I do remember reading in 78 that there have been rumors about a small in gig in Hamburg. The tour rumors went on and off.
Legally and also money wise may have been good reasons to drop out from such a tour and mind you the Stones have not been welcomed at all in all countries. Honestly speaking I much assume that only the help of Prince Rupert brought them back in the catch to earn money and to be modest enough to get accepted by the immigration.

Incredible to see Jagger work that stage during "Let it Rock". When I see the band like that it makes me think of Keith saying about Jagger that there is no one who can work a stage like he.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Bill Wyman suffered a serious back injury from a fall after the last show of the 1978 tour so there was no question of a tour for him in 1979. Columbia Records had signed Ronnie as a solo artist on the strength of his Paris demos and paired him with Roy Thomas Baker to finish the album. The contract included tour support so Ronnie was going out on his own in 1979 and trying his best to take Keith and Charlie with him. Keith was still toying with releasing his covers album, BAD LUCK for Atlantic/EMI. Stu was encouraging Charlie to stick with Rocket 88. Mick was soured on his pending divorce and the situation with Keith. In hindsight, it's remarkable they still came together on and off to work on the EMOTIONAL RESCUE album.

Concerning Wyman: his back injury did not stop him from many recording sessions, and he doesn't say anything in his books about it. Wood first and only band is the Stones -before he can do anything solo he must have clearance from the Stones -there's even that famous fax for '81, that read something like 'touring in three weeks time, get ready'.

Concerning Mac in '82: he wasn't asked for the tour due to his alcohol and drugs problems at the time, Jagger didn't want to have him around Wood, who was deeper and deeper into crack.

Concerning the '79 tour, Jagger has explained why they didn't tour: they wanted to do a tour like the 1978 US tour, but where facing two main problems: Keith was having severe travel restrictions due to the Toronto bust, and a tour of the scale of a '78 tour wasn't financially viable in Europe. Traveling in Europe for a band and entourage was much more expensive due to all the boarders of the time. If you don't want to loose money (when you're the Stones that is), the scale of a European tour must have been larger, and according to Jagger the Stones where not in a fit state in '79, just as they weren't in '85 and '86.

Mathijs



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-03-23 10:57 by Mathijs.

Quote
timbernardis
and I guess there was not enough time to organise a tour at that point.

And his sentence was the concert for the Blind?


plex

Based on Chet Flippo's book the Some Girls tour was booked quite poorly so they certainly could have done an even poorer job for a UK/Euro tour. Obviously time wasn't an issue with booking the Some Girls tour.

Mathijs' remarks seem reasonable and the best presented thus far.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Mathijs' remarks seem reasonable and the best presented thus far.

i didn't realize presentation counted

They spared them the pain of the worst tour ever by The Stones. 78 was a joke.

He also has nicer tits, but I was trying not to be vulgar.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
He also has nicer tits, but I was trying not to be vulgar.

how's that working out for you?

C'mon, StonesTod, give me some credit for getting my own joke.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
C'mon, StonesTod, give me some credit for getting my own joke.

ok, but it's hardly creditable to be getting one's own joke. i almost always get mine, but i assume i'm supposed to and just go about my day without fanfare.

Quote
More Hot Rocks
They spared them the pain of the worst tour ever by The Stones. 78 was a joke.

Why do you say that,? I love the 78 recordings, the band sound on fire.

Quote
coffeepotman

Quote
More Hot Rocks
They spared them the pain of the worst tour ever by The Stones. 78 was a joke.

Why do you say that,? I love the 78 recordings, the band sound on fire.

Keith and Ronnie F'd up on stage. Crappy show. Lousy set lists. There was no way they attempt to play a deep cut or some like Midnight Rambler, Monkey Man etc during this tour. It was embarrasing.

Quote
More Hot Rocks

Quote
coffeepotman

Quote
More Hot Rocks
They spared them the pain of the worst tour ever by The Stones. 78 was a joke.

Why do you say that,? I love the 78 recordings, the band sound on fire.

Keith and Ronnie F'd up on stage. Crappy show. Lousy set lists. There was no way they attempt to play a deep cut or some like Midnight Rambler, Monkey Man etc during this tour. It was embarrasing.

but...but....they played some chuck berry numbers and almost the entire sg album...and keith wore his green tennies....and they only effed up a few times....and they're sorry about it....please reconsider....it's been over 30 years and it's time for reconciliation....

I think it all depends on what you listen to. HANDSOME GIRLS or LACERATED make me think the '78 tour was great. KENTUCKY FRIED ROCKERS or BLIND DATE ('79) make me think they were dreadful. The Stones were rarely a consistent live act (apart from set lists) in the mid to late seventies and early eighties. We had twenty years of consistency more recently and most of us moaned about it. From that perspective alone, I prefer the '78 tour to '89 to 2007.

It was 1978,man. The atmosphere was different. Punk was in. Nobody (other than metal acts) were hardly doing long songs.Ft Worth kicked ass. For the times they had some great shows.