Hi All.

I’ve been a visitor to this website for some time and having now registered am making my first posting.

As a long-standing Stones fan I have found the site not only an informed, interesting and useful tool but also a measure of the very high regard and fondness you all have for the band – it’s truly amazing and a wonderful tribute to a unique band that has given us all so much pleasure over the years.

Anyway, moving on, I’d like to make a few comments. I do not intend to deal with any one issue but rather a number of issues that have been raised in various threads.

Firstly, and on the subject of Keith (no I’m not a ‘Keith basher’) I’d just like to say that I think he’s a fine guitarist, one who has contributed immensely to popular music and will no doubt continue to do so for as long as he is able. Keith’s contribution is most evident in the chords and riffs that have shaped the Stones’ music, and in this respect his contribution and influence is felt at a broad level. But I’ve always thought of Keith as a far more nuanced player/musician – something the casual fan will probably not appreciate Consider - his guitar playing and tone on The Nearness of You, or I’m Ready (see youtube.com), and his harmony vocals on Worried about You – is there another ‘rock star’ that is similarly informed by blues, soul and country music and a desire to go beyond the usual boundaries of the rock genre? I don’t think so.

But, clearly, he’s playing less on stage these days. I can’t say why this is – perhaps it’s arthritis – but I’ve noticed that at the very least there appears to be less focus on the guitars in the live mix these days. Unlike many of you, I’ve seen the Stones on only twelve occasions, but on the ABB tour last year was surprised that for a band of such magnitude, and whose style is pretty much defined by guitars, that they have increasingly opted for a bigger, fuller sound in which keyboards, brass and backing vocals seem to play too significant a role. And why the need for Blondie Chaplin on guitar? I have to say that, in my opinion, this is an error in judgement on the part of the band. Perhaps they feel that the size of the stage show and its intended ‘wide appeal’ also demands a sound that is similarly broad in its appeal, but I think this has dissipated the essence of their sound. Moreover, this ‘taming’ of the band’s sound is, I think, inevitably tied up with the element of ‘show biz’ that informs much of the live show. I know this was probably always there to a degree, but the ‘schmaltz’ factor has become a little too evident for my liking. Come on Stones fans, we may love them but they’re not above criticism – if we romanticise them too much we will end up disappointed. I first saw them in June 1982 and despite Mick’s attire and the pink stage set they sounded like a guitar band with keyboards and brass used not to define the sound but to compliment it. Having said that, Midnight Rambler at Twickenham last year was genuinely aggressive and dirty – though I’m afraid this was an exception.

Perhaps I’m getting old but last year’s show was an eye opener. Surrounded by people on mobile fans, talking, going to the bar – it’s the Stones up there – have theses people missed the point? I found that extraneous activities sadly detracted from the experience for me. May be it was always like this – I don’t know – but I can’t handle it any more. And yes, there are arguments on both sides of the ticket price argument, but, as others have said, this, and questions marks about the sound (as opposed to the playing and singing) are pretty compelling if you’re paying £150. Maybe it’s not so much compared to other forms of entertainment (though I’m not sure one can really put a monetary value on entertainment – especially when it’s the Stones) but there’s no denying it – most fans will have to dig deep.

As age inevitably catches up with the Stones a return to a more immediate and vital approach would, I think, suit them. After all, Keith has always said he wants to take rock and roll beyond mere youth and Mick certainly has the physical capabilities to do so. Consider Let Me Down Slow on ABB – they can do it and we would welcome it – even if the casual fans didn’t understand. For a band that has never been afraid to respond to new musical styles they owe it to themselves too.

But perhaps the biggest factor in all this is that which affects the Stones themselves – How do you stop being The Rolling Stones? That I can understand – they can’t really just stop, but I do think, as others have said, that they should not run the risk of damaging their legacy. £150 is too much for me this year, and though I could afford it, on balance I would be wise to use the money elsewhere. This saddens me because in a way because I can’t let go either.

Anyway, just though I’d add my thoughts.

sweet little rock n roller.

superb post.

welcome aboard!

*and i'm just like that bird - singing just for you*

Poor old Blondie Chaplin. He plays acoustic guitar here and there (sometimes he plays an additional electric), shakes his tambourine, sings some background vocals and recently he is the MAIN OFFENDER!

It can be a superb post, but nothing new. Ticket prices, Blondie Chaplin, lack of guitar sound in the mix, Keef's disability, etc.
Maybe you think that your thoughts would be strong facts if you write many pages?

Welcome, roller - good points.

"No Anchovies, Please"

The Stones are these days more a big corporation than a band. People who attend the concerts are going to see the living legends and to hear the well known classics. In order To do world tours in big stadiums the Stones must play the warhorses. Its not so bad because are unique and great songs but its a bit sad for those fans who go to the concert for the music.

Im 32 years old and I wasnt born when the Stones were on their prime or during the cultural revolution of the sixties. I dont have any attach to that. But I think a substancil percentage of the fans do have that cultural attach and they also go to see the Stones because they represente their youth.

But many of those fans want to hear the wahorses and theyoungest fans also want to hear SMU satisfaction and so on. As I said above those songs are very good but, and this for me is very important, they are catchy songs. They fit the stadiums and get imeadiate response from the audience.

We have to attend to the cultural patterns of those days. There are very good music today but also much crap. In general, the music level of the 60 and 70 is higher than today. People went to hear the music of the stones, not to see the legends.

The success of the Stones is mainly because of the unique quality and immortality of their songs, but many gems wouldn`t get a good response of the audience because the hears of the audience are not trained to hear good music. Just for the catchy warhorses.

A reasonable point keefed, but I simply felt like joining in. There's a lot to say on the subject - not just making a point stick - and I say it because it does matter to me. Not intended as negative in any way - all said before in various ways but this is my take on it.

Blondie Chaplin: come on why is he playing the significant role that others more knowledgeable than myself have also noted? I sometimes think the fault lies with a society that no longer discriminates where popular culture is concerned - we should demand more of such a fine band.

Great post....thanks...

JR

It´s come to light over the past few days here that there are a few of us that first saw RS in 1982. Rock n roller, where was it? I was at Twickenham last year also. Great show.

Hi jagger50.

Wembley Stadium, 25 June 1982 (25 years ago!). Have great memories of it. Ticket £10.50 - don't remember complaining about the cost then! They messed up the start of Beast of Burden in a big way I remember!

Preferred the unadourned sound then Have you seen Black Limo on youtube (Philadelphia '81)? Raw and real - and Mick is both hilarious and amazing.

Plenty of talk about Taylor vs. Woood etc, but has anyone ever commented on the absence of Bill Wyman? What changes to the sound did this bring - bass is key part of the sound. D Jones is great but lots more attack - Wyman characterised by 'space' in the bass sound. Any comments?

Great post, rock'n roller and welcome aboard.

Yes, I was at Wembley also. Kick myself for not seeing them on an earlier tour. My first real sense of them playing in my town, London, was in 1976. It was on at Earl´s Court. But I was only 15. It was all over the local radio stations. What I do have from those years are a few brilliant scrap books I made. I just can´t believe it´s all still going on.

It's always amazing how one can percibe things so differently. I've onle been to three concerts this leg of the tour and I've been treated to:

All Down the Line, She Was Hot, Waiting on a Friend, Can't You Hear me Knocking, Respectable, Rocks Off, You Got The Silver, Ain't too Proud to Beg, All Over Now, She's So Cold, Bitch, Monkey Man, Let It Bleed, Get Off of My Cloud, Bitch

And I've already missed;

Some Girls, Ruby Tuesday, Paint it Black, Sweet Virginia, Shattered, Heartbreaker among others.

I don't think anybody has ever done so many changes to the setlist on one tour as this before not the Stones not anybody.

It's not that hard to find reasons to complaint, but as my 20yo son says to me, Dad, you Stones fans are so lucky and been for a long time, what you have is unique and I don't think other generations will ever have what you have....So lets enjoy it while we still can.

BTW...Welcome rock'n roller

Rock'n'roller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi All.
>
> I’ve been a visitor to this website for some time
> and having now registered am making my first
> posting.

Welcome aboard - nice post too.

> I’ve seen the Stones on only twelve
> occasions, but on the ABB tour last year was
> surprised that for a band of such magnitude, and
> whose style is pretty much defined by guitars,
> that they have increasingly opted for a bigger,
> fuller sound in which keyboards, brass and backing
> vocals seem to play too significant a role.

If anything, the sound of last years ABB tour was LESS big and produced than previous tours. The guitars were higher up in the mix than Licks and the brass and keyboards were mixed down a bit. That said, I can see you general point, althoughI don't personnally mind having backing musicians as long as it is tasteful and complementary.

> Having said that, Midnight Rambler
> at Twickenham last year was genuinely aggressive
> and dirty – though I’m afraid this was an
> exception.

I thought the whole show was excellent. And when I came back for the second show I couldn't believ it - that was even better! MR and sway were the highlights of the first show for me though. Along with SOL.

> Perhaps I’m getting old but last year’s show was
> an eye opener. Surrounded by people on mobile
> fans, talking, going to the bar – it’s the Stones
> up there – have theses people missed the point?

The reason for this is that the promotors have decided to go for all seated shows in the UK (and now in germany). This means that tickets get bought up by corporate events for people who only want to hear Satisfaction and then go home. The nice sectioned off seats mean that they can sit confortably and get up to go for a drink or toilet without much hassle. They also get to sit at the front without having to put up with those dedicated fan types who queue up for hours because they are truly dedicated to the band and the music. The people on mobile phones are probably calling their freinds and colleagues to say "Tara, I say, I'm at a Rolling Stones show.... No no they haven't played anything I know yet... What's that famous song... Oh yeh, Satisfaction, I like that one - you sure that's not the Kinks.... OK see you later sweetie"

If you go to an all standing show (such as throughout most of Europe or IOW Festival the other week) you will get a very different experience - I promise. It probably costs the same to get to mainland Europe as it does to get to another city in the UK now so maybe you should do it - quick, before the tour ends...

Hey there!
Welcome!
Good post!
Also , i dont like these ticket prices

wipeacdc@hotmail.com
never too old or young to rocknroll!!!!!!

leteyer:
No complaints about the set list – swings and roundabouts as they say. It’s the sound mix. Technology being what it is, this surprises me.

I quite understand the element of nostalgia, and your son’s comments are wonderful given his age, but nostalgia will let us all down in the end. If we are attending for purely nostalgic reasons then I think that’s a pity. And I think the Stones would probably say the same – as professionals they probably want to do more new material but might be constrained by backers and sponsors that demand a warm glow of nostalgia. I looked at the set list from the 1978 US tour – virtually the whole of Some Girls one after another!

stillife:
I know people want to hear the warhorse numbers, but the Stones have always mixed it up with other, lesser know things. Not a problem – room for both the committed and casual fan. Look at the reviews on this site for IOW – the comments about how a predominantly younger audience were wrong-footed by the less well-know material.

Jagger 50:
Sorry, it was 26 June 1982!

keefed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Poor old Blondie Chaplin. He plays acoustic guitar
> here and there (sometimes he plays an additional
> electric), shakes his tambourine, sings some
> background vocals and recently he is the MAIN
> OFFENDER!
>
> It can be a superb post, but nothing new. Ticket
> prices, Blondie Chaplin, lack of guitar sound in
> the mix, Keef's disability, etc.
> Maybe you think that your thoughts would be strong
> facts if you write many pages?

Does Blondie sing on Sail on Sailor...from the beach Boys?........yeah those points you mentioned..we talk a lot about these things on ''Tell''...i saw them many times...this year in nijmegen the second part of the show was punky..i really like it...and like it so i gotta disagree...still good post man. And yes it would be a good thing if they believed in their album...fact is they dont.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-27 17:33 by rooster.

sjs12 – I know what you mean about the seating – I’m aware what a difference this makes but can’t really travel all over the place these days – not even for the Stones.

But I was in the front row at Main Road in 1990 though. Unforgettable experience! Also in the thick of it for Keith’s solo tour at The Town and Country Club on his 49th birthday – also a great show. Saw Ronnie with Bo Diddley at Hammersmith too – 10pm start!

"But I was in the front row at Main Road in 1990 "

Me too. That's when you got the front row by turning up earlier than anybody else and not because you were a master of how to play Ticketmaster roulette ;^)

Hi Rock'n'roller...
Nice to read your post
I agree with a lot of the things you wrote about

It is hard to let go of some things