For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Gazza
Mick carried the Stones on the Licks tour - I dont think his singing is a major issue, other than the obvious fact that its a much more fragile instrument than it used to be and needs more rest between shows.
I think what decline there is is simply down to the lifestyles of both guitarists' catching up with them. Which when you're in your sixties is only to be expected.
I enjoyed pretty much every tour more than the one before up to 2003. There was a serious dip in performance levels on ABB. That said, I went to 13 shows on that tour, enjoyed them all to some degree and saw a couple of shows that were as good as I've ever seen them do. However, I suppose its natural to get lost in the momemnt of a Stones show. A more telling factor is that its not a tour where I tend to want to listen to recordings of the shows very often.
Quote
oldkr
Keith's physical decline is as much to blame as micks obsessive professionalism- but then given the prices they demand, that perfection must be sought.
OLDKR
Quote
socialdistortion
They need to do what The Who do
Quote
Silver Dagger
The most obvious reason for their decline live is their reliance to bring too many other musicians on tour with them.
Quote
Justin
The peak of their post'89 days was 1997. They have dipped lower after that and plateaued for several tours now. But the quality sure ain't going up...it's slowly but surely sinking. Keith, to me, is the soul of the band. It is his performance alone that energizes the rest of the band. The lack of actual rhythm playing in recent tours has brought the band to rely on Chuck to fill in the gaps. Where there SHOULD be chords...there is noodling. keith has slowly turned into a jazz player where he fiddles around with a song more than actually strumming. That rhythm is the main component driving the music...when that's gone...the band is practicallly disconnected. keith lays the foundation.
Quote
NorthShoreBlues2Quote
Justin
The peak of their post'89 days was 1997. They have dipped lower after that and plateaued for several tours now. But the quality sure ain't going up...it's slowly but surely sinking. Keith, to me, is the soul of the band. It is his performance alone that energizes the rest of the band. The lack of actual rhythm playing in recent tours has brought the band to rely on Chuck to fill in the gaps. Where there SHOULD be chords...there is noodling. keith has slowly turned into a jazz player where he fiddles around with a song more than actually strumming. That rhythm is the main component driving the music...when that's gone...the band is practicallly disconnected. keith lays the foundation.
indeed. well put. I agree . . .
Quote
T&AQuote
NorthShoreBlues2Quote
Justin
The peak of their post'89 days was 1997. They have dipped lower after that and plateaued for several tours now. But the quality sure ain't going up...it's slowly but surely sinking. Keith, to me, is the soul of the band. It is his performance alone that energizes the rest of the band. The lack of actual rhythm playing in recent tours has brought the band to rely on Chuck to fill in the gaps. Where there SHOULD be chords...there is noodling. keith has slowly turned into a jazz player where he fiddles around with a song more than actually strumming. That rhythm is the main component driving the music...when that's gone...the band is practicallly disconnected. keith lays the foundation.
indeed. well put. I agree . . .
me too - except the jazz fiddling part - keith ain't no stephane grappelli
Quote
From4tilLate
It's been a dead horse since 1982. Mick and Keith have both abandoned what they used to do well, whether they realize it or not. The Stones used to be a wonderfully ragged beast, sometimes on the rails and sometimes careening off; that was part of the magic. Now Mick does constant calisthenics (which are impressive in a man his age but not what he used to do well) and Keith - I agree with Doxa in a post from a few weeks back - surrendered band-leading to Chuck in a compromise to get the band back together - which prevented the magic from ever returning. What little Stones magic there was left in '89 blew away when Wyman left.
Quote
socialdistortion
That's FUNNY!! (not). Why be a wise guy. You know what I mean
Quote
socialdistortion
That's FUNNY!! (not). Why be a wise guy. You know what I mean
Quote
JustinQuote
deadegad
let Ronnie (sober) play unrestrained lead,or Clapton, if willing, or MT. . ..
I can't believe some on this board can still type this sentence and still think it's even a valid option.
I'm not referring to the '75-'78 tours as examples. I'm talking about how he approaches certain songs. THSMLI from Licks and Rock me baby from the same tour is an example of Mick with LOTS of power in his voice. Same with OOC durung B2B. Balls out power growl singing. Now he's speaking the words with little power in the actually voice. In fact his voice sounds very frail and nasally. SWH and most songs from shine a light cd is laughable. However, PIB from the same cd is Mick putting effort into his vocalsQuote
mickschix
No, I disagree STARSTAR, the growl was not singing. Mick's vocals are much better today than in 1975 and 1978 when he rushed through the vocals and tried to sound like Louie Armstrong. It was just a phase and since then he has hired a vocal coach and he has learned how to save his voice and make the most of what he has( which is still quite a lot!) Keith, well, he would never try to intentionally learn new techniques....or at least he'd never let anyone know, too macho for that rubbish!
Quote
starstar74
I'm not referring to the '75-'78 tours as examples. I'm talking about how he approaches certain songs. THSMLI from Licks and Rock me baby from the same tour is an example of Mick with LOTS of power in his voice. Same with OOC durung B2B. Balls out power growl singing. Now he's speaking the words with little power in the actually voice. In fact his voice sounds very frail and nasally. SWH and most songs from shine a light cd is laughable. However, PIB from the same cd is Mick putting effort into his vocals
Yes, the Webster show is a great example of vintage Mick signature style singing. Too bad he saved it for a solo show instead of a Stones show.Quote
jamesfdouglasQuote
starstar74
I'm not referring to the '75-'78 tours as examples. I'm talking about how he approaches certain songs. THSMLI from Licks and Rock me baby from the same tour is an example of Mick with LOTS of power in his voice. Same with OOC durung B2B. Balls out power growl singing. Now he's speaking the words with little power in the actually voice. In fact his voice sounds very frail and nasally. SWH and most songs from shine a light cd is laughable. However, PIB from the same cd is Mick putting effort into his vocals
I know exactly what you're talking about starstar74.
I've not seen any evidence of Mick really delievering that awesome, cool voice of his for a whole show since I saw the Webster Hall bootleg video from 1993.
The same voice that has made the band who they are. The Jagger voice.
Hell, the last tour where he used it regularily was 1978, judging by boot's I've heard (I didn't see that tour as a) it was U.S. only and b) I was only 4 years old).