For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
bumbum
Just reading: Bruce Springsteen releasing a new CD early 2009, McCartney just release a new CD, U2 a new CD soon etc.
Why are Stones so little productive / lazy.
Where is the ambition / creativity?
Do the Stones just live in the past or?
Quote
Gazza
..and you typed that with a straight face, of course!
Quote
bumbum
Just reading: Bruce Springsteen releasing a new CD early 2009, McCartney just release a new CD, U2 a new CD soon etc.
Quote
Sleepy CityQuote
Gazza
..and you typed that with a straight face, of course!
Maybe not, but I certainly wouldn't call anything by U2 quality! And let's remember they haven't entirely been sitting on their arses (film projects, the forthcoming Faces reunion, etc).
Quote
JustinQuote
bumbum
Just reading: Bruce Springsteen releasing a new CD early 2009, McCartney just release a new CD, U2 a new CD soon etc.
And all those examples you provided are unfair comparisons. Springsteen and McCartney all write their own songs BY THEMSELVES. They don't have a songwriting partner to wait on and compare notes with. It is MUCH easier to write a song by yourself and then record it. Therefore, these guys can release CDs at a steady pace because it is a VERY fast process for them.
U2...I dunno if Bono writes most of the lyrics and some music...but if he does...then that explains why U2 also has a steady flow of releases each year also.
You can't compare Mick/Keith to these guys because their one rule is that every song must say "Jagger/Richards" on the credits so they have to do at least SOME work together.
Quote
bumbum
Most of the Stones music since the ealry 70'ies at least has been written / composed by Jagger / Richards individually and not by both of them. So that's no excuse
Quote
stickydion
During 80s the Stones have realesed 5 studio albums but at the same time they did 2 tours only. Then the typical moaning coming from the fans was: "Why are Stones so lazy? After all Rock and Roll means live...concerts". ...
Quote
pgarof
They're in their 60's now, they don't have to keep writing new material, they have been for 45 years, don't you think that's enough?
Quote
pgarof
I'm sure when their ready they will, how can you say their lazy, living in the past, no creativity and ambition.
Quote
pgarof
What other band is there that have done as much as them, They'll tour and put an album out when they're good and ready.
Quote
Gazza
Four studio albums in 23 years (and counting) doesnt strike me as being particularly creative.
Quote
Sleepy CityQuote
Gazza
Four studio albums in 23 years (and counting) doesnt strike me as being particularly creative.
Let's remember that they've released solo albums too...
Quote
stoned in washington dc
they are lazy and see no point because when they do work on an album nobody likes it.
...
Quote
skipstone
"but they just don't give a shit..thats the other thing..they couldn't care less.. why continue with don was.. the guy is a loser who hasn't produced anything remotely interesting or relevant in like 15 years..."
So is that 14 or 16 years? Is that 'like' 15 years? Because 15 years is actually 15 years. Voodoo was 14 years ago. So based on what you're saying, they haven't done anything worth a shit, or Was, in 14 years.
Quote
GazzaQuote
stoned in washington dc
they are lazy and see no point because when they do work on an album nobody likes it.
...
I'm not so sure. ABB got their best reviews in decades. They had the perfect vehicle to promote the bloody thing - ie, the biggest concert tour in history and the biggest US TV audience of 2006.
Time was when they'd hit their audience up the face with a new album by playing the songs from it. On the last tour it quickly became evident that they didnt believe in the new material and were content with playing it safe.
Quote
stoned in washington dc
reviews in the big music magazines are bought... .
Quote
skipstone
Dude, I was making fun of you for actually saying "like"!
Where would you rank Voodoo? Certainly not above the 1968-1972 era. Nor 78 or 81. But it's certainly above a good number of others, for me at least.
Relevant? What is THAT? Ka-rist that is such an over used and abused term. In fact, I think it has no relevance with the Stones. They do what they do. The relevance with the Stones? That they play their own instruments.