Hi Everybody

first of all Happy 2008, even if a bit late ...
I don't know whether this sbj has been already discussed or not in some form (probably yes). The premise is simple: all of us are waiting again for a new album and a further tour of the band and, at the same time, we have a clear picture of the style, pro and contra of the "classic" Stones tour as learned in the ABB tour years and the previous two world tours.
Based on the above, I tried to summarize ten possible suggestions - not in order of priority - for a next (2009 ??? ) tour, even if we could certainly collect some hundred:

1) Reduce ticket prices, increase attendance
2) Increase the mix of new album tracks vs warhorses
3) Include a 30% of completely new venues/cities vs the "classic" Stones gig locations
4) Having Mick telling the crowd some short anectode-detail about song story, recording, or Stones career inbetween song and song
5) Modify/integrate/change the consolidated group supporting the band (Darryl,Chuck and Bobby excluded as "untouchables", but this is just my point of view)
6) Modify warm up groups/artist selection criteria and available time including more high profile names, performing for a longer time (not so likely in my opinion ...)
7) Improve/increase guest star policy of invitation during the gig for jamming or duetting with Mick (if singers)
8) Completely re-design stage layout to permit a larger band-crowd contact
9) Allow the ticket holders to select a song out of three, for example pre-voting the preference through web pools
10) Having more girls as vocalist together with Lisa .... (not to be considered a variation of suggestion no. 5 ....)

Would you like to give some priority to the above points and/or add the 11t?

Keef Rider Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Everybody
>
> first of all Happy 2008, even if a bit late ...
> I don't know whether this sbj has been already
> discussed or not in some form (probably yes). The
> premise is simple: all of us are waiting again for
> a new album and a further tour of the band and, at
> the same time, we have a clear picture of the
> style, pro and contra of the "classic" Stones tour
> as learned in the ABB tour years and the previous
> two world tours.
> Based on the above, I tried to summarize ten
> possible suggestions - not in order of priority -
> for a next (2009 ??? ) tour, even if we could
> certainly collect some hundred:
>
> 1) Reduce ticket prices, increase attendance

Agree with the first part, but not the second. Stadium shows have been done to death. Time to downscale and concentrate on the music, with less obsession with profit margins. They dont need to outgross everyone else to justify the existence of a tour.

> 2) Increase the mix of new album tracks vs
> warhorses

yep..and old album tracks v warhorses too!



> 3) Include a 30% of completely new venues/cities vs the "classic" Stones gig locations


As long as Belfast is in it, I'd say yes.LOL..seriously, though, there cant be that many cities they havent played in by now...and it makes things easier logistically and for the audiences to have a large % of the shows in large cities.

> 4) Having Mick telling the crowd some short
> anectode-detail about song story, recording, or
> Stones career inbetween song and song

Nah. They have enough excuses to reduce the number of songs already. Theyre only going to be onstage for a certain length of time and if he's going to spend 15 minutes of the show prattling on about stuff like that, thats' 2-3 songs wasted.

> 5) Modify/integrate/change the consolidated group
> supporting the band (Darryl,Chuck and Bobby
> excluded as "untouchables", but this is just my
> point of view)

Reasonable point, but unlikely to happen....Bernard & Blondie have key roles in 'shadowing' Mick & Keith and that seems to be needed unfortunately and isnt something that just anyone can pick up overnight. The Stones know their limits and what extras they need better than any of us.

> 6) Modify warm up groups/artist selection criteria
> and available time including more high profile
> names, performing for a longer time (not so likely
> in my opinion ...)

I think the Stones do a good job in having relatively big names open for them down the years. Many of them headliners in their own right.

> 7) Improve/increase guest star policy of
> invitation during the gig for jamming or duetting
> with Mick (if singers)

Not that easy, scheduling wise, to attract someone to play with them for a stretch of shows just to sing or play on one song....unless its in a major city like LA, new York, London etc. The Stones dont seem to be a band open for 'jamming' it would seem. Not in large venues anyway.

> 8) Completely re-design stage layout to permit a
> larger band-crowd contact

Each tour will have a new design anyway. The onstage thing sounded good in theory but I'm not sure the band were comfortable with it, and as the tour progressed it came across as an opportunity for another overpriced scamfest by Cohl and co.


> 9) Allow the ticket holders to select a song out
> of three, for example pre-voting the preference
> through web pools

They did that before with the cybervote ('97-98) and ended up rigging it to suit themselves. Waste of time. Dont agree with the public 'voting' for setlists, because as far as the Stones are concerned, it appears theyre currently tailoring the show to suit the 'masses' already. Most people are going to vote for 'Satisfaction' etc. Personally, I think it would be much more preferable if they simply got to play what THEY wanted. After 45 years, theyve earned that right. They've kowtowed to a certain element of the public for long enough by now.


> 10) Having more girls as vocalist together with
> Lisa .... (not to be considered a variation of
> suggestion no. 5 ....)

Dont know. Seems like a change just for the sake of it. Lisa is fine as it is and its not like they need these backing vocalists for too many songs to justify having any more of them...theres enough extra musicians onstage as it is without more cluttering it up.


Interesting suggestions, though!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-01-09 00:28 by Gazza.

> 10) Having more girls as vocalist together with
> Lisa .... (not to be considered a variation of
> suggestion no. 5 ....)

I suggest Amy on this one

__________________________

More theater shows
Showcase for Lisa
No Expectations as encore
Tone down the staging
Keep having fun

Come back to New Orleans Louisiana, they missed us the last few tours.
Did not come on 1997 BTB Tour
No licks Tour in New Orleans
No Bigger Bang Tour either.

No Stones in New Orleans since 1994. I think it is time for them to
visit us before they retire.

drummer_dude

scale down the back up band and play smaller venues, and also my usual request, play some never before played numbers, the later has been done lately but i want more !!!!!!!

drummer_dude Wrote:

> Come back to New Orleans Louisiana

Yeah boys, come on back down here!

A great arena within walking distance of the
French Quarter and several 5-star hotels to choose from.
And, oh yeah, seafood that will make you slap your mama!

Play at my house

can i go, lol

Any show, anywhere, anytime, even an all warhorses set...just show us signs of life please!!

:-)

Play a totally different set, and stick to it.

11) Arena tour using the same concept as the Superbowl stage!

That would be Awesome.

Everyone would be happy with that - Cohl could charge absolute top dollar for the middle of the tongue - much better that the bigger bang concept.

Shame it won't happen - Jagger doesn't like playing a whole set 'in the round'

Personally, I think this would be an absolute killer tour, best in years. bums me out to think that fantastic stage is probably getting dusty in some warehouse somewhere.

Oh, well, I can always pray to the gods of rock 'n' roll!

Monkeytonkman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 11) Arena tour using the same concept as the
> Superbowl stage!
>
> That would be Awesome.
>
> Everyone would be happy with that

Personally, I wouldnt. I'd rather see the band in front of me. Half the audience would only be seeing their backs most of the time, and if the b-stage is anything to go by, they'd probably struggle to get the sound right.

If youre in the first few rows on the floor of a stadium or arena and the band are 60 yards away playing on the b-stage, its not really a lot of fun and you feel quite disconnected from the show for 15-20 minutes. If thats what it was going to be like for an entire show, you'd have to pay me to go and see it.

. downsize! they should stay in the same city for 1 or 2 weeks and play 3 or 4 smaller shows (1 theatre 3 arenas (up to 10'000).
like this they would have less travel stress and the shows get mor intimate.

. do more bluesy and/or easy stuff like back off your, you got the silver hand or through and through.
i think nowadays they sound best on those tracks. somehow suits their appearance and stile better.

. get the arangements a bit "tighter" (dont know a better word in english)
on the recent tour some songs were almost falling apart sometimes.

. let the opening acts sound good (thats a topic that also ennoys me with other bands)

. rehearse the rarely played songs better! play more rarely performed songs!

Put some theatre seats right in front of Charlie's drum kit (facing outward) for a real "on-stage" experience. Draw 5-10 fans at random for these seats.

Maybe another internet vote (not rigged this time) for 4 or 5 of the songs.

Let some warhorses rest and drag out a few hits that are rarely/never played (Thumb, Time Is On My Side, 19th, Rainbow, etc.).

More spontaneous.

Mick and Keith sharing a mic.

"No Anchovies, Please"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-01-09 16:23 by Elmo Lewis.

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Personally, I think it would be much more
> preferable if they simply got to play what THEY
> wanted. After 45 years, theyve earned that right.
> They've kowtowed to a certain element of the
> public for long enough by now.

I get goosebumps just to think of this as a possibility.

I always had this fantasy of Mick standing on the stage chatting away with the audience a bit after the 5th or 6th song and then suddenly saying: "Ok, we're gonna do one for you now, this one's called...err... Highway Child!"

Don't mean to turn this into a setlist wish thread, would just love to see the faces in the crowd then... And the reactions on this board.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-01-09 16:41 by therollingmanu.

A 'hard-rockin'Rolling Stones (like 1978/1981):

Jagger/Keef/Wood/Watts

Keyboards: McLagan
Saxophone: Keyes
Piano: some nasty boogie-woogie pianoplayer
Bass: a new guy

hardrock guitar, no bullshit with tricks and backgroundsingers. Core of the
Setlist: 1964 chess chicago / 1968-1972 / 1977-79 Paris / new album (2008?)

Hallelujah

Decrease the number of warhorses and increase the number b-sides for a change. The catalog is vast Mick!

There are endless possibilities with the catelog of songs they have. I think they are hurting themselves by sticking with so many of the same warhorses over the years. The reaction that Neil got for playing some of lesser known songs was great when I saw him. I even talked to a few people who are Stones fans that said they'd never see them again cause its the same show all the time...

So I'd say a nice fresh set list, without the parade of the same 8 songs at the end of every show. Love to see them play smaller venues, stadiums have horrible sound and the whole show seems to focus too much on the lighting and stage.

I'd also try to trim down the backing musicians. If they can cut them back, play a stripped down show and create a fresh set list than I'd have no problem them playing the same songs every night for a tour. Also love to hear them do at least one blues song per show, not sure why this didn't happen last tour, also wouldn't mind a few acoustic numbers.

I think alot of lifelong fans we wish for a different mix not the same stuff.

Well guys, I'm back, thanks a lot, I try to re-adjust the decalog of suggestions according to your points:


1) Reduce ticket prices in order to grant increased attendance for big venues
2) Balance the mix of new album tracks, warhorses and rare Stones bluesy classic, let say 33%-33% and 33%
3) Balance a 30% of completely new venues/cities,30% small (and expensive) theater gigs and the rest of "classic" Stones gig locations
4) Having Mick telling the crowd some short anectode-detail about song story, recording, or Stones career inbetween song and song granting the total number of 19 or 20 songs in total in any case (short pause before B-stage?..)
5) Modify/integrate/change the consolidated group supporting the band (Darryl,Chuck and Bobby excluded as "untouchables", but this is just my point of view): not needed
6) Modify warm up groups/artist selection criteria and available time including more high profile names, performing for a longer time (not so likely in my opinion ...): actual policy it's fine
7) Improve/increase guest star policy of invitation during the gig for jamming or duetting with Mick (if singers) : too difficult
8) Completely re-design stage layout to permit a larger band-crowd contact: what about studing a big insular stage (tongue-shaped, why not?...)
9) Allow the ticket holders to select a song out of five, pre-voting the preference through web pools
10) Lisa and Lisa only ... forever

Instead of old suggestions no. 5 and 6 I put two new:

- A small symbolic present for all ticket buyers, ridiculous value for the organization, but with a big symbolic importance for all fans: a tongue guitar pick with venue name and date (not everybody is so lucky to receive a Keef's one in FOS ...)

- Meet & Greet competition for all concerts managed through RS official web site allowing the winners to shake hands to the band before each gig (10 people?)

11) Reserved seating for me and my guests close to the stage at performances;

12) $10,000,000 from tour proceeds set aside for me, to be deposited in a Swiss bank account;

13) Replace "warhorses" with lesser-known songs, like "Around and Around."

14) Someone else to design the iorr t-shirt.

change the setlists.

it can be done.

they played around 50 different songs for the european tour last year, but around 16 of these were the same every night.

drop average songs that are now warhorses like its only rock and roll, start me up, you got me rocking, tumbling dice, wanna hold you etc and replace accordingly with song from same album.

play some oldies on the b-stage with short versions instead of songs that last 7 or 8 mins. better to play more songs.

> Gazza Wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> > Personally, I think it would be much more
> > preferable if they simply got to play what THEY
> > wanted. After 45 years, theyve earned that
> right.


At first I found that statement as the most wise thing I read for a long time. A new paradigm, a new eden or eldorado. But, it took me a few seconds to realize that it is in fact a terrific sentence. Haven't they done that for 45 years.
I would add that, even if it is not the mood, I think This Band is made for Stadium Shows. That is where they are at their best. The Top Act of Rock History should not give up the Stadiums to nonsense bands as they seem to multiply these days. It should really sadden everyone here to know that such stupidity as Mika or TokioHotel fill up stadiums in France within one or two hours. But maybe I am a dreamer.

phd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Gazza Wrote:
> >
> ------------------------------------------------
> >
> > > Personally, I think it would be much more
> > > preferable if they simply got to play what
> THEY
> > > wanted. After 45 years, theyve earned that
> > right.
>
>
> At first I found that statement as the most wise
> thing I read for a long time. A new paradigm, a
> new eden or eldorado. But, it took me a few
> seconds to realize that it is in fact a terrific
> sentence. Haven't they done that for 45 years.

They used to to some degree. Nowadays theyre a jukebox for the section of the audience who dont know many of their songs but because theyve paid so much for their ticket feel like they should dictate what they hear. There are numerous interviews with Mick over the last few years where he comments on feeling 'obliged' to play certain songs

> I would add that, even if it is not the mood, I
> think This Band is made for Stadium Shows. That is
> where they are at their best.

Have you ever seen them in a theatre? The Stones may be the best stadium act around but rock 'n' roll isnt designed to be played in 70,000 seat stadiums where almost all of the crowd can only see the band via a video screen. This is a musical experience first and foremost - not a fireworks and pyrotechnics exhibition.

The Top Act of Rock
> History should not give up the Stadiums to
> nonsense bands as they seem to multiply these
> days. It should really sadden everyone here to
> know that such stupidity as Mika or TokioHotel
> fill up stadiums in France within one or two
> hours. But maybe I am a dreamer.


I dont know those bands, but just because one act plays then it doesnt diminish the worth of another act because they choose not to. What have the Stones left to prove by playing stadium shows over and over again? Theyve done it to death now for 30 years. The music will always take a poor second place to the spectacle of the event. Additionally, by playing them so often and continuing to charge larger ticket prices for the privilege of watching them do so, the law of diminishing returns dictates that after a while they wont be able to fill them as easily after a while. We've already seen the first signs of that.

Go way back into the catalog for once. Do it for the long time fans a favorite.

How about a Chuck Berry number or two...or, even a medley of Berry tunes...from the B-stage maybe...I hope they don't wait for him to die (ala the Ray Charles/Nightime tribute on the last tour) to pay tribute...again.
BTW..What Berry tunes that they havn't covered would you like to see the boys tackle? How about "Nadine"...

"Mustang Ford".

They actually did 'Nadine' live back in '63, but theres no circulating recording of it, so I guess it would be 'new' to all intents and purposes.

I think the recent absence of Chuck covers has as much to do with a disagreement over excessive demands for performance royalties as much as anything else.

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Mustang Ford".
>
> They actually did 'Nadine' live back in '63, but
> theres no circulating recording of it, so I guess
> it would be 'new' to all intents and purposes.
>
> I think the recent absence of Chuck covers has as
> much to do with a disagreement over excessive
> demands for performance royalties as much as
> anything else.

Like these guys don't have the loot $$$. Give me a break.