Mood: a-ok
Keith Richards said in 1997:
"I want to make really good stuff. If we get hits out of it, fantastic, but if not they'll be damn good records, and they'll still last, and they'll be around a long time. The immediate gratification left me a long time ago. If you don't get it, you ain't been there, but maybe you'll get it further down the road."
I am so sick of people saying to me "The Stones haven't had a hit record since 1978 or 1981" etc. Who cares? Hit with who? Do you listen to the crap that's on the radio these days that is considered to be "hits"? A bunch of teeny boppers who don't play any instruments, don't write any of their own material and get choreographed dance moves. Or, worse yet, the ones that constantly "sample" other artists hits to make their own "hits" instantly recognizable.
I don't care if the Stones don't release what today's industry considers a "hit" album. What they do do is release consistently good albums.
The Stones are a "live" band. How many people heard "Out of Control" on Bridges to Babylon or "Don't Stop" on 40 Licks and said "Ah, it's an ok song" only to hear it live and go "Hey that's a great live track". That's what the Stones do best. They take a studio track and they push it into another realm on the stage. That's why we can go to hundreds of Stones shows and still get something new and refreshing, even if it's a song we've heard 100 times.
So what's with the fans on the boards actually bitching about another live album? I can't understand that at all. People try to infuse the reasoning that we all have bootlegs of the live stuff...but a well mixed polished official release can't compete with even the best bootlegs. I for one am looking forward to the live album, especially disc 2.
So as Keith said above: "If you don't get it, you ain't been there, but maybe you'll get it further down the road."
Maybe you won't, but then that's your tough luck.
Posted by blue_lena
at 8:05 PM EDT