The UK-tour 1966, Stones had the Yardbirds as opening act. At that point they had Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page on guitar, had made great blues stuff for more than two years while Stones in 1966 played pop! Just listen to the "Got live if you want it" LP from that tour, sounds horrible! I have never heard anything from Yardbirds stuff from this tour, but I suspect that they played the shirt of the Stones on that tour??

Quote
Kuntaman
The UK-tour 1966, Stones had the Yardbirds as opening act. At that point they had Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page on guitar, had made great blues stuff for more than two years while Stones in 1966 played pop! Just listen to the "Got live if you want it" LP from that tour, sounds horrible! I have never heard anything from Yardbirds stuff from this tour, but I suspect that they played the shirt of the Stones on that tour??

I'd love to hear a recording of the Yardbirds from that tour but I have never heard of any recordings coming to light. As Beck/Page recorded collaborations only the version of 'Train Kept a Rollin'" from 'Blow Up' 'Happenings Ten Years Time Ago' and 'Psycho Daisies' come to mind. Did they outplay the Stones? Unless someone who was there chimes in we may never know...

Quote
Kuntaman
Just listen to the "Got live if you want it" LP from that tour, sounds horrible!

One person's opinion.

Althouhg Beck and Page were technically better guitar players than Keith and Brian, the audience was there to see the Stones. I guess the rolling stones certainly had the public with them so the yarbirds , as good as they were, weren't a threat to them. "Got live if you want it" is testament that the Stones rocked hard on stage,they invented punk music with that one. I wasn't there so I can't answer your question really but my guess is that Stones weren't outplayed by the yardbirds on that 1966 UK tour.
Rock and Roll,
Mops

There's a Great Shakes commercial that has both Beck and Page.
There are no live concert recordings, and very few photographs of them onstage.
According to all, it was a rather hit-or-miss combination, mostly misses.
Page was good onstage, but Beck could be erratic.
It looks good on paper but never seemed to get off the ground before Beck left.
Happenings is a monster track, though.

That whole Stones 1966 UK tour is rather odd. Besides the pictures of them at the Albert Hall, I haven't seen any photos of any other gigs. ANd look at the lineup: Stones, Ike and Tina Turner, and the Yardbirds!

Eh? The Stones and Yardbirds songs were in a fairly similar place at the time. Pop and blues, mixed with various more exotic influences.

There is live footage of them with page on bass and of course there is the incomplete 2 tracks from Glasgow 1966 featuring page and beck on guitar.

There's photos from other gigs, just hard to track down.

I doubt they blew the stones off stage because the stones generated so much energy and excitement and there interesting musical highlights too like lady Jane etc.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-25 20:41 by His Majesty.

What a great show. Yardbirds, better guitarists, Stones better front man!
I'm a fan of both Stones are number 1.

When Clapton left Page is who The Yardbirds wanted first. He turned it down and suggested Beck.When Page first joined he was on bass until it became obvious that was a waste of talent.

Double-click this one:

Beck and Page were only a few months together in Yardbirds - during summer time 1966. A very short time together to develope anything major musically.

Didn't Yardbirds play the shit out of the Stones?



2 1 2 0

Quote
rollmops
Althouhg Beck and Page were technically better guitar players than Keith and Brian...

Page is technically good, but a sloppy player. And it's more virtuosity than technique; technically, Jones and Richards are also quite good as rhythm guitarists.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-26 00:31 by lsbz.

Vilhelm
Nordic Stones Vikings

No they didn't. And I think Got Live is really good.

The definitive Yardbirds '66 Rave Up

Actually the best thing that happened to The Yardbirds was Clapton leaving and they became the band that was ahead of their time while still holding on to their blues oriented base.....A better band than the Stones? NO, but definitely underated imho.

Quote
Brue
The definitive Yardbirds '66 Rave Up

This is from the film Blow Up, of course. "Why is Beck smashing his guitar?" you may ask. Because the director wanted the Who, but they were unavailable. He settled for the Yardbirds instead, and convinced a somewhat reluctant Beck to behave in a Townshend-like manner.

Quote
tomk
There's a Great Shakes commercial that has both Beck and Page.
There are no live concert recordings, and very few photographs of them onstage.
According to all, it was a rather hit-or-miss combination, mostly misses.
Page was good onstage, but Beck could be erratic.
It looks good on paper but never seemed to get off the ground before Beck left.
Happenings is a monster track, though.

That whole Stones 1966 UK tour is rather odd. Besides the pictures of them at the Albert Hall, I haven't seen any photos of any other gigs. ANd look at the lineup: Stones, Ike and Tina Turner, and the Yardbirds!

There are so many acts on that tour. I don't think anyone had enough time to play.

htttp://www.last.fm/user/rocknrollcola

Quote
Kuntaman
The UK-tour 1966, Stones had the Yardbirds as opening act. At that point they had Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page on guitar, had made great blues stuff for more than two years while Stones in 1966 played pop! Just listen to the "Got live if you want it" LP from that tour, sounds horrible! I have never heard anything from Yardbirds stuff from this tour, but I suspect that they played the shirt of the Stones on that tour??

You should realize that at this point in time, the Stones were already rock giants,with 11 hit singles (7 of which went to no.1) and 4 charttopping albums, their last one (Aftermath) a great artistic achievement. The Yardbirds, however,
were on the verge of becoming "has-beens", which they definitely were 6 months later. And what do you mean "made great blues stuff for more than two years"?
Their discography was this : 1 old live album (w/Clapton, no Beck or Page), 4 pop singles only moderately successful (and 3 of them penned by professional pop songwriters). Then they had a quite good recent pop album (Roger the engineer), featuring "Over under sideways down", which is a good song, but was essentially a flop. Don't misunderstand me, I like the Yardbirds, but the thought that they would "play the shirt off the Stones" is simply ridiculous.

Quote
walkingthedog

Quote
Kuntaman
The UK-tour 1966, Stones had the Yardbirds as opening act. At that point they had Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page on guitar, had made great blues stuff for more than two years while Stones in 1966 played pop! Just listen to the "Got live if you want it" LP from that tour, sounds horrible! I have never heard anything from Yardbirds stuff from this tour, but I suspect that they played the shirt of the Stones on that tour??

You should realize that at this point in time, the Stones were already rock giants,with 11 hit singles (7 of which went to no.1) and 4 charttopping albums, their last one (Aftermath) a great artistic achievement. The Yardbirds, however,
were on the verge of becoming "has-beens", which they definitely were 6 months later. And what do you mean "made great blues stuff for more than two years"?
Their discography was this : 1 old live album (w/Clapton, no Beck or Page), 4 pop singles only moderately successful (and 3 of them penned by professional pop songwriters). Then they had a quite good recent pop album (Roger the engineer), featuring "Over under sideways down", which is a good song, but was essentially a flop. Don't misunderstand me, I like the Yardbirds, but the thought that they would "play the shirt off the Stones" is simply ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous to think that Page and Beck, on dual lead guitars, would have packed a little more firepower than Keith and Brian, but you're absolutely right about the Stones being a MUCH bigger act in 1966 than the Yardbirds. To an audience of Stones fans at the time, the setlist of self-penned hits, and the frenetic energy with which they performed them, would have blown the Yardbirds off the stage.

Quote
tatters

Quote
walkingthedog

Quote
Kuntaman
The UK-tour 1966, Stones had the Yardbirds as opening act. At that point they had Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page on guitar, had made great blues stuff for more than two years while Stones in 1966 played pop! Just listen to the "Got live if you want it" LP from that tour, sounds horrible! I have never heard anything from Yardbirds stuff from this tour, but I suspect that they played the shirt of the Stones on that tour??

You should realize that at this point in time, the Stones were already rock giants,with 11 hit singles (7 of which went to no.1) and 4 charttopping albums, their last one (Aftermath) a great artistic achievement. The Yardbirds, however,
were on the verge of becoming "has-beens", which they definitely were 6 months later. And what do you mean "made great blues stuff for more than two years"?
Their discography was this : 1 old live album (w/Clapton, no Beck or Page), 4 pop singles only moderately successful (and 3 of them penned by professional pop songwriters). Then they had a quite good recent pop album (Roger the engineer), featuring "Over under sideways down", which is a good song, but was essentially a flop. Don't misunderstand me, I like the Yardbirds, but the thought that they would "play the shirt off the Stones" is simply ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous to think that Page and Beck, on dual lead guitars, would have packed a little more firepower than Keith and Brian, but you're absolutely right about the Stones being a MUCH bigger act in 1966 than the Yardbirds. To an audience of Stones fans at the time, the setlist of self-penned hits, and the frenetic energy with which they performed them, would have blown the Yardbirds off the stage.

Yeah, at the time there was only one band in the world that could outshine them and that was The Beatles. It was not the quesion of the competence of the guitarists (with the technology of the day - who would hear the difference, anyway?) - it was the hits, hits and more hits, the hysteria and the physical iconic presence. 1966 was the peak year of The Beatles vs. Stones competition - when "Have You Seen Ypur Mother, Baby?" failed to make the peak position that was almost shocking news. The Yardirds were totally in a different league - the time to praise and notice the excellence of their key players was to come later, after acts like Jimi Hendrix, Cream started to gather attention, and the rock music "progressed". But in 1966 it was a pop hysteria, and the Stones were the kings of it with The Beatles.

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Quote
tatters

Quote
walkingthedog

Quote
Kuntaman
The UK-tour 1966, Stones had the Yardbirds as opening act. At that point they had Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page on guitar, had made great blues stuff for more than two years while Stones in 1966 played pop! Just listen to the "Got live if you want it" LP from that tour, sounds horrible! I have never heard anything from Yardbirds stuff from this tour, but I suspect that they played the shirt of the Stones on that tour??

You should realize that at this point in time, the Stones were already rock giants,with 11 hit singles (7 of which went to no.1) and 4 charttopping albums, their last one (Aftermath) a great artistic achievement. The Yardbirds, however,
were on the verge of becoming "has-beens", which they definitely were 6 months later. And what do you mean "made great blues stuff for more than two years"?
Their discography was this : 1 old live album (w/Clapton, no Beck or Page), 4 pop singles only moderately successful (and 3 of them penned by professional pop songwriters). Then they had a quite good recent pop album (Roger the engineer), featuring "Over under sideways down", which is a good song, but was essentially a flop. Don't misunderstand me, I like the Yardbirds, but the thought that they would "play the shirt off the Stones" is simply ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous to think that Page and Beck, on dual lead guitars, would have packed a little more firepower than Keith and Brian, but you're absolutely right about the Stones being a MUCH bigger act in 1966 than the Yardbirds. To an audience of Stones fans at the time, the setlist of self-penned hits, and the frenetic energy with which they performed them, would have blown the Yardbirds off the stage.

Yeah, at the time there was only one band in the world that could outshine them and that was The Beatles. It was not the quesion of the competence of the guitarists (with the technology of the day - who would hear the difference, anyway?) - it was the hits, hits and more hits, the hysteria and the physical iconic presence. 1966 was the peak year of The Beatles vs. Stones competition - when "Have You Seen Ypur Mother, Baby?" failed to make the peak position that was almost shocking news. The Yardirds were totally in a different league - the time to praise and notice the excellence of their key players was to come later, after acts like Jimi Hendrix, Cream started to gather attention, and the rock music "progressed". But in 1966 it was a pop hysteria, and the Stones were the kings of it with The Beatles.

- Doxa

You nailed it, as usual. As good as Page and Beck were, the material they played, and the time constraints in which they had to play it, allowed little room to really stretch out and jam. It wasn't a question of what they were capable of doing, it was a matter of how much of it were they going to be able to show you in a 20-minute set of their hit singles.

yardbirds a lot of rave ups.

stones did rave ups, live 1964 (the who also)

the times where changes for them in 1965,(not so long concerts as they did in the clubs.in 1964)

Listening to "Happenings Ten Years Time Ago" one senses that it was Beck's explosive spirit that fuelled this fantastic twin-guitar performance. Listen to all these "Little Games" recordings with Jimmy Page, and you realise that the magic has gone, they simple don't gel anymore. What had sounded like psychodelic hard rock heaven before is now falling to pieces, one half Pagey's knowingly conceived, but somehow pale hard rock (lacking Beck's volatile unpredictablity), the other half Keith Relf's romantic pop style, never meshing, never catching fire.

So contrary to what many people think, I guess we should be thankful for those few months when the "unpredictable" Beck was having his "on- and off-moments with them. Because they created some great pieces of music. I'd really love to have a listen to one of their better shows - if any such recording should ever turn up.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-26 16:39 by Greenblues.

Quote
tatters
As good as Page and Beck were, the material they played, and the time constraints in which they had to play it, allowed little room to really stretch out and jam. It wasn't a question of what they were capable of doing, it was a matter of how much of it were they going to be able to show you in a 20-minute set of their hit singles.

I heard better Yardbirds live perfomances than the ones posted here. They were a good band, but nowhere as important as the Stones. You can critisize Got Live If You Want It for its weird production, but not for the performance. There were dozens of bands on the level of the Yardbirds, like the Pretty Things, but the Stones are one or two classes higher.

Quote
Greenblues
Listening to "Happenings Ten Years Time Ago" one senses that it was Beck's explosive spirit that fuelled this fantastic twin-guitar performance. Listen to all these "Little Games" recordings with Jimmy Page, and you realise that the magic has gone, they simple don't gel anymore. What had sounded like psychodelic hard rock heaven before is now falling to pieces, one half Pagey's knowingly conceived, but somehow pale hard rock (lacking Beck's volatile unpredictablity), the other half Keith Relf's romantic pop style, never meshing, never catching fire.

Happenings Ten Years Time Ago is one of the best songs of the sixties, as good as anything the Stones did (or the Beatles, or Bob Dylan, or Serge Gainsbourg). Just fantastic.
But I like Little Games, too. Semi-successful chamber pop. Mickie Most generally seems to be blamed for its flaws, although whether that's fair or not I don't know. I think of it as their Between the Buttons and like the Stones they kept moving on. If they'd been able to reconcile their different ambitions they could have gone on to be huge; Live Yardbirds: Featuring Jimmy Page is three quarters of the way to Led Zeppelin.

Quote
Squiggle

Quote
Greenblues
Listening to "Happenings Ten Years Time Ago" one senses that it was Beck's explosive spirit that fuelled this fantastic twin-guitar performance. Listen to all these "Little Games" recordings with Jimmy Page, and you realise that the magic has gone, they simple don't gel anymore. What had sounded like psychodelic hard rock heaven before is now falling to pieces, one half Pagey's knowingly conceived, but somehow pale hard rock (lacking Beck's volatile unpredictablity), the other half Keith Relf's romantic pop style, never meshing, never catching fire.

Happenings Ten Years Time Ago is one of the best songs of the sixties, as good as anything the Stones did (or the Beatles, or Bob Dylan, or Serge Gainsbourg). Just fantastic.
But I like Little Games, too. Semi-successful chamber pop. (...) If they'd been able to reconcile their different ambitions they could have gone on to be huge; Live Yardbirds: Featuring Jimmy Page is three quarters of the way to Led Zeppelin.

I'm not so sure about that. OK, there are moments that clearly sound much like early Zeppelin, for example the guitar solo from "Think About It", but from my point of view, Page's elaborated style needed more powerful and "pro"-like co-musicians, especially on the vocal department. And he was very lucky to find his perfect musical foils in Led Zeppelin.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-26 17:33 by Greenblues.

Quote
Greenblues
Page's elaborated style needed more powerful and "pro"-like co-musicians, especially on the vocal department. And he was very lucky to find his perfect musical foils in Led Zeppelin.

What's "pro" about sloppy playing?! Zeppelin are far from pro; rhythmically rather unstable, and that's important for a rock band. As a somewhat comparable band, Deep Purple were much more pro musicians.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-26 18:26 by lsbz.