Rolling Stones new album!?

[Shaggy]

13 hours ago, chris_b said:

There are some pretty stupid posts in this thread. Shame on you.

 

Any musicians who want to gig and make records should do just that. More power to them.

 

I have to agree.  I always find these threads slightly depressing due to the utterly predictable Brit tendency to put down anything perceived as successful.   I’m not a massive fan of the Stones (though “Gimme Shelter” will always be in my all-time top 10 songs), but their sheer longevity for both creative output and for putting on high energy live performances is staggering - I’m pretty sure it’s a feat that will never be repeated again in the world of popular music.   Respect 😎

[tauzero]

18 hours ago, chris_b said:

There are some pretty stupid posts in this thread. Shame on you.

 

Any musicians who want to gig and make records should do just that. More power to them.

 

But what if they play the Tickled Trout and do me out of a possible date?

[grenadillabama]

Yes- roll on Stones ! The alternative is a Keith solo band .And a Mick solo band. Mick got Jeff Beck to play on "Just Another Night" (Small hit).The music is better when they help each other.If the Stones would accept outside songwriting (Modern 2023 ) , they would get some new catchy songs. But not songwriting royalties paid to Mick and Keith. 

[ezbass]

And it's been released https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66720789 . Charlie on 2 tracks, Steve Jordan on the rest.

[Wolverinebass]

On 30/08/2023 at 18:55, tauzero said:

 

But what if they play the Tickled Trout and do me out of a possible date?

You are JTUK and I claim my five pounds.

[Wolverinebass]

Whilst I don't have anything resembling a problem with The Stones or anyone continuing to an advanced age, what I do have a problem with is it all comes down to "the show must go on." I mean Charlie had been in the band for almost 60 years and they didn't even stop for a second. Much in the same way as The Who after Entwistle.

 

I appreciate that there's touring commitments and all that, but those guys in those bands have known each other since they were kids. To not give up the merest second for grief leaves a bit of a bad taste really. Maybe that's why folk object to them carrying on? 

 

As for Rod Stewart, he should have packed it in 20 years ago after he had throat surgery. Or maybe just never started depending on your personal viewpoint.

[Mykesbass]

31 minutes ago, Wolverinebass said:

what I do have a problem with is it all comes down to "the show must go on." I mean Charlie had been in the band for almost 60 years and they didn't even stop for a second.

 

To not give up the merest second for grief leaves a bit of a bad taste really. 

Interesting take. I'm firmly in the "show must go on" camp and would be surprised if Charlie would have wanted them to pause to grieve. I played a gig knowing my mum was going to die that night in the full knowledge that she would have been furious with me if I hadn't.

[Wolverinebass]

1 minute ago, Mykesbass said:

Interesting take. I'm firmly in the "show must go on" camp and would be surprised if Charlie would have wanted them to pause to grieve. I played a gig knowing my mum was going to die that night in the full knowledge that she would have been furious with me if I hadn't.

I played a gig the day after my brother died. Much like your mum, he'd have been furious if I hadn't. However, my brother wasn't in the band and I didn't draft a replacement brother in right away if you see my point.

 

I dunno. Maybe I kind of felt that Charlie is much more than "just a drummer" and it just didn't seem right to just immediately carry on without a beat. Zeppelin probably had the best take on it. However, it's a thorny issue. Thousands of people will see them without him. Does it matter? To me, yes, but I'm probably in the minority.

[Doctor J]

Perhaps Charlie wanted them to go on like that and they are fulfilling his dying wish?

[BigRedX]

You don't become a famous musician and songwriter with a bit of ability and good luck alone. You get there by being completely driven to do it and working bloody hard to get there. It goes way beyond what the typical person playing covers at the weekend will ever understand, and even then it may not be enough.

 

I know I'll be playing right up to the point when I am no longer physically or mentally capable of it, simply because it is what I want to do, and who am I to begrudge other musicians the same facility just because I don't like their music?

[rwillett]

I just heard Angry on Planet Rock and thought that it sounded like the Stones and lo and behold it was.  I liked it, I liked it enough to think about buying it. I still might.

 

I'm firmly in the camp of carryin on as long as you want and if there are people who want to listen to you, fair game. Doesn't John Paul Jones play in his local pub on a Sunday afternoon and invite people to play with him? Good for him.

 

If people don;t like them, fine, they are playing because they like it, none of the remaining members of the Stones need the money, I suspect The Glimmer Twins are richer than some countries, but as far as I can work out, they've earnt it.

 

I thought they did pause when Charlie went, at least for a few days? I have to say I actually shed a tear as I liked Charlies playing, and he appeared to be a class act.

 

Anyway, if you don;t like them, ignore them, I have managed to ignore BTS for all their performing life, I suspect other people can manage to ignore the Stones.

 

RIP Charlie

 

Rob

 

 

[Lozz196]

Yep, I heard Angry on Radio 2 earlier, sounded pretty decent 

[Dad3353]

Don't get angry with me ...

 

 

Edited September 6, 2023 by Dad3353

[Beedster]

On 30/08/2023 at 14:06, Shaggy said:

 

I have to agree.  I always find these threads slightly depressing due to the utterly predictable Brit tendency to put down anything perceived as successful.   I’m not a massive fan of the Stones (though “Gimme Shelter” will always be in my all-time top 10 songs), but their sheer longevity for both creative output and for putting on high energy live performances is staggering - I’m pretty sure it’s a feat that will never be repeated again in the world of popular music.   Respect 😎

 

100% Greg, 100%. If I could have done 5% of what they've done and still be doing 5% of what they're still be doing I'd count myself extremely fortunate and extremely successful 👍

 

And  Let it Bleed is probably still my fave album 👍

[Beedster]

1 hour ago, BigRedX said:

You don't become a famous musician and songwriter with a bit of ability and good luck alone. You get there by being completely driven to do it and working bloody hard to get there. It goes way beyond what the typical person playing covers at the weekend will ever understand, and even then it may not be enough.

 

I know I'll be playing right up to the point when I am no longer physically or mentally capable of it, simply because it is what I want to do, and who am I to begrudge other musicians the same facility just because I don't like their music?

 

Nicely put 👍

[Beedster]

On 30/08/2023 at 14:06, Shaggy said:

 

I have to agree.  I always find these threads slightly depressing due to the utterly predictable Brit tendency to put down anything perceived as successful.   I’m not a massive fan of the Stones (though “Gimme Shelter” will always be in my all-time top 10 songs), but their sheer longevity for both creative output and for putting on high energy live performances is staggering - I’m pretty sure it’s a feat that will never be repeated again in the world of popular music.   Respect 😎

 

Pretty sure the American music community didn't greet B. B. King's final album, recorded when he was 83, in the same way 🤔

[PaulWarning]

just listened to Angry, best thing they've done in a long while, Mick's voice is just the same, amazing, when you think about the Maccas, Elton Johns, Rod Stewarts of this world

 

[Cosmo Valdemar]

53 minutes ago, PaulWarning said:

just listened to Angry, best thing they've done in a long while, Mick's voice is just the same, amazing, when you think about the Maccas, Elton Johns, Rod Stewarts of this world

 

I'm the opposite - to me it's soulless, glossy, over-produced and empty.

Mick sounds amazing thanks to autotune.

[Mykesbass]

Well I like that. Still making good music 60+ years on, still instantly recognisable - I think that's a phenomenal achievement.

[Beedster]

30 minutes ago, Mykesbass said:

Well I like that. Still making good music 60+ years on, still instantly recognisable - I think that's a phenomenal achievement.

Yep, and if that was Sheeran or similar genre-hopping sleb, a vast number of people would be going crazy about it 🤔

[rwillett]

Just watched the video for the first time. Well........ I might need to go and have a cold shower.

 

Interesting that they have focussed on the rather good looking woman and have snippets of the Stones on the bill boards. Mind you, ZZ Top have been putting beautiful women and cars in their videos for years and it never did them any harm.

 

I like the song, I think it's stripped back, well made, is it as a good as "Sympathy for the Devil" or "Gimmer Shelter"? No, those songs will still be played long after the Stones are gone. Its not bad and if I can play or sing as well as that when I'm their age, it'll be a)  a miracle as I can't now and b) I'll be delighted

 

I'm happy enoguh to buy the album and if I get 2-3 good songs on it, thats fine. Its rare to find an album like Let it Bleed or Revolver or Dark Side of the Moon anymore.

 

Rob

[ezbass]

13 minutes ago, rwillett said:

Just watched the video for the first time. Well........ I might need to go and have a cold shower.

 

Interesting that they have focussed on the rather good looking woman and have snippets of the Stones on the bill boards. Mind you, ZZ Top have been putting beautiful women and cars in their videos for years and it never did them any harm.

I hate it when they use rock stars to sell cleavages. Subtle it ain’t. I quite like the tune though.

[rwillett]

5 minutes ago, ezbass said:

I hate it when they use rock stars to sell cleavages. Subtle it ain’t. I quite like the tune though.

I like the tune as well. I suspect whetever she was selling, I couldn't afford it

[chris_b]

It's the Stones. . . . what do you expect? You can't beat long blond hair, 4" heels and a good cleavage when you're selling rock and roll.

 

It's not going to challenge Honky Tonk Women in the sets of most covers bands. You can hear the big hole left by Charlie but I like it and you know who it is as soon as you hear the first chord.

 

In their 7th decade. . . . good on them.

[rwillett]

17 minutes ago, chris_b said:

It's the Stones. . . . what do you expect? You can't beat long blond hair, 4" heels and a good cleavage when you're selling rock and roll.

And that’s just Mick….