Quote
NickB
Oh well we'll agree to disagree and agree that the Stones are still a mighty fine band even when they're not on form.

Quote
ablett
Wasn't he ill just before hand?

Quote
LastStopThisTown
I believe many would be less critical of the band if they charged cheaper tickets AND put some real effort in to their shows. For £150 per ticket i just don't expect to be able to SEE them, i expect the performance of a life time. The simple fact is of late this just has not happened.

Quote
Tantekäthe
A combination of various factors:

1) Commercial reasoning obviously drives any of their moves, resulting - among other things - in a live show concept (setlists, line-up, arrangements) that is tailored towards the tourists. Routine and boredom have drowned out any spontaneity, creativity and joy; SFTD is the best example of this, they obviously hate it themselves but the masses are supposed to expect it from them. Who is to blame? I blame Mick for his greed and his conservatism, but much more do I blame Keith for his bigotry in enjoying both the wealth and the outlaw image and for taking a convenient back seat.

Quote
Turd On The Run

Is it Mick? Is it Keith? It is both, in a sense. (And on some nights Ronnie was the fulcrum of deterioration...)

Keith is the most obvious culprit in the Stone's decline. He was once the musical soul, the muse, the engine, and the engineer. At times of late he seems content to be a passenger. On stage his physical condition will vary wildly - one night there are flashes of the greatest rock and roll rhythm guitarist ever, other nights he will mostly noodle and rip out a few chords here and there...and pose a lot...he will have embarrassing lapses and his playing some nights is simply humiliatingly amateurish.

Mick's decline is more evident in his judgment...his insistence in embalming the Stones into a Globe-Trotting-Greatest-Hits-Juke-Box-version of a once intriguingly unpredictable and supple band and presenting a lowest-common-denominator show for the hundreds of thousands of fans and tourists...his insistence on replicated, repetitive spectacle over the once organic (and at time shambolic) flow of a supremely instinctual ensemble has robbed the Stones of much of their power to surprise. His stage presence is still nothing short of staggering, though...and his command of the stage dominates all aspects of the show.

His live singing often degenerates into a distractingly rote, nasal-y and thin shadow of his glory years...some of this is down to the natural aging process - in order to be able to continue on 18 month Global Tours he has to save the instrument and husband his strength. Yet when Jagger wants to...when the moment moves him...he still can kill a song dead. (Want proof? The execrable Streets of Love was transformed by Jagger into a highlight in concert by his committed and beautiful readings...he was engaged...he was trying...he single-handedly turned a clunker into a gem...that's a singer...)

And this leads to the reason why - to the long-time fan - the Stones seem to have hit a wall...the biggest reason, aside from the obvious physical decline in Keith, is that the Stones no longer play to their strengths. Their (Jagger's?) insistence on playing basically the same set they played three and a half decades ago needlessly exposes their weaknesses and puts them into a nostalgia-act straitjacket. The set they insist on presenting ad-infinitum not only willfully trivializes their more current output and robs them and their music of any relevance, but it betrays their age and musical shortcomings for the world to see...and reduces the band to mediocrity through sheer boredom and miscalculation.

A perfect example of this is Sympathy for the Devil - featured on Shine A Light and a centerpiece on all post-1989 tours. There is no legitimate reason anymore for this song to still be in the set - Mick sings it as caricature and Keith exposes himself to ridicule with his nightly discombobulation of a once-stunning and set-defining guitar solo...now degenerated into self-indulgent posing and mangled, cringe-inducing cacophony. What was once a generational touchstone has become painful parody. It's Only Rock and Roll - once (in 1975-76) a riproarin' firecracker - has all the bite of a rubber chicken. The Stones simply are not capable of pulling off these (and many others like All Down the Line, Sway, YCAGWYW) songs anymore. And they should not even try.

Why not play to their current strengths and artistic integrity instead? If the Stones concentrated more on material they are suited to play at this stage of their career - material that is excellent and reflects their current output - they would be a far better band. Songs like Out of Control, Laugh, I nearly Died, Saint of Me, Dangerous Beauty, Back of My Hand, Love is Strong, Low Down, Too Tight, Terrifying, Almost Hear You Sigh, Rain Fall Down, and Back Of My Hand could be interspersed with Midnight Rambler and Street Fighting Man and When the Whip comes down as well as some covers like Imagination and 'Aint Too Proud To Beg and Little Red Rooster to make a sparkling set - it would inspire and stimulate the band to reach for challenging musical spaces, recapture their mastery of the Blues, and simultaneously give relevance to their late-career work. I've noticed how energized Jagger is when he sings newer (and non-warhorse) material like Saint of Me, Out of Control, and Streets of Love. He is a completely different singer than the going-through-the-motions marionette talk-singing Brown Sugar or Miss You for the 148,996th time. (The crowd is energized too...no one walks out because the Stones are playing Out of Control instead of YCAGWYW...no one.) I've also seen Jagger detonate songs like That's How Strong My Love Is...literally smash them with brilliance.

Keith's deterioration as a guitarist is lamentable, but if the Stones were to pare down their set to songs they are suited to play at this age and stage of their careers, if they would honor more of their late-career material, and if they would leave the Stadiums for less gargantuan arenas (they can make a 15,000 seat arena seem intimate - I have witnessed this) not only would they be a happier, more vital and engaged band, but their fans would be thrilled to see them functioning at this level again. Most importantly, they would discard some of the crass cloak of corporate avarice that they have wrapped around themselves the last 2 decades and regain their relevance as artists.

Apologies for the length of my rant...and thanks for a superb thread.

Quote
ablett

Quote
Tantekäthe
A combination of various factors:

1) Commercial reasoning obviously drives any of their moves, resulting - among other things - in a live show concept (setlists, line-up, arrangements) that is tailored towards the tourists. Routine and boredom have drowned out any spontaneity, creativity and joy; SFTD is the best example of this, they obviously hate it themselves but the masses are supposed to expect it from them. Who is to blame? I blame Mick for his greed and his conservatism, but much more do I blame Keith for his bigotry in enjoying both the wealth and the outlaw image and for taking a convenient back seat.

2) Keith's lost playing ability, maybe due to mental damage rather than to arthritis (to me, his self-indulgent posing on stage indicates there is something wrong with his perception of reality in general or at least with his ears, otherwise he would notice the embarrassment and hide away rather than expose himself; let alone the repetitive rubbish he talks in interviews..)

3) Mick's drifting into the "nasal" singing mode for most of the time that makes his vocal performances often unlistenable

4) The lack of a functioning rhythm section. Blondie Chaplin more or less compensates for Keith's absence, but Charlie Watts does not form a unit with Darryl Jones like he did with Bill Wyman. Thus, the sound is not coherent anymore.

Quote
Turd On The Run
There have been intermittent intimations of the Rolling Stone's "decline" since 1966 - I remember in my early youth reading a magazine claiming "their clothes don't fit them like they used to..." or some such similar piffle, mainly because they were in the middle of an astonishing run of Top Ten pop-rock singles and had seemingly turned their back on the blues (this is pre-Beggars Banquet, mind you). All throughout the 1970's the subject of the Stones "decline" was prevalent - most especially in the 1973-1977 period. Nevertheless, the decline is now inarguable. Some of the shows I witnessed during the last tour - especially the European legs in 2006/07 - Frankfurt, Cologne, Nijmegen - were painful to watch for a person who has seen them numerous times in the last 35 years. The decline was dismaying.

Is it Mick? Is it Keith? It is both, in a sense. (And on some nights Ronnie was the fulcrum of deterioration...)

Keith is the most obvious culprit in the Stone's decline. He was once the musical soul, the muse, the engine, and the engineer. At times of late he seems content to be a passenger. On stage his physical condition will vary wildly - one night there are flashes of the greatest rock and roll rhythm guitarist ever, other nights he will mostly noodle and rip out a few chords here and there...and pose a lot...he will have embarrassing lapses and his playing some nights is simply humiliatingly amateurish.

Mick's decline is more evident in his judgment...his insistence in embalming the Stones into a Globe-Trotting-Greatest-Hits-Juke-Box-version of a once intriguingly unpredictable and supple band and presenting a lowest-common-denominator show for the hundreds of thousands of fans and tourists...his insistence on replicated, repetitive spectacle over the once organic (and at time shambolic) flow of a supremely instinctual ensemble has robbed the Stones of much of their power to surprise. His stage presence is still nothing short of staggering, though...and his command of the stage dominates all aspects of the show.

His live singing often degenerates into a distractingly rote, nasal-y and thin shadow of his glory years...some of this is down to the natural aging process - in order to be able to continue on 18 month Global Tours he has to save the instrument and husband his strength. Yet when Jagger wants to...when the moment moves him...he still can kill a song dead. (Want proof? The execrable Streets of Love was transformed by Jagger into a highlight in concert by his committed and beautiful readings...he was engaged...he was trying...he single-handedly turned a clunker into a gem...that's a singer...)

And this leads to the reason why - to the long-time fan - the Stones seem to have hit a wall...the biggest reason, aside from the obvious physical decline in Keith, is that the Stones no longer play to their strengths. Their (Jagger's?) insistence on playing basically the same set they played three and a half decades ago needlessly exposes their weaknesses and puts them into a nostalgia-act straitjacket. The set they insist on presenting ad-infinitum not only willfully trivializes their more current output and robs them and their music of any relevance, but it betrays their age and musical shortcomings for the world to see...and reduces the band to mediocrity through sheer boredom and miscalculation.

A perfect example of this is Sympathy for the Devil - featured on Shine A Light and a centerpiece on all post-1989 tours. There is no legitimate reason anymore for this song to still be in the set - Mick sings it as caricature and Keith exposes himself to ridicule with his nightly discombobulation of a once-stunning and set-defining guitar solo...now degenerated into self-indulgent posing and mangled, cringe-inducing cacophony. What was once a generational touchstone has become painful parody. It's Only Rock and Roll - once (in 1975-76) a riproarin' firecracker - has all the bite of a rubber chicken. The Stones simply are not capable of pulling off these (and many others like All Down the Line, Sway, YCAGWYW) songs anymore. And they should not even try.

Why not play to their current strengths and artistic integrity instead? If the Stones concentrated more on material they are suited to play at this stage of their career - material that is excellent and reflects their current output - they would be a far better band. Songs like Out of Control, Laugh, I nearly Died, Saint of Me, Dangerous Beauty, Love is Strong, Low Down, Too Tight, Terrifying, Almost Hear You Sigh, Rain Fall Down, and Back Of My Hand could be interspersed with Midnight Rambler and Street Fighting Man and When the Whip comes down as well as some covers like Imagination and 'Aint Too Proud To Beg and Little Red Rooster to make a sparkling set - it would inspire and stimulate the band to reach for challenging musical spaces, recapture their mastery of the Blues, and simultaneously give relevance to their late-career work. I've noticed how energized Jagger is when he sings newer (and non-warhorse) material like Saint of Me, Out of Control, and Streets of Love. He is a completely different singer than the going-through-the-motions marionette talk-singing Brown Sugar or Miss You for the 148,996th time. (The crowd is energized too...no one walks out because the Stones are playing Out of Control instead of YCAGWYW...no one.) I've also seen Jagger detonate songs like That's How Strong My Love Is...literally smash them with brilliance.

Keith's deterioration as a guitarist is lamentable, but if the Stones were to pare down their set to songs they are suited to play at this age and stage of their careers, if they would honor more of their late-career material, and if they would leave the Stadiums for less gargantuan arenas (they can make a 15,000 seat arena seem intimate - I have witnessed this) not only would they be a happier, more vital and engaged band, but their fans would be thrilled to see them functioning at this level again. Most importantly, they would discard some of the crass cloak of corporate avarice that they have wrapped around themselves the last 2 decades and regain their relevance as artists.

Apologies for the length of my rant...and thanks for a superb thread.