I thought on previous tours that the Stones varied the set list much more than they have so far on this tour. What do you guys think?

It will change: MSG show in 13th September will have surprises for sure!

'Cause you're going to that gig, aren't you, marquess??


[There'll be no wedding today...]

lotta theories floating around about this. consult your local theorist.

because they are 62 years old

because the moon is not blue

my question is: when did people start expecting the artists to vary the set lists?
in the past people treated a concert like a theatrical production: if you went to more than one show on a given tour, you expected it to be real similar each time, and just dug it so much you wanted to go again. nowadays large sectors of the public seem to think it's like a TV series: if it's not different every time, something's wrong. i wonder what caused the change in expectations.



"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith

well the Stones started the "rotational" songs business in '89....so we've come to expect at least that much "movement" in the set ever since. So far at least - they are taking us back to the '81 era when setlists were more or less static.

Some artists still do static sets - some vary it dramatically. I think the issue on this tour is that the Stones themselves changed everyone's expectations starting in '89 and that's why the confusion today.

Do you paint your car a new color every day? I think they keep it like that because it is working. And because they play new cities every time. More than 99% of the crowd see only one show. Why make it better for 1% and worse for 99% ???

Bjornulf

89, really? i had the impression that the set list was pretty stable in 89 as well - but then, maybe that's because what i experienced of 89 was actually 90. :E
what was "rotational" in 89?


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith

I think what makes me and others disappointed in the same set lists is because last tour they changed it up so much and we got to hear them do so many different songs. And the band commented on how much they liked doing this and how it kept them fresh. So maybe we were hoping they'd continue this. Especially since they have so many great and hit songs that they never do. You can also add that they have been playing songs like You Got Me Rocking every night for years and people are not very fond of it in the first place. A few in my section in Hartford moaned when they broke into this number. Mick also said they would be doing some songs they had never done before or some they have not done in a long time. She's So Cold is really the only one that fits that besides the covers.

On a personal level, many of the bands I have liked over the years have always mixed up their sets. Allmans, Grateful Dead, Black Crows, Phish and this made them much more interesting every night.

Thanks for the joke Bruno :-((((

but i will be in Jan 20th 2006... if there´s a show...

But i´m sure there will be, like in 2003, with the ppv in the cable channel!!!

cheers!

bv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do you paint your car a new color every day? I
> think they keep it like that because it is
> working. And because they play new cities every
> time. More than 99% of the crowd see only one
> show. Why make it better for 1% and worse for 99%
> ???
>
> Bjornulf

That's one of the theories, BV. I don't happen to subscribe to it, though.

Mick hinted at some changes for the arena shows in the interview today posted on the official website...

Also, some songs seem boring when you just see their titles on a set-list posting...but they sure don't sound boring live!

good point Openg


Ssoul - the idea of rotational songs crept into the set in '89 - here's a list of songs and # of times played that were not in static portion of the nightly setlist (info comes from Henrik Mulder's excellent site):

song title
number of times played

Shattered
1

Salt of the earth
3

Blinded by love
3

I just wanna make love to you
4

Factory girl
9

Terrifying
19

One hit (to the body)
21

Dead flowers
29

Play with fire
33

Little red rooster
38

Almost hear you sigh
44

Street fighting man
45

Angie
45

Before they make me run
49

Undercover of the night
59

Can't be seen
63

Bitch
78

Once a tour starts like this with a very predictable setlist so far there's little chance that they return to the Licks-like variety. Setlist-wise, the Bigger bang tour is a return to the roots - tours with nearly the same setlists every night and only the occasional surprise song like in the 60's, 70's and 80's. They may prove me wrong, but I honestly believe the Stones will not change this scheme during the current tour. As long as they're successful, they don't need to change things. Don't take it for granted that if you go and see two shows in a row that the second show will be much different that the first one (see Boston, two shows in even the same city saw just one song changed).

Diehards have to decide themselves - considering the ticket prices - if they wanna go to, let's say ten or twenty shows to see as much different songs as possible and hope to catch the occasional surprise song considering the this time very high risk of ending up disappointed by more or less static setlists. It's a lottery this time, folks!

I respect Bjornulf's attitude and how he defends the band, but at the same time I believe that deep in his heart he also prefers some more variety, some genuine surprises - instead of having to review every show like "great version of Jumping Jack Flash tonight"..."Jumping Jack Flash left me breathless tonight"..."Jumping Jack Flash was so incredibly tight tonight, one of the best versions I ever heard", "I believed they could not top last night's JJF, but tonight's JJF was even better, incredible, wonder how tomorrow night's JJF will be"... and so on.






Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-08-31 23:26 by retired_dog.

i havn't got a clue,, but they should do 3 or 4 different songs a show,,that way every1 is happy

I agree with Hound Dog and this color of car stuff and 1% of the crowd cares is not true. I think Stones should have more respect from their fans. Take tonigth, in Detroit that where the add for Lexmark "Complicated" started. Someone was willing to pay big bucks for this song and mosty people regognices it. Would the Stones think that? No they believe everyone is there for TD, MY etc. I think these boards should get their attention and I think Bjornulf should shake them up a little? Or is he afraid to?

It really does suck for how well they are playing that the only complaint is the set lists. I know people who went to both Boston shows and were very disappointed and vowed never to see them in a stadium again.

I'll betcha tonight's version of JJF is the best ever. The best that ever will be (until the next show, of course).

retired_dog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > I respect Bjornulf's attitude and how he defends
> the band, but at the same time I believe that deep
> in his heart he also prefers some more variety,
> some genuine surprises

I'm sure that's the case -- if he had his way they'd play what HE wanted -- but I agree with him that the average person in the stands hasn't been to 10 shows on the tour and it's all new to them. Funny thing is, ask 100 people, diehard or casual fan, to make up their dream set list, you'll get 100 different answers. They're playing it safe and playing to the masses, and it maskes sense.

intv7 - true, they ARE playing it safe....but they lose respect from many of us when they do that. Safe means easy. You can't tell me the Stones are stretching themselves with this setlist...I doubt that anyone's losing any sleep over whether they can get thru another version of YGMR. While I didn't think CYHMK was necessarily played brilliantly last tour, I respected the hell out of the band for having the balls to give it a go. That's what I'm talkin' about....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-08-31 23:52 by T&A.

-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-12-22 04:50 by cirrhosis.

YGMR must be one of the most hated songs among the hardcore fans on these message boards. Talk about playing a song to death.

Because they would have to re-program all the lights and effects. That could cost Mick an extra $40.00

thanks for the 89 statistics, T&A. yeah, now i remember some people bitching because they didn't hear Angie on Steel Wheels and others bitching because they heard it twice.

>> But the disappointment really stems from the internet. ... When all you can do is read song titles on a screen, it's a lot more exciting to see them vary from night to night. <<
great point, Cirrhosis - thanks, that's the most sensible explanation i've heard for the chronic "setlist disappointment" one sees so much of these days.




"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-09-01 00:10 by with sssoul.

Even in recent tours there was grumbling, but it's more deserved now. I think 99% would actually love to hear other songs to rotate with Beast of Burden and You Can't Always Get What You Want. You Got Me Rocking should be way gone by now. The Stones are underestimating the audience reaction. What happened to Love In Vain, Factory Girl, No Expectaions, Waiting on A friend, Stray Cat Blues, Dead Flowers. Whether it's an arena or a stadium their catalog is too rich, too great and too appreciated for me to see any downside to mixing up the set list. Plus they would gain new appreciaton from those who haven't yet heard these! The first time I saw them at Shea they did Dead Flowers and I was thrilled. Ruby Tuesday and All Down the Line were improvements, but there is still room for more. And many people now are avoiding the stadiums all together for lack of variety. Keeping the classic war horses is one thing, but the other songs need to change.

Bands that tour a lot play different sets every night. Bands that don't, don't. It's pretty simple.
That was one of the attractions the Grateful Dead had. Songs out of nowhere. Still I wouldn't give the Stones a hard time. Any song is better than no songs at all, and that's where the Dead are now.

crapshooter:

agreed. using Dylan's approach as an analogue - Dylan rotates probably about 60 songs on a regular basis. He's not really stretching himself a whole lot. And even with this appraoch his hardcore fans (I'm one) are mildly disappointed that he doesn't dig even deeper.

the Stones have the same opportunity as Bob to vary it up without even breaking a sweat and still please the masses. If they think 90% of the audience can't see past 15 "must play" songs they have a real lack of respect for their fans. I actually don't theorize that's the problem. I theorize that they are too damned lazy....there I've identified the "elephant in the room" and I feel better for it.

I think the setlist will change once the new album is out. According to Ronnie on the BBC radio documentary, they have rehearsed twelve songs from ABB. They won't play them until the album is actuallty in the shops. Expect to hear new songs like Rain Fall Down at MSG!