Quote
marcovandereijk
All I hope for, is that they will get together in the studio with the whole bunch,
start jamming around ideas that were brought in by both Mick and Keith or the two of them
together and that they will manage to inspire each other to make the songs come alive.
They're a BAND for gods sake, so please operate like one. Challenge, surprise, stimulate
each other and see what happens. Lock yourselves up in a studio, basement, kitchen or
whatever and let the ideas flow freely.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
For the record, I'm a Stones fan who enjoys both Glimmer Twins solo as well. I've come to accept over the last thirty years that they work best creatively apart. When they do work together, you're just as likely to get a VOODOO LOUNGE as a DIRTY WORK. And, as Mick said about VOODOO LOUNGE, the results do not differ substantially from working quickly (the STEEL WHEELS model) to justify the aggravation. Much as I enjoy CROSSEYED HEART, I'm not convinced Keith is "back" in terms of bursting with creativity. I think he needs indulgence and sympathetic collaborators. That isn't necessarily the Stones. Like it or not, they both know their best work is behind them. What they do now is simply carrying on. The pressure is far greater than ever before to not "tarnish the legacy." This is something every veteran artist faces. That is why many will create only for themselves in their last years and be reluctant to share the results. That certainly describes Mick's continuous songwriting efforts. As Dave Stewart noted several years ago, Mick could release tons of new songs they've amassed over the years. He suggested Mick do so exclusively as a cloud release. And it isn't just talk, one journalist reported Dave Stewart playing him a track. L'wren's fashion shows even featured some exclusive Mick songs never aired elsewhere. There's a lot that is locked up in the archive of recent vintage.

Quote
frenki09

Quote
Rocky Dijon
For the record, I'm a Stones fan who enjoys both Glimmer Twins solo as well. I've come to accept over the last thirty years that they work best creatively apart. When they do work together, you're just as likely to get a VOODOO LOUNGE as a DIRTY WORK. And, as Mick said about VOODOO LOUNGE, the results do not differ substantially from working quickly (the STEEL WHEELS model) to justify the aggravation. Much as I enjoy CROSSEYED HEART, I'm not convinced Keith is "back" in terms of bursting with creativity. I think he needs indulgence and sympathetic collaborators. That isn't necessarily the Stones. Like it or not, they both know their best work is behind them. What they do now is simply carrying on. The pressure is far greater than ever before to not "tarnish the legacy." This is something every veteran artist faces. That is why many will create only for themselves in their last years and be reluctant to share the results. That certainly describes Mick's continuous songwriting efforts. As Dave Stewart noted several years ago, Mick could release tons of new songs they've amassed over the years. He suggested Mick do so exclusively as a cloud release. And it isn't just talk, one journalist reported Dave Stewart playing him a track. L'wren's fashion shows even featured some exclusive Mick songs never aired elsewhere. There's a lot that is locked up in the archive of recent vintage.

I really enjoy reading Rocky Dijon's posts. Very informative, clear-minded, straight forward and original. Keep 'em rolling!

Quote
GetYerAngie

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Hairball
[


I think you underestimate everyone who you declare not seeing half the story - they see it loud and clear. When you say that "the qualities in Jagger are actually the same ones which has brought the band into greatness, and helped to keep the band alive and in top for ages", aren't you referring to things that happened well over 30 years ago? Surely you can't say that the band has been in 'top form' since then, and I believe you've actually noted that the studio output of this latter period is not up to par (Jagger solo as well as Stones output). It's clearly obvious that Jagger played a big part in bringing the band into greatness and keeping them at the top for so many years, but he didn't do it alone. And for the last 30+ years where he has nearly taken sole leadership of the band, it seems clear that he's been fishing around in the wrong ponds. Just as you say Keith's quality of input is lacking (or conservative as you put it), the qualities that Mick once brought to the band have been diminished for one reason or another, and the results speak for themselves when the band barely touches any of it when performing live.

Well, for Mick keeping the band in top, has not solely - are actually much - to with the studio output for the last 30 years. I guess that what the Stones mostly is for Jagger - a touring circus he runs and takes of, and the biggest act in that business. And nothing indicates that they won't be as long as Jagger has the stamina and motivation. The studio output of the Stones since 1989 is rather marginal thing in compared to that - it is morelike 'I guess we need also release some new music here and then, to be a living and breating band and everything, not that we really need or want to'. And one can hear that from the results.

Another thing is that the creative juices of both Mick an dKeith have dried a long time ago. Yeah, they can up with some okay tunes here and then, somehow adding something to their legacy, but the days they were able writing stunning, distinctive songs - and albums full of them - are long past. I think that is the real reson why they don't bother even playing them. Jagger claims the conservatism of their audience for that, but I think everyone involved knows the real truth for their absence. Playing them would be 'apolegetic' or 'forcing the audience like them', and no one would be happy. We have to remember that their past doings are just so 'bigger than life' that competing with them would be a mission impossible. And I think recognizing their own lack of ability to write actually great new music is the reason why they are not so keen entering teh studio too often either.

The issue is not that if the music is 'contemporary' or 'rootsy' or whatever. But that of: if it is great or not.

I know you Keith Richards fans love CROSSEYED HEART dearly, and I also like it very much as a Keith Richards solo album. It is great within its own little terms, but as a Rolling Stones item I don't see there anything really worthwhile. Actually if translated into a Rolling Stones album - which I think should not to be done - it is a rather lame effort. There really aren't any distinctive songs or song sketches, which Jagger could transform into memorable Rolling Stones level greatness by adding his contribution there. Yeah, we could get a couple of Keith ballads - as they are now - to fill the Keith section of the album, and then a couple of "onemoreshots" when 'Jaggerized'. And that's it. Aren't, say, VOODOO LOUNGE or A BIGGER BANG full of that alraedy? If it is like Keith has said that his task is to "inspire Mick", I am rather sure that the material of CROSSEYED HEART would not have done that. So I am glad that Keith did it alone - the songs sounding and looking exactly like him, with no any compromises. That's why the album is so genuine and great by its own terms.

The Richards guys here seem to typically blame Jagger for their creative downhill, and if Keith would have more a say, the things would have been better (or be better now if the Stones would be 'crosseyedheartized'). Bullshit me thinks. Keith is as much to blame as Mick - if there is anything to 'blame' in matters like these: you can't force the creativity.

- Doxa

And right there we should respectfully agree to disagree regarding Crosseyed Heart. You like it as a solo album "on it's own little terms" (whatever that means), while I think it stands on it's own and is leaps and bounds better than any Mick solo and indeed ranks up there with my favorite Stones albums. You also say you're glad it remains a Keith solo album, claiming Mick couldn't help it even if it were given the Stones treatment. I on the other hand am glad it remained a solo album because I firmly believe Mick would have possibly ruined it. An interesting thought to ponder though is the 'what if' factor. It might have been the best Stones album in decades (?), but then again it may have turned ugly with Micks input - I lean towards the latter based on my opinions regarding Mick's Stones input/solo material for the last several decades.

And opinion it is. You seem to want to come up with a scientific solution and lay a foundation as to what makes the Stones great. And then when someone has a differing opinion about why they love the Stones that doesn't quite meet your criteria or match your hypothesis, you say they just don't get it! You somehow want to come to the defense of Mick and say people are wrong for thinking the way they do. I appreciate your enthusiasm and enjoy reading some of your opinions, but I don't always agree. And when I disagree (with anyone), I don't come around in a roundabout way saying that that you are wrong for thinking the way you do and that you just don't get it! The bottom line is, it really doesn't have to get all personal, and as has been mentioned several times - Mick doesn't really need to be defended. He's a big boy who makes his own choices, and within that territory he can't please all the people all of the time - and the same goes for Keith. Some are more diehard and fanatical about it than others, but the common ground here is that everyone here likes the Stones for one reason or another. It's not a science, it's an art where everyone has a right to their opinions about it.

Well, I truly disagree with you. CH is nowhere near Stones level - yes it is the best KR solo, but that doesn't say much. Wandering Spirit was on Stones level, but no other solo projects have been. I agree with Doxa, the best thing about CH is that it was succesfull and I really hope that it prevents more than one Keith-vocal (and hopefully there will be just a duet like on Black and Blue) on the new album. Keith has charm, but he must focus on his guitar...

Quote
35love
DandelionPowderman wrote:

'PS II: Everything I have contributed in the CH thread is now removed. That'll make you happy and probably open up for all of your friends who wanted to discuss the album, but felt blocked and policed. Where are they, btw?'

I checked, and DP DID indeed erase the thoughtful, intelligent, helpful comments written over weeks while a consistent group of us discovered and shared the CrosseyedHeart release.
That sucks.
DP man, you're too smart and cool to let anyone upset you to this point. I think you add real value.

Topic: Oh I really hope the boys are in the studio in a few weeks! Good juju thought vibes for them--

Quote
DandelionPowderman
+1 (and knowledgable as well)

Quote
GetYerAngie

Quote
35love
DandelionPowderman wrote:

'PS II: Everything I have contributed in the CH thread is now removed. That'll make you happy and probably open up for all of your friends who wanted to discuss the album, but felt blocked and policed. Where are they, btw?'

I checked, and DP DID indeed erase the thoughtful, intelligent, helpful comments written over weeks while a consistent group of us discovered and shared the CrosseyedHeart release.
That sucks.
DP man, you're too smart and cool to let anyone upset you to this point. I think you add real value.

Topic: Oh I really hope the boys are in the studio in a few weeks! Good juju thought vibes for them--

I might be less impressed with a lot of DP's many opinions, since he often is so biased in a way that is not mine, but sometimes his contributions are valuable and good reads. And his threads with live-albums are really good as a supplement to Rene's track-talks. But in this case I must say, that I just don't understand his reaction. I mean why delete? Strange...

Quote
swimtothemoon
Ronnie probably does have some interesting ideas. The question is will they be
allowed and /or will he be given proper credit for them.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I didn't expect a singer/songwriter-tinged album from Keith, so I really don't understand how a different album than his previous ones can be described as «conservative».

Time to stop this nonsense, imo. No more bashing - let's look forward to a new Stones album

Actually, I wasn't initially talking about CROSSEYED being 'conservative' - it is, though, by the terms I defined above - but of it attracting a conservative side of Stones fans. Well, looking all those posts now trying to 'defend' CROSSEYED HEART and point out its qualities - isn't there alraedy a thread for that fiesta already here? - and at the same bashing Jagger and see any new forms of music taking since the golden age of rock music harmful- even using Dylan to back up an argument - just verifies my point. Using a term 'conservative' is no pejorative but descriptive.

Most of the members of big rock and roll generations are very conservative - even intolerant - in regards to latest currents - how is that so shocking to say it loud? (In most cases, it is an age gap.) Because rock music was so 'liberal' by nature long time ago? a 'wrong' word?

- Doxa

I just don't see how fans who love Crosseyed Heart can be labeled "conservative" when they got something entirely else than they expected and loved it.

And I don't see how I am defending the album by pointing that out.

We were looking forward to cool open G-riffs and got "John Hiatt"! (I can't really see the Dylan comparison). Still, you keep going about the conservative fanboys.

Wrong word indeed, and a discussion which is banging in open doors, imo.

I obviously seem to use the term 'conservative' in a larger sense than you do - referring to different musical genres. I think anyone knowing Keith Richards, especially being a hardcore fan of his, knows the kind of music Keith likes, and most likely, likes them as well. So for them there was nothing surprising in CROSSEYED HEART genre-wise if knowing from where Keith comes from. If there had been, say, a hip hop song there, I guess the real liberalism of his hardcore fanbase would have been tested... (all this iwould just ridiculous speculation had not a guy called Mick Jagger existed - who knows, like some people seem to be afraid here, what the "current sounds" in a new Stones album Ron talks about might be like....).

But in the sense you seem to use the word, you, of course, are right. The album was a nice surprise for many of his audience, offering things Keith hadn't really released before, or at least, to this extent. Like you said in some of your posts, Keith adapting a kind of singer/song-writer role altogether - instead that of old riffmaster - was an novelty per se.

I hope you catched my post in which I tried to explain the logic of being 'adventurous' - one can be that no matter if one is such genre-liberal as Mick or genre-conservative as Keith, and I think in ther case, Keith has been actually more adventurous than Mick during the last decades or so.

Leave that "conservative boys" stuff out, please. That's your words, not mine. Do you people - this is not just for you, Dandie - actually read my posts through - I do understand if you don't though - or are you just picking up some terms that you seemingly want to feel be hurted by? Look that Big Bad Bad Doxa is, once again, "bashing poor Keith Richards fans".

- Doxa, a genre conservative, and proud of it!

Sorry, my friend. Many words, but the same core contents. You're just putting out the fire now.

Nobody is hurt. Your focus was too narrow for that. You didn't have a target to shoot at.

For this discussion to bear fruits, it would have had to be progressive (i.e. how can Mick and Keith potentially cooperate to achieve better results?). Instead, you're using sensationalism and belittling of fellow posters as your tools. Everybody on here loves Mick, so you could have spared yourself that, imo.

You repeatedly called «Keith Richards fans» (what is that anyway?) both fanboys and conservative. Why should I leave it out?

If you stir the pot, you gotta finish the game. Personally, I think it was unnecessary. What have you achieved? A thread where lots of posters had fun discussing an album died down, something that wouldn't have happened hadn't you pulled a stunt like this. Well done.

This is the last constructed «Mick/Keith-fight» I will take part of. It's useless and doesn't serve any purpose, imo.


PS: You got proudmary to cheer on you, I'll give you that

PS II: Everything I have contributed in the CH thread is now removed. That'll make you happy and probably open up for all of your friends who wanted to discuss the album, but felt blocked and policed. Where are they, btw?

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
swimtothemoon
Ronnie probably does have some interesting ideas. The question is will they be
allowed and /or will he be given proper credit for them.

Most of Ronnie's creative ideas are probably put into his painting these days, something he knows he'll get credit for.

I'd love to see the Stones split the credits on the the likely last record evenly, between all the musicians, including Chuck and Darryl, no matter who wrote the songs. This would be an amazing gesture of goodwill and blow everyone including the hardcore fans away. Plus it would be a great way to get the best possible ideas and performances out of them all!

Quote
Stoneage
All threads, with very few exceptions, that goes un-sticky dies out sooner or later. It would be interesting to return to the CH-thread in, let's say, February to contemplate what all the commotion was about really.
I think this record needs distance to be sized up truthfully.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
swimtothemoon
Ronnie probably does have some interesting ideas. The question is will they be
allowed and /or will he be given proper credit for them.

Most of Ronnie's creative ideas are probably put into his painting these days, something he knows he'll get credit for.

Quote
Turner68
That's a bummer. Don't let Doxa get to you Dandelion.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I'm sure your intentions were good, Doxa, but what you did was destructive, not constructive this time.

It has nothing to do with opinions. As I have said numerous times, there was room for all kinds of opinions in that thread.

The result of what you did was that people wanted me banned from IORR, because they started to believe that I «policed the thread» or was «pulling strings», controlling posters who were spitting out insults to the ones who didn't like the album.

This couldn't be further from the truth, and I hope you will think again the next time you decide that you must take actions «to balance things out». You're a great poster, Doxa, and people listen to you. There's power in words, and there are people here who take the «camp»-thing literally (also «camps» within IORR).

Personally, I don't care to the extent that I am hurt myself. I just wanted to use this occasion as an eye-opener – to tell that even on a fun RS board that we shouldn't take too seriously, things are happening if one light certain fires.

What happened to the thread? It died down. There was a new Keith-video that came two days ago. Only a very few comments...

You wanted more diversity in the CH-thread? By all means, take the thread home with proudmary, Carpet, LongBeach, Naturalust and the other fans. I'm sure they have lots of exciting things to say about the album and will offer their extensive knowledge on the matter. I really hope they can offer that.

Quote
Redhotcarpet
we are all adults and doxa is not to be blamed.

Quote
Turner68
They could always try to get Paul McCartney to work with them, he has been a very active collaborator. It's hard to imagine that he and Keith didn't mess around a bit with guitars when they hung out a couple years back.