Since the rumours already have started about a new tour 2009, it's a big question if there's a new album to follow.
If that's the case are the band writing and/or recording already?

What's your opinion, should they tour behind old material or produce a new vivid album and mix the setlist with ABB song.

Been Stoned since 1964 and still am!

<<< Since the rumours already have started about a new tour 2009 >>>

They have ? What have you heard, who did you hear it from ... etc etc etc. Can you expand on this please ?

Yes. The album will be titled "Bigger Boobs"

Quote
Fan Since 1964
What's your opinion, should they tour behind old material or produce a new vivid album and mix the setlist with ABB song.

Mix the setlist with ABB song? What did happen to BRIDGES TO BABYLON material in ABB tour? Like it never existed - like any of their post STEEL WHEELS material expect "You Got Me Rocking" and Keef's Frank Sinatra numbers. Just an observation.

- Doxa

Quote
franzk
Yes. The album will be titled "Bigger Boobs"

Yes ofcourse!

Been Stoned since 1964 and still am!

Quote
paulywaul
<<< Since the rumours already have started about a new tour 2009 >>>

They have ? What have you heard, who did you hear it from ... etc etc etc. Can you expand on this please ?

Well there's some threads about a new tour 2009.
In my opinion I think they should do this rumoured tour behind a new album and hopefully also mix the setlists with songs from ABB and other albums from the later years, like BtB, WL and SW.

Some warhorses but not like the last tour.

Been Stoned since 1964 and still am!

August/September (2009) world tour start as usual is my guess.

Quote
Doxa
[...and Keef's Frank Sinatra numbers
- Doxa

Never heard that random thought before! I think "Frank" is getting better with age, it is usually a highlight of recent albums to hear new "Frank" songs, certainly for me

Quote
Room1009

Quote
Doxa
[...and Keef's Frank Sinatra numbers
- Doxa

Never heard that random thought before! I think "Frank" is getting better with age, it is usually a highlight of recent albums to hear new "Frank" songs, certainly for me

For me, too. I think Keith's songs are the only symptoms of the daring idea that perhaps The Stones should not always like act like that they are on their twenties. Keith's slow numbers - especially in concert - are so human and effective; transmitting some true feelings (even though I 'm not sure if my analogy to Frankie boy was very accurate; a random thought, really...)

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-08-21 17:38 by Doxa.

come on is this thread a joke??? there's a million threads on this already.. this adds nothing

harrumph

Quote
stoned in washington dc
come on is this thread a joke??? there's a million threads on this already.. this adds nothing

harrumph

Well I guess there's a question asked here.
The other threads are more of the polling type.

But maybe I wasn't clear enough with my question here!

Been Stoned since 1964 and still am!

Rumours are made up from wishful thinking fans i think
i like to see the stones spend alot of time recording new songs, i can do without another greatest hits tour, its time for them to knock out loads of new songs, with a low key tour to promote new material ( lol @low key stones tour)
If they do tour again, i dont see them on a 2 year jaunt, them days have gone.
Mabe they will do a few dates here n there over about 6 months.but we will see. They will do what feels right for them.At this stage in there career, id love them to concentrate just recording loads of knew quality spongs, and forget about the big hyped up tours.

I am agree completely terry. The greatest hits tours are getting very tiresome and makes them appear to be just cashing in. A small scale tour similar to the shows they did at the Beacon would give them much more credibility than they large scale stadium tours that are less and less about the music and more about the effects, lights and so on.

Love to see them do more in the studio. And not feel obligated to make the album in the same vein as others with a rocker to start it off, mid tempo to follow, Keith slow songs to end it and all the rest. Otherwise you'll hear the same things.. Stones roll on... Top money making tour ever.. Do something different. Take a page from Neil or Dylan.

I'd love to see a tour with material only from 1980 and up. It'd never happen, but I can dream.

New album? No...a tour promoting all of the Universal reissues. Oh wait a minute - they did that on the Licks tour.

It woudl be cool to see them dip into their more recent catalog with some different songs - say I Go Wild instead of YGMR and hell yeah maybe 3 tunes from Bridges? Out Of Control, Lowdown and...Flip The Switch? Too Tight? Plus Keith's YDHTMI and Thief...he should stop singing that garbage like Connection and Little T&A - those are just terrible. He should stick to tunes he can actually SING.

There's no point in them doing a new record if they're not going to promote it! A Bigger Bang come to mind?

Fish and Cheese Tour

How about this rumour? I heard Keith is going to play the same lick over and over again in every song for the 3 year tour coming up...

>> A small scale tour similar to the shows they did at the Beacon would give them much more credibility than the large scale stadium tours <<

just curious, and not picking on Hound Dog (or anyone else), just using his post as a handy example:
when people agitate for the Stones to do a tour consisting of small venues,
it seems like they assume that they will be among the lucky few to score tickets,
rather than among the much-larger number of fans left desolate in these small venues' parking lots.
since it's pretty obvious that statistically that assumption is not too realistic ...
are you saying you'd prefer the Stones to stick to small venues even if you yourselves can't get tickets?

Late summer 2009 is probably realistic - AC/DC would ne already in Europe and the rest of the world, when the Stones start their tour in the US. I don't think, both AC/DC and Stones on the same continent during the same time slot would be that good.

Quote
with sssoul
>> A small scale tour similar to the shows they did at the Beacon would give them much more credibility than the large scale stadium tours <<

just curious, and not picking on Hound Dog (or anyone else), just using his post as a handy example:
when people agitate for the Stones to do a tour consisting of small venues,
it seems like they assume that they will be among the lucky few to score tickets,
rather than among the much-larger number of fans left desolate in these small venues' parking lots.
since it's pretty obvious that statistically that assumption is not too realistic ...
are you saying you'd prefer the Stones to stick to small venues even if you yourselves can't get tickets?

1. The chance of not getting tickets as with sssoul points out
2. The enormous increase in ticket prices due to the certain obligation to become 'member' in order to get tickets...

I'd love to get a second opportunity to see the Stones small-scale, but not at any price. A hybrid tour like the Licks concept would be a great answer, AND finally a useful formula for the memberships.

Jelle

sssoul, wasn't really trying to say they should only play places like the Beacon, I'd just like them to stop playing the huge stadiums where the sound is terrible and its more about the production. Arenas, theaters, and outdoors places like Red Rocks would be great.

They are supposed to record a new album. They always have some new stuff to tour with. It does not seem like they are working on it yet, but ABB was made mainly with Mick & Keith in Mick's chateau in France, so it's hard to see when they are "on". I am sure we will hear more about it when the others get together in the spring.

PS. The new album title is Drinking and Dancing, inspired by the legendary 1982 album from Gothenburg, and other recent events.

Bjornulf

"PS. The new album title is Drinking and Dancing, inspired by the legendary 1982 album from Gothenburg, and other recent events."

I this Scandinavian humour bv?

Very Cool BV! Thanks for the update! Looking forward to it and another great Tour!
Fred Hardin
Pleased to meet you........

>> sssoul, wasn't really trying to say they should only play places like the Beacon, I'd just like them to stop playing the huge stadiums <<

thanks Hound Dog - and as i said i didn't mean to be question you in particular,
i just wonder about this every time people root for a small[ish]-venue-only tour.
no one seems to *really* mean "i hope the Stones play a tour set up so that most fans won't have a chance to see a show",
but isn't that what it comes out to? even if you mean arenas rather than stadiums.
it's not like the casual concertgoers will leave all the tickets for us headcases just because the venues are smaller,
so ... so as i say i wonder what it is that people really mean when they wish for this.

Well it didn't seem too out of hand getting tickets for the No Security tour and that was all in arenas. I think what many people want is just something different and a stripped down approach. Plus the Stones feel for some reason if they are playing in a stadium they have to do the same 15 greatest hits at every show.

sssoul:
I'm not sure about my sums, but if the Stones did, for example a 40 date tour of UK venues (a mix of small/medium sized venues) would this not equal the capacity of say 2-3 arenas?
They wouldn't have to charge the ticket prices if they cut down on production costs - I read somewhere that they have around 500 personnel when they go on tour!
Of course 40 gigs would physically take more out of them, but then Bill seems to manage and he's 71.
Not to mention Buddy Guy, BB King etc etc.

... a 40-date UK tour equalling the capacity of 2-3 arenas?? you're picturing some mighty small venues :E

but anyway: 40 dates would take a minimum of 80 days, since they never do two dates in a row now (Mick's doctors' orders)
and meanwhile the rest of the world who doesn't live in the UK is ... waiting their turn, right?
okay ... and then at that rate covering the rest of Europe, Asia, the Americas, etc, will take them how long?

and with all due respect to Bill's gallant band, i don't think that comparison gets very far.

>> Well it didn't seem too out of hand getting tickets for the No Security tour and that was all in arenas. <<

i'm glad it wasn't too difficult for you to get tickets and i agree it seems to have been a splendid tour ...
except that it didn't come anywhere near me and i didn't have any possibility of attending a show.

all i mean is: sure, i see the appeal of the scale-it-down concept, but with one major reservation:
i don't see how playing smaller venues would suddenly make the Stones less popular,
so smaller venues do mean some people who would love to be at the show can't be.
sure they could play a series of smaller shows in each city, but that means playing fewer cities ...
so i reckon the Licks "small/medium/large" format was about as ideal as it can get,
unless the band just somehow ceases to be so goddam popular. and why should they? :E

sigh - as i keep saying: i wish the Rolling Stones were my local pub band. but they're not.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-08-22 19:58 by with sssoul.

Quote
Tseverin
"PS. The new album title is Drinking and Dancing, inspired by the legendary 1982 album from Gothenburg, and other recent events."

I this Scandinavian humour bv?

Only norwegian

Vilhelm
Nordic Stones Vikings