I've noticed a lot of gloomy talk about it being the "end" for the Stones, that they might break up, etc on the part of some.
Why so? Hasn't the band gone through dry spells before? I mean look at the whole '80s conflict, or the fact that it took them 5 years to release another album after Steel Wheels. Consider that they only released 2 studio albums in the whole of the '90s--Two albums in A DECADE. It doesn't seem like this dry spell is anything new. Touring is IMO a much bigger issue than getting in the studio and recording. A tour takes months of planning, preparation, getting everyone in shape, discussions about venues, stage show, etc. All it takes to record an album, especially for this band, is to get off their asses and get in the studio.

This isn´t 1980ies anymore and they´re not mid 40ies either.Bastards are soon 70 years old,takin this long break after ABB tour kinda means they are semi-retired.
I´ll like to think they will tour again,most certainly will,but believe me its their last.

A Bigger Bang will prove to be the Stones final studio release. What we'll probably get next year is another Greatest Hits compilation with a few 'new' tracks added on - just the like 40 Licks, really.

What I wanna know is: why is everybody feeling so negative?



I know what we need. We need to dance! Now!


http://stifford.avatar.yuku.com/u

Honky Tonk Man wrote on May 29^th, 2011 at 4:31am:

A Bigger Bang will prove to be the Stones final studio release. What we'll probably get next year is another Greatest Hits compilation with a few 'new' tracks added on - just the like 40 Licks, really.

Depends on what happens in the studio, who they pick to produce and what they are coming up with. If they yield good results, they will put out a full length, they can always put a best of out at anytime. 40 Licks sessions didn't yield much, all the great ideas went out the window and touring was the focus. A Bigger Bang was about making some new music, and they got some good stuff. They hurried it, and you can feel the fractures of the band, but they pulled it off and it got alot of play on the tour. Can they do it, yes, will they, I think so... All the studio activity shows me, they aren't fucking around. They are in training, making music like an athlete is training for the olympics right now and has been for months and years. If they want to do something special, and they really should... They need to call Rick Rubin, now!!!

My sources straight from the London offices tell me the Stones 50th World Tour is ON.

" My sources straight from the London offices tell me the Stones 50th World Tour is ON. "


Hi Baby !!!!


Hashishing  ... ?!    **** Weeding ?!

The talk on the Tell Me message board is that there will be a best-of out next year. With 40 Licks now out-of-print, there isn’t currently one on the market – Rolled Gold, Hot Rocks, etc, do not count as they are Abcko releases. If they do decide to celebrate their 50th with a tour, a release will be necessary and a career retrospective will be the most appropriate for the occasion. I personally would like to hear news of a newly-recorded studio album, but I can’t see it.  

Keith is currently recording on-and-off in New York with Steve Jordan, so we’ll get some kind of solo release from him in the not too distant future I think. Whether it’ll be a few numbers for the forthcoming Depp-produced documentary, Happy, or a full-blown Wino’s release, remains to be seen.  

'Forty Licks' has been out of print for a few years. Prior to that, it's distribution had been transferred from Virgin to ABCKO.

left shoe shuffle wrote on May 29^th, 2011 at 11:58am:

'Forty Licks' has been out of print for a few years. Prior to that, it's distribution had been transferred from Virgin to ABCKO.

I found 40 Licks to be a decent-enough retrospective. Minus the 4 new tracks which I suspect they were obliged to record, they only had 36 tracks to pick from. I think they made the right selections on the whole, too.

Perhaps this time we’ll get a 50-track best-of? Maybe spread over 3 CD’s? Would be nice.

Seems inevitable.

There might not be a full album of new material in the offing, but with the expanded 'Some Girls' re-issue forthcoming, and a likely 50th anniversary compilation,
they'll be supporting something if they decide to tour in 2012...    

marko wrote on May 28^th, 2011 at 6:33am:

This isn´t 1980ies anymore and they´re not mid 40ies either.Bastards are soon 70 years old

Yep, but just hope they tour in thier 80's like Chuck Berry, John Lee Hooker, etc... :nomames :scary :forfucksake :smoking

Perhaps they're afraid of the Rapture; you know, people disappearing like the Bon Jovi/Pavlov thread.
Brainy

The calender, Keith's fingers and did you see Shine A Light?

Why is everyone fearing this is the end of democracy?
GOLDMAN SACHS
Brainy
:stinkypost

steel driving hammer wrote on May 29^th, 2011 at 12:51pm:

marko wrote on May 28th, 2011 at 6:33am: This isn´t 1980ies anymore and they´re not mid 40ies either.Bastards are soon 70 years old Yep, but just hope they tour in thier 80's like Chuck Berry, John Lee Hooker, etc... :nomames :scary :forfucksake :smoking

God, I hope not!  :wtf3

StickyStones wrote on May 28^th, 2011 at 6:16am:

I've noticed a lot of gloomy talk about it being the "end" for the Stones, that they might break up, etc on the part of some. Why so? Hasn't the band gone through dry spells before? I mean look at the whole '80s conflict, or the fact that it took them 5 years to release another album after Steel Wheels. Consider that they only released 2 studio albums in the whole of the '90s--Two albums in A DECADE. It doesn't seem like this dry spell is anything new. Touring is IMO a much bigger issue than getting in the studio and recording. A tour takes months of planning, preparation, getting everyone in shape, discussions about venues, stage show, etc. All it takes to record an album, especially for this band, is to get off their asses and get in the studio.

The gap between the end of the Steel Wheels tour and starting recording Voodoo Lounge was three years. In that time, Mick, Keith & Ronnie all put out solo albums, and Keith and Ronnie both also toured. Its not like they were inactive. Or dry. That was never the case until within the last decade.

This time?  They're pushing 70 for goodness sake, havent worked in four years, their main musical driving force has played live for ten minutes since August '07, barely even played on a session and has co-authored about five new songs in the last 14 years. Their lead singer and main songwriter has also performed for no more than a few minutes in the last 4 years and has written very little that has (to date) been released.

They're not motivated to make new material because theres little money in it. And how anyone can compare periods of inactivity from decades ago with that of guys in their late 60s who havent played live in almost half a decade (and counting) and some of whom were most definitely struggling for large stretches of their LAST tour is a pretty extreme case of blind faith over logic.

The longer the gap is at this stage the less pleasant it's going to be, unfortunately.

Pretty much all songwriters only have a limited muse. After a while, the well does tend to run dry. They're hardly alone in that regard. Anything more is a bonus at this stage.

personally, i could do WITHOUT a new release...
Reissue super CDs...
just want them to get in shape and play...
go out like champs!!!

Brainbell Jangler wrote on May 29^th, 2011 at 2:27pm:

Perhaps they're afraid of the Rapture; you know, people disappearing like the Bon Jovi/Pavlov thread. Brainy

It's over.

" The longer the gap is at this stage the less pleasant it's going to be ...... After a while, the well does tend to run dry........ Anything more is a bonus ... "


http://www.prettyboring.com/files/images/0703_paris_tanning_ramey.jpg !!!!

How can the end be near?  I just bought two bottles of Rolling Stones wine.

But seriously, there are other bands out there if this one isn't doing it for you.

Why bother with a new release? No one cares. Alot of time and effort, scratching their heads (and probably asses) trying to think up some thing slightly original, for very little return. There's just not any serious money in albums anymore. And anyway, do they have a contract for new material?

A 50th world tour is enough. It's a major milestone, and they dont need to tour behind a record that if we are lucky, they will play maybe 1-2 tracks off it that 90% of any audience wont give a shit about :nooslajaleisk. Just say "This is it", and watch them attendance records fall. End it all with a televised gig from some little pub in London and say goodbye.

To NOT say this is the last time will have everyone laughing in the aisles.

corgi37 wrote on Jun 1^st, 2011 at 6:34am:

To NOT say this is the last time will have everyone laughing in the aisles.

good point and it makes weight for the argument that it is over and they will go down as never saying this is the last time

to paraphrase an old poet, this is they way the world ends... not with ABB but a whimper...

You're right I agree, for economical as well as sentimental reasons, the best way out is back to the roots - three shows at the Marquee or the 100 Club or whatever the gig is in London (with MT and Bill in tow to boot) then say goodnight.

So much for all that  tho..  it will be interesting to see how it all pans out

The Marquee closed a few years ago.

The 100 Club would be a terrible place for a gig even if they were filming it. The stage is at floor level, meaning you can see very little if youre not at the front, and it only holds about 350 people. There's not even a balcony.

Gazza wrote on Jun 1^st, 2011 at 5:51pm:

The 100 Club would be a terrible place for a gig even if they were filming it. The stage is at floor level, meaning you can see very little if youre not at the front, and it only holds about 350 people. There's not even a balcony.

And there's a wall urinal in the men's toilet that's mounted high enough that you practically need a ladder to use it, at least that's how it was in 2003.  :wtf3

I'm not fearing, there is no way they will not cash in on the 50 year Anniversary gig, and NYC will be a certainty. Summit anyone?

Gazza wrote on Jun 1^st, 2011 at 5:51pm:

The Marquee closed a few years ago. The 100 Club would be a terrible place for a gig even if they were filming it. The stage is at floor level, meaning you can see very little if youre not at the front, and it only holds about 350 people. There's not even a balcony.

:forfucksake
Oh. well forget that then   :nomames :smilemick

Edith Grove wrote on Jun 1^st, 2011 at 8:37pm:

Gazza wrote on Jun 1st, 2011 at 5:51pm: The 100 Club would be a terrible place for a gig even if they were filming it. The stage is at floor level, meaning you can see very little if youre not at the front, and it only holds about 350 people. There's not even a balcony. And there's a wall urinal in the men's toilet that's mounted high enough that you practically need a ladder to use it, at least that's how it was in 2003.  :wtf3

In my youth I could send a stream of piss over my head, but age and common sense have both made this trick useless.

Pdog wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2011 at 7:42am:

Edith Grove wrote on Jun 1st, 2011 at 8:37pm: Gazza wrote on Jun 1st, 2011 at 5:51pm: The 100 Club would be a terrible place for a gig even if they were filming it. The stage is at floor level, meaning you can see very little if youre not at the front, and it only holds about 350 people. There's not even a balcony. And there's a wall urinal in the men's toilet that's mounted high enough that you practically need a ladder to use it, at least that's how it was in 2003.  :wtf3 In my youth I could send a stream of piss over my head, but age and common sense have both made this trick useless.

best Pdog ever.

I refuse to listen to anything else about the end of the band. They will continue.