be kind of interesting as a solo project but just don't fit on a Rolling Stones album.

Like most, I really wish Mick and Keith would sit down in a room with a couple of acoustics and a piano and write some songs together for a change. Although both seem to realize they're more together than the sum of the parts live, they seem to have a blind spot about this when it comes to songwriting.

"No Anchovies, Please"

But Elmo, that's exactly what they said they did for ABB. I think they need to simply come up with a good melody and lyrics which feel good to sing along to. Nothing wrong with that.

You're completely right, JaggerFan.

I am doubtful however whether the Stones are really capable of putting out anything really good. They seem to have lost their muse for writing great songs before the turn of the eighties and Mick seems to treat songwriting a little too calculating these days - we need a bit of genuine soul instead of role playing.

Bingo, Edward! But, the truth of the matter is that you can't force the muse - it's there or it's not. It's not been there for the better part of 3 decades now. Sometimes it comes back (Dylan); other times it never does (Rimbaud).

Like Wyman said a few months back, if the Stones put out a song like Satisfaction today it would not be a big hit like it was back then. Times have changed, their style of music is not what young kids are listening to. Wouldn't matter how good the song is.

J-J-Flash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Like Wyman said a few months back, if the Stones
> put out a song like Satisfaction today it would
> not be a big hit like it was back then. Times have
> changed, their style of music is not what young
> kids are listening to. Wouldn't matter how good
> the song is.

Hmmmm...not so sure. But, the bigger point here is that sadly they seem incapable of providing an opportunity to test this theory....

Not sure I agree. I think if songs like Out Of Control, Saint of Me or You got Me Rocking were Stones they put out in the early 70s when the Stones were at the top of the music world they'd become much more well known songs. Its hard to compare because we are talking about different times but that is what I think. Not saying those songs are as good as many of their classics but to me a song like IORR is not one of their best either, but everyone knows and its a classic.

I'm so glad to be discussing this with people who agree with me and I agree with.

I don't think Out Of Control, Saint Of Me or You Got Me Rocking compare in any way with the Stones early seventies peak - the last album they released with songs that could genuinely stand alongside their classics was Tattoo You. That's not to say everything since has been truly bad but you have to look hard to find the good stuff (Undercover Of The Night, perhaps) .

The last Stones single that's worthy to stand alongside their classics is Start Me Up.

I've studied most of what you write JaggerFan and agree with most of what you say wholeheartedly. You won't get any animosity from me (It's nice to hear a bit of reality !!).

> I've studied most of what you write JaggerFan and
> agree with most of what you say wholeheartedly.
> You won't get any animosity from me (It's nice to
> hear a bit of reality !!).


Thanks for the kind words, Edward. Lately it means more than ever. What's so hard about facing reality anyways?

The animosity and sometimes hostility in others is what troubles me more - I mean, if people are going to interperet my alternative views on the band as a personal attack on them, they obviousy need to get a grip. To hold your own worth on idols, be it a band, actor, athlete, or whatever means you are filling up some void in your life that needs looked at.

Sorry bout the mini-rant, it just blows me away how people can take other's opinions personally.

Didn't say they were as good of songs just saying that there are also songs from the 70s that are so so yet today have become very radio friendly hits.

I have lots of critisms about the Stones today, but I just don't think that some of their old hits would be as popular today as they were back then. But to be honest I don't give a rat's ass what is a hit or not. If I like I like it.

And yes Jaggerfan it is amazing how people crap on other people's opinions, in that other thread it felt like I was wrong for thinking Midnight Rambler is a great song.

The thing that's lacking (amongst other things) is a distincive riff. Dangerous Beauty just sounds like those few chords recycled for the thousandth time but play a song like Honky Tonk Women, Brown Sugar, Satisfaction of Start Me Up and it grabs the listener every time.

It's true times have changed and creativity has probably diminished where marketing has become paramount so the question of the potential of a song like Satisfaction being a hit may be open to debate (yet i still think it has every chance) but one things for sure - those early Stones hits will be classics forever whatever the current state of the music industry.

J-J-Flash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And yes Jaggerfan it is amazing how people crap on
> other people's opinions, in that other thread it
> felt like I was wrong for thinking Midnight
> Rambler is a great song.

In the aforementoined thread, I thought I'd come home and see my pets boiled on on the stove. What a FREAK.

And Edward Twining, you're right. They simply don't write very good songs anymore. ABB is a great example - it had everything, guitar-based, classic sound - but the SONGS were mediocre middle-of-the-road type songs. Decent, but ultimately forgettable.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-04-04 22:35 by JaggerFan.

The success of Bob Dylan's Modern Times has proven last year that it's well possible for a seasoned artist to have a number one on the album chart, if the label promotes them well. Unfortunately, it's too late for ABB now, but maybe the Stones will be as successful with the next record. But then ABB contains some straight opposition with songs like Sweet NeoCon and Dangerous Beauty, whereas Bob kept things more open for interpretation with saying things like "I've already confessed. No Need to confess again."

billwebster; I agree. I've always said said they COULD do it.

Maybe they ought to do what Aerosmith did - get some pro songwriters into the mix. That was the KEY difference between "Done w/ Mirros" and "Permanent Vacation". I mean the Jagger'Richards thing might be out of steam, but they can still PLAY...

I was referring to hit songs that become classics. Dylan was a different breed with that and while I think his last few albums have been great, there aren't number one songs that radio friendly hits, but again that was never Dylan's style so its hard to compare the two in that regard.

Not sure but don't think many of the Stones best albums reached number 1, could be wrong. But then albums like Emotional Rescue did become number. All of this is why it really means nothing to me as a music fan

If we really want a nea single, and try to convince the lurking Stones organisation with this thread, we should say:

I WILL BUY THE DANGEROUS BEAUTY SINGLE

Sing this all together now:

I will buy the DB single, tralalalala
I will buy the DB single, tralalalala
I will buy the DB single, tralalalala
I will buy the DB single, tralalalala

!!!!!!!!

Jelle

ABB is done.

billwebster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The success of Bob Dylan's Modern Times has proven
> last year that it's well possible for a seasoned
> artist to have a number one on the album chart, if
> the label promotes them well. Unfortunately, it's
> too late for ABB now, but maybe the Stones will be
> as successful with the next record. But then ABB
> contains some straight opposition with songs like
> Sweet NeoCon and Dangerous Beauty, whereas Bob
> kept things more open for interpretation with
> saying things like "I've already confessed. No
> Need to confess again."


Thats true, but while a "seasoned" artist like Dylan or the Stones having a commercially successful and critically acclaimed ALBUM is certainly achievable, for them to have a smash hit SINGLE is a different thing entirely.