Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
71Tele
Mick & Keith "solo": The two of them with a couple of stools, acoustic guitars and harmonica, maybe a keyboard; doing blues cover favorites, reinterpreting some Rolling Stones songs, and maybe even a couple of new ones. Small venues, intimate, conversational vibe. Can you imagine how cool that would be? It would be the hottest ticket in town. Too bad they can't stand each other.

That would be cool, but if they're going to do that they might as well include Ronnie and Charlie and call it the Stones.

lol

Quote
TrulyMicks
I'm surpised at the amount of people here who would not go. Mick is one of the greatest, most prolific songwriters of all time, not to mention his showmanship and stage presence that no one can rival. This is a Stones fan site?

I would love to see him on stage, with or without the Stones.

so he's going to be writing songs on stage, and standing there? No thanks. He would need to be a powerful lead vocalist to carry the show, which he really isn't anymore, to me. I don't hold it against him, but that's how he sounds. Of course if it was in a tiny club I'd like to be there just to see him, but then it would be $$$ to compensate, and I'd draw the line.

I'd be there, if at all possible.
I'd prefer a number of blues songs in the set list.

What were the mick's solo tour in the past? Some gigs in Australia and Japan where getting fame is easy for him. Nothing in Europe and USA where he should be under bad critics. I would like to see ronnie on tour but he plays always in germany or vikings land. Why???

Quote
TrulyMicks
I'm surpised at the amount of people here who would not go. Mick is one of the greatest, most prolific songwriters of all time, not to mention his showmanship and stage presence that no one can rival. This is a Stones fan site?

By that yardstick, why isnt Charlie Watts filling stadiums?

Cant see why youre surprised - his solo work isnt a patch on his output with the Stones. And the musicians he chooses to play with mean nothing to most Stones fans.

The Rolling Stones are about much more than one person.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
24FPS
I think he's past the solo tour itch. Maybe he'd play with some other 'senior' superstars on his level.

I don't know, I think he craves the adultation too much to stay off the stage even after the Stones call it quits.

he hasnt exactly been keen to get anywhere near a stage when the Stones have been inactive, has he?

Right. If Mick felt like touring,we'd have a Stones tour.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TrulyMicks
I'm surpised at the amount of people here who would not go. Mick is one of the greatest, most prolific songwriters of all time, not to mention his showmanship and stage presence that no one can rival. This is a Stones fan site?

By that yardstick, why isnt Charlie Watts filling stadiums?

Cant see why youre surprised - his solo work isnt a patch on his output with the Stones. And the musicians he chooses to play with mean nothing to most Stones fans.

The Rolling Stones are about much more than one person.

Come on, Gazza, you are in minority here with your balanced view. For the majority on this board the Rolling Stones are about one person - Keith Richards. And this majority wants very much Keith's solo tour - never mind his voice(or luck of it) and ability/unability to play guitar. @#$%& Jagger and gimme Keith - it's an attitude.
I personally don't like Richards solo - I just think his singing is a joke, his lyrics are halfbaked and mostly one-dimensional and his stage charisma as a frontman is close to zero. Keith only is good when there is Jagger to his right

But I don't express my negativity toward his stuff on the Keith's threads: you like it so good for you. The question is why Keith's fans feel the need to post all the time what the crap Jagger is - the person, the artist, the musician etc. People who don't care about the Stones don't hate him with such a passion like so-called Stones fans
TrulyMicks - it isn't a Stones fan site, it's Keith Richards fan site, and everybody know this
Sorry for my English - I'm angry and don't have the patience to check up spelling errors

Where did I mention anything about Keith solo? And I didnt say I disliked Mick's solo work either!

The generalised point remains - It simply doesnt follow that because you like the Stones, you have to be a huge fan of their solo work too.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TrulyMicks
I'm surpised at the amount of people here who would not go. Mick is one of the greatest, most prolific songwriters of all time, not to mention his showmanship and stage presence that no one can rival. This is a Stones fan site?

By that yardstick, why isnt Charlie Watts filling stadiums?

Cant see why youre surprised - his solo work isnt a patch on his output with the Stones. And the musicians he chooses to play with mean nothing to most Stones fans.

The Rolling Stones are about much more than one person.

I'm surpised because this is a fan website! Given the chance, I would attend solo shows by all of hte Stones since I am such a fan. I can't believe how some dismiss Mick so quickly, to each his own.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
24FPS
I think he's past the solo tour itch. Maybe he'd play with some other 'senior' superstars on his level.

I don't know, I think he craves the adultation too much to stay off the stage even after the Stones call it quits.

he hasnt exactly been keen to get anywhere near a stage when the Stones have been inactive, has he?

I think he'd much rather tour with the Stones, and as long as that's still a possibility he's not going to tour solo. But if (when) it becomes obvious the Stones are absolutely never going to tour again I think he'd consider it. I think at that point Mick and most fans would come to the same conclusion: a Stones tour is far preferable to a Jagger solo tour, but a Jagger solo tour is far preferable to nothing.

And I actually think a Jagger solo tour could be good - his voice sounded great for the most part on the last Stones tour, he's still unmatched when it comes to energy and showmanship, and there's certainly no shortage of classic songs he could peform. And let's face it, with the right guitarists and the right band there's a chance those songs could sound a lot better than they did on the last Stones tour. They wouldn't have the same soul but they would be more technically proficient.

It simply doesnt follow that because you like the Stones, you have to be a huge fan of their solo work too.

You're right, of couse. I can't say I like Jagger's solo very much(except WS), honestly not my cup of tea.
But we're talking here about perfoming and I don't think there are many perfomers like Jagger. So I agree with TrulyMicks
"I'm surpised at the amount of people here who would not go. Mick is one of the greatest, most prolific songwriters of all time, not to mention his showmanship and stage presence that no one can rival. This is a Stones fan site?"

Quote
proudmary
It simply doesnt follow that because you like the Stones, you have to be a huge fan of their solo work too.

You're right, of couse. I can't say I like Jagger's solo very much(except WS), honestly not my cup of tea.
But we're talking here about perfoming and I don't think there are many perfomers like Jagger. So I agree with TrulyMicks
"I'm surpised at the amount of people here who would not go. Mick is one of the greatest, most prolific songwriters of all time, not to mention his showmanship and stage presence that no one can rival. This is a Stones fan site?"

Exactly. Except for Wandering Spirit, there's not much of Jagger's solo stuff I like. If he toured and only played solo stuff I wouldn't go. But I assume that if he tours solo he'll mostly be doing Stones songs, with a few solo tracks and a few blues numbers thrown in.

Quote
Rockman
...A Mick tour with Keef on geeeetar and Charlie on drums would be way cool ....

charlie could finally be mick's drummer and we could finally get over that thing....

Granted, his late 80's mini tour was pretty bad and we don't have much else to go on, but what about the one off show in NYC to promote Wandering Spirit. That was great!

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Rockman
...A Mick tour with Keef on geeeetar and Charlie on drums would be way cool ....

charlie could finally be mick's drummer and we could finally get over that thing....

Lol. Every once in a while you get off a really funny remark and I realize there's a reason we haven't hunted you down and strung you up yet.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-28 21:13 by ohnonotyouagain.

Quote
proudmary
It simply doesnt follow that because you like the Stones, you have to be a huge fan of their solo work too.

You're right, of couse. I can't say I like Jagger's solo very much(except WS), honestly not my cup of tea.
But we're talking here about perfoming and I don't think there are many perfomers like Jagger. So I agree with TrulyMicks
"I'm surpised at the amount of people here who would not go. Mick is one of the greatest, most prolific songwriters of all time, not to mention his showmanship and stage presence that no one can rival. This is a Stones fan site?"

Put it this way. If he played reasonably locally (say, within 100 miles, which is basically the distance from where I live to Dublin) and it wasnt overpriced, I'd go.

If you're throwing a flight and Stones-like ticket prices into the mix, I'd probably skip it.

Oddly enough, I'd prefer to see a solo show filled with his solo material than one with Stones songs. I dont mind his solo work at all, although I wouldnt be a huge fan. Mick doing Stones songs though does very little for me at all.

There are, however, a lot of acts right now I'd prefer to see ahead of a Mick Jagger solo gig. Or a solo gig by any of the band for that matter. I can understand why some would be enthusiastic, but after almost 50 Stones gigs, it's personally not a priority.

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
24FPS
I think he's past the solo tour itch. Maybe he'd play with some other 'senior' superstars on his level.

I don't know, I think he craves the adultation too much to stay off the stage even after the Stones call it quits.

he hasnt exactly been keen to get anywhere near a stage when the Stones have been inactive, has he?

I think he'd much rather tour with the Stones, and as long as that's still a possibility he's not going to tour solo. But if (when) it becomes obvious the Stones are absolutely never going to tour again I think he'd consider it. I think at that point Mick and most fans would come to the same conclusion: a Stones tour is far preferable to a Jagger solo tour, but a Jagger solo tour is far preferable to nothing.

And I actually think a Jagger solo tour could be good - his voice sounded great for the most part on the last Stones tour, he's still unmatched when it comes to energy and showmanship, and there's certainly no shortage of classic songs he could peform. And let's face it, with the right guitarists and the right band there's a chance those songs could sound a lot better than they did on the last Stones tour. They wouldn't have the same soul but they would be more technically proficient.

Well by the time the Stones do get done touring. IF they tour again. Jagger will be close to 70. Don't think their will be much call for a 70 year old Jagger solo tour.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-28 21:21 by sweetcharmedlife.

Quote
Tseverin
Granted, his late 80's mini tour was pretty bad and we don't have much else to go on, but what about the one off show in NYC to promote Wandering Spirit. That was great!

It was indeed.

still has the energy? Onstage, yes. Voice? Not really. See: Shine a Light.

keep it within my $45 upper price limit, and....hmmm...no, i'd still pass. much better value at there for even less than $45 a pop....

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
24FPS
I think he's past the solo tour itch. Maybe he'd play with some other 'senior' superstars on his level.

I don't know, I think he craves the adultation too much to stay off the stage even after the Stones call it quits.

he hasnt exactly been keen to get anywhere near a stage when the Stones have been inactive, has he?

I think he'd much rather tour with the Stones, and as long as that's still a possibility he's not going to tour solo. But if (when) it becomes obvious the Stones are absolutely never going to tour again I think he'd consider it. I think at that point Mick and most fans would come to the same conclusion: a Stones tour is far preferable to a Jagger solo tour, but a Jagger solo tour is far preferable to nothing.

And I actually think a Jagger solo tour could be good - his voice sounded great for the most part on the last Stones tour, he's still unmatched when it comes to energy and showmanship, and there's certainly no shortage of classic songs he could peform. And let's face it, with the right guitarists and the right band there's a chance those songs could sound a lot better than they did on the last Stones tour. They wouldn't have the same soul but they would be more technically proficient.

Well by the time the Stones do get done touring. IF they tour again. Jagger will be close to 70. Don't think their will be much call for a 70 year old Jagger solo tour.

If old blues guys can tour into their '70s and beyond I don't see why Jagger can't. And physically he's in a lot better shape than most others his age.

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
24FPS
I think he's past the solo tour itch. Maybe he'd play with some other 'senior' superstars on his level.

I don't know, I think he craves the adultation too much to stay off the stage even after the Stones call it quits.

he hasnt exactly been keen to get anywhere near a stage when the Stones have been inactive, has he?

I think he'd much rather tour with the Stones, and as long as that's still a possibility he's not going to tour solo. But if (when) it becomes obvious the Stones are absolutely never going to tour again I think he'd consider it. I think at that point Mick and most fans would come to the same conclusion: a Stones tour is far preferable to a Jagger solo tour, but a Jagger solo tour is far preferable to nothing.

And I actually think a Jagger solo tour could be good - his voice sounded great for the most part on the last Stones tour, he's still unmatched when it comes to energy and showmanship, and there's certainly no shortage of classic songs he could peform. And let's face it, with the right guitarists and the right band there's a chance those songs could sound a lot better than they did on the last Stones tour. They wouldn't have the same soul but they would be more technically proficient.

Well by the time the Stones do get done touring. IF they tour again. Jagger will be close to 70. Don't think their will be much call for a 70 year old Jagger solo tour.

If old blues guys can tour into their '70s and beyond I don't see why Jagger can't. And physically he's in a lot better shape than most others his age.

It's called desire...As in Mick has no desire to tour. With or without the Stones.

i believe that the stones have another round left in them. my suggestion (hope is more like it) is that they stick to smaller venues and softer shows. throw in the mid size theatre / amphitheatre - maybe an arena show from time to time such as MGM Grand in Vegas and of course Madison Sq. Garden. control ticket sales through fan clubs and such - cut out the middle man (ticketmaster!). scalping a floor seat the night of show is way of getting a ticket, but it would be really nice to go up on rs.com or some other fan club-related site, pay an entry fee, and buy tickets at a reasonable face value ticket ... if they toned down the large productions and get out of the stadiums, then there is really no reason for a $450 ticket. don't be a bunch of barbara streisands!

last, soften the show - i think for the sake of keith's fingers, stop playing 19, 20 songs fast, hard, and in 2 hours. take a set list that is 1/2 slow, 1/2 fast - more acoustics, more classics, and rareities, and give the audience a kickass, low-down, rocking show to remember ... can you imagine if they came out, sat on stools, and opened a show with a acoustic version of sympathy or even cant you hear me knocking ...

i'm sure that this is going to be viewed upon by iorr threaders as wishful thinking or even pointless ... hey, be that as it may - it's one users wish and dream.
cheers!

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
24FPS
I think he's past the solo tour itch. Maybe he'd play with some other 'senior' superstars on his level.

I don't know, I think he craves the adultation too much to stay off the stage even after the Stones call it quits.

he hasnt exactly been keen to get anywhere near a stage when the Stones have been inactive, has he?

I think he'd much rather tour with the Stones, and as long as that's still a possibility he's not going to tour solo. But if (when) it becomes obvious the Stones are absolutely never going to tour again I think he'd consider it. I think at that point Mick and most fans would come to the same conclusion: a Stones tour is far preferable to a Jagger solo tour, but a Jagger solo tour is far preferable to nothing.

And I actually think a Jagger solo tour could be good - his voice sounded great for the most part on the last Stones tour, he's still unmatched when it comes to energy and showmanship, and there's certainly no shortage of classic songs he could peform. And let's face it, with the right guitarists and the right band there's a chance those songs could sound a lot better than they did on the last Stones tour. They wouldn't have the same soul but they would be more technically proficient.

Well by the time the Stones do get done touring. IF they tour again. Jagger will be close to 70. Don't think their will be much call for a 70 year old Jagger solo tour.

If old blues guys can tour into their '70s and beyond I don't see why Jagger can't. And physically he's in a lot better shape than most others his age.

most of the old blues and jazz guys tour so they can eat. i think jagger's not in danger of missing out on dinner whether he tours or not...

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
24FPS
I think he's past the solo tour itch. Maybe he'd play with some other 'senior' superstars on his level.

I don't know, I think he craves the adultation too much to stay off the stage even after the Stones call it quits.

he hasnt exactly been keen to get anywhere near a stage when the Stones have been inactive, has he?

I think he'd much rather tour with the Stones, and as long as that's still a possibility he's not going to tour solo. But if (when) it becomes obvious the Stones are absolutely never going to tour again I think he'd consider it. I think at that point Mick and most fans would come to the same conclusion: a Stones tour is far preferable to a Jagger solo tour, but a Jagger solo tour is far preferable to nothing.

And I actually think a Jagger solo tour could be good - his voice sounded great for the most part on the last Stones tour, he's still unmatched when it comes to energy and showmanship, and there's certainly no shortage of classic songs he could peform. And let's face it, with the right guitarists and the right band there's a chance those songs could sound a lot better than they did on the last Stones tour. They wouldn't have the same soul but they would be more technically proficient.

Well by the time the Stones do get done touring. IF they tour again. Jagger will be close to 70. Don't think their will be much call for a 70 year old Jagger solo tour.

If old blues guys can tour into their '70s and beyond I don't see why Jagger can't. And physically he's in a lot better shape than most others his age.

most of the old blues and jazz guys tour so they can eat. i think jagger's not in danger of missing out on dinner whether he tours or not...

Jagger doesn't need to tour so he can eat, but never underestimate his desire to shag a new babe in a different town every night.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary
It simply doesnt follow that because you like the Stones, you have to be a huge fan of their solo work too.

You're right, of couse. I can't say I like Jagger's solo very much(except WS), honestly not my cup of tea.
But we're talking here about perfoming and I don't think there are many perfomers like Jagger. So I agree with TrulyMicks
"I'm surpised at the amount of people here who would not go. Mick is one of the greatest, most prolific songwriters of all time, not to mention his showmanship and stage presence that no one can rival. This is a Stones fan site?"

Put it this way. If he played reasonably locally (say, within 100 miles, which is basically the distance from where I live to Dublin) and it wasnt overpriced, I'd go.

If you're throwing a flight and Stones-like ticket prices into the mix, I'd probably skip it.

Oddly enough, I'd prefer to see a solo show filled with his solo material than one with Stones songs. I dont mind his solo work at all, although I wouldnt be a huge fan. Mick doing Stones songs though does very little for me at all.

There are, however, a lot of acts right now I'd prefer to see ahead of a Mick Jagger solo gig. Or a solo gig by any of the band for that matter. I can understand why some would be enthusiastic, but after almost 50 Stones gigs, it's personally not a priority.

At this Webster Hall show he perfomed 3 Stones song and they were good. So, it depends. And, opposite to you, I've never seen them life

i think the "it Depends Tour" would be a fitting title

I think Mick would do a fine professional show, but I would not go.

Quote
StonesTod
i think the "it Depends Tour" would be a fitting title

You're on fire today, Tod!

Quote
ohnonotyouagain

Quote
71Tele
Mick & Keith "solo": The two of them with a couple of stools, acoustic guitars and harmonica, maybe a keyboard; doing blues cover favorites, reinterpreting some Rolling Stones songs, and maybe even a couple of new ones. Small venues, intimate, conversational vibe. Can you imagine how cool that would be? It would be the hottest ticket in town. Too bad they can't stand each other.

That would be cool, but if they're going to do that they might as well include Ronnie and Charlie and call it the Stones.

Excellent! And it could be called The Rolling Stones Solo. I would love that. And since they would not have all the circus and another fifty people on the stage, they might even fit into European arenas. Now we are getting somewhere :-)