To put it like this; A 81/82 show could vary from awful to brilliant in one and the same show: the 89/90 shows were all leveled.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-16 00:18 by Stoneage.

Quote
Stoneage
To put it like this; A 81/82 show could vary from awful to brilliant in one and the same show: the 89/90 shows were all leveled.

That is the truth. However, the 89/90 shows were at a HIGH level. Saying they all sounded the same is hardly a criticism, if they all sounded great!

Matt Clifford, ouch!

It really is sad when you hear bands from their generation playing still today compared to how the Stones have sounded live after the 89-90 tour. The decline is so drastic it cannot be denied.

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
More Hot Rocks

Quote
dcba
"the '99 NS US tour was fantastic again"

Mathijs I really have nothing but respect for you but imho the spirit of the 99 US Tour was great (playing arenas, varied setlists, rare songs) but the actual shows were kinda weak. I DLed a few of them and apart from the 1st Washington gig (March. 7?) the rest was kinda boring. Just my opinion...

I agree. Shows weren't exciting. Ronnie not even going though the motions. I few deep cuts. There were way more deep cuts during LICKS. Better set lists. More inspired. Lackluster would be the word I would use during this tour.

I agree

I certainly didn't see a 'lackluster' show in Anaheim in '99. I saw a lackluster Licks show at Staples in L.A. in October 2002. So, maybe the night you go can matter.

(Peripheral comment: I will never forget being at the Opening Steel Wheel Tours Show in Veteran's Stadium in Philly in a row of seats - seats!! on the pitch in front of the stage!! at a stadium show!!! What was that?!! - near the front of the stage, and I jumped up on top of my chair and started jumping up and down and screaming in excitement and my entire row joining up with me and the several rows behind us recoiling in shock at our unbridled enthusiasm and screaming at us to sit down...to sit down at a fcuking Stones concert!!!! It was then and there that I knew it wasn't 1969, or 1972, or 1975 or 1981 anymore! I should open up a thread about this...when was the first time you knew the Stones' had become "just entertainment"...that was the exact moment it hit me.)




you twat.,.. do you not get it??? the age group of the fans grew up they don't want someone like you jumping around blocking there view... that has nothing to do with the stones turning into just entertainment as you put it.

I don't think the quality between shows differ that much since 1989. It tends to be the judgement from the observer that differ. Since 1989 the shows are more or less put on rails. There isn't much that can go wrong. Even if Keith doesn't play a note right, he is pretty much covered for.

1989 tour, the show I saw live - Midnight Rambler - Mick WHISPERED in the song - and I could hear it clearly. The sound was incredible on that tour.

I have boots from 1981, 1990 and 1994. They all have things I like and some I don't. Overall the 1981 boot has attitude and swagger, some of which WAS captured well on Still Life, especially Time Is On My Side and Imagination, both of which are brilliant really, that the 1989-90 Rolling Stones don't have at all. The 1990 boot is nice because it has more songs on it than Flashpoint and they sound...pretty much the same as Flashpoint overall - very well performed, a lot like the LP versions, whereas the 1981-82 Stones pretty much did anything but the LP versions live. That 1990 boot has nothing majorly impressive on it other than Midnight Rambler, Mixed Emotions and Almost Hear You Sigh but then again there are some interesting sounds going on that were probably cleaned up a bit for the live album.

1994 boot, well, for the most part it's bland but Not Fade Away, Tumbling Dice, Shattered and Out Of Tears are fantastic. Having seen that tour, which was OK yet a bit more interesting overall than the 1989 tour, the boot is nice but nothing significant like the 1981 boots I have. For whatever reason those boots (as well as Still Life and the movie) capture something that is almost comical yet...vibrant and raw. They were a BAND just playing. 1989 onwards they are more of a revue. Big difference and probably explains a part of why people prefer the Hampton boot (and whatever others) over anything since then.

Quote
Munichhilton
I WAS at the 1981 tour.
I agree with Mathijs summation of that tour.

It was the last great 'Keith is in charge' tour.
It never got better than that.

Instant highlights that cannot be denied:

Under My Thumb
When The Whip Comes Down
Beast Of Burden
All Down The Line
Star Star
Jumping Jack Flash (over 8 minutes of it!)


I can hear Take The A Train now!!!

All those songs except for UMT were played alot better in 1978. Tht list of songs is hardly a reason to build up the 81 tour. they actually showed how weak it was.

Quote
robertfraser
(Peripheral comment: I will never forget being at the Opening Steel Wheel Tours Show in Veteran's Stadium in Philly in a row of seats - seats!! on the pitch in front of the stage!! at a stadium show!!! What was that?!! - near the front of the stage, and I jumped up on top of my chair and started jumping up and down and screaming in excitement and my entire row joining up with me and the several rows behind us recoiling in shock at our unbridled enthusiasm and screaming at us to sit down...to sit down at a fcuking Stones concert!!!! It was then and there that I knew it wasn't 1969, or 1972, or 1975 or 1981 anymore! I should open up a thread about this...when was the first time you knew the Stones' had become "just entertainment"...that was the exact moment it hit me.)

you twat.,.. do you not get it??? the age group of the fans grew up they don't want someone like you jumping around blocking there view... that has nothing to do with the stones turning into just entertainment as you put it.

You pitiful imbecile...do YOU not get it?? This was the opening night of a Rolling Stones World Tour...near front of stage...the Stones on the road after 7 long years and multiple fractures in the foundation - some so deep that most people thought they were history...over. And the Stones get back together, cut a new album and they are back onstage - a dream come true for millions - and some people want to force me to SIT through the experience...people who treat the concert like just another corporate-sponsored event they can tell their colleagues at the office about. For someone like myself who had seen the Stones live since the early 1970's it was shocking and a non-starter! Sorry, no...I WILL NOT SIT DOWN FRONT OF STAGE AT A ROLLING STONES CONCERT. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with "growing up" - I have been to Stones concerts since where the audience was filled with people who were quite old and they were up and dancing from the first note to the last. It had to do with the fact that in 1989 the Rolling Stones no longer were the rebel decadents of yore, rather had become part of the "entertainment establishment", and the seats near the front - quite costly now - were mostly in the hands of corporate blocks. The times had changed. The Reagan Era had changed everything and what the Rolling Stones meant culturally (and financially) had been transformed along with everything else. Guns and Roses and such bands had taken the Bad-Boy torch from the Stones, and the Stones were now the Elder Statesmen of Rock. Not a bad position to be in - but the 1989 Stones had neither the cultural nor the musical relevance of the 1981/82 Stones...much less earlier incarnations. That was my point.

P.S. DO NOT provoke me...keep your insults to your wife and children. I feel only contempt toward doormats like yourself that feel the courage to hide behind their sticky keyboard typing out affronts. I come to this forum to communicate respectfully with fellow fans and leave cretins like yourself that one is forced to deal with in everyday life behind for a few moments. Don't you dare ruin this experience for me. If you disagree with what anyone writes, do so with respect, otherwise stay fcuking silent.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-16 07:00 by Turd On The Run.

Why would anyone have to stand on their seats? Why isn't standing up enough? Getting up on your seat fs with the freedom of the person behind you. And your near the stage! You have to get up on your seat and block the view of people behind you when you can clearly see the stage, and they can't? They want to see the Stones, not you.

Quote
24FPS
Why would anyone have to stand on their seats? Why isn't standing up enough? Getting up on your seat fs with the freedom of the person behind you. And your near the stage! You have to get up on your seat and block the view of people behind you when you can clearly see the stage, and they can't? They want to see the Stones, not you.

Good point...sorry for the misprint...in my typing frenzy I wrote "jumped up on top of my chair" when I should have written, "jumped up from my chair". Excuse my mistake...and yes...it would be rude to jump on top of a chair so no one else behind you can see.

Which reminds me of another thing that I very often experienced during my concert-going life. People who put their girlfriends on top of their shoulders, thinking it is so wonderful to have their sweetheart cheering on their shoulders as people behind are completely blocked. Never got that either.

Apologies turd on the run i was very,very drunk last night don't even remember writing that. It was uncalled for - sorry....no more jack for me.

Can we stop saying '81 and '89, ha, ha! They did tour in '82 and 1990 as well - or does Europe, the UK and Japan not count?

Quote
brianwalker

Quote
Munichhilton
I WAS at the 1981 tour.
I agree with Mathijs summation of that tour.

It was the last great 'Keith is in charge' tour.
It never got better than that.

Instant highlights that cannot be denied:

Under My Thumb
When The Whip Comes Down
Beast Of Burden
All Down The Line
Star Star
Jumping Jack Flash (over 8 minutes of it!)


I can hear Take The A Train now!!!

All those songs except for UMT were played alot better in 1978. Tht list of songs is hardly a reason to build up the 81 tour. they actually showed how weak it was.

Ha!!

Listen to you go

Quote
Big Al
Can we stop saying '81 and '89, ha, ha! They did tour in '82 and 1990 as well - or does Europe, the UK and Japan not count?

Reflects the year of seeing them or from when the boot is from I guess. That's how I was using it. It's rather obvious what tours the years are. It's not like you need a teleprompter to tell you that.

My butt sounds better than '89/'90.

Quote
vermontoffender
My butt sounds better than '89/'90.

Wow

That's one well EQed butt!
Simply fantastic

dvd

Is this official and any good?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-18 16:24 by brownsugar86.

I cant compare those tours because it's not the same band. Keith ran a group in 1981, with Mick. They tried and it showed. They rocked, sometimes they sucked but you got the real raw deal. And I know it wasnt good enough for 1989, they could never tour like that again.

1989 is the result of Jagger's solo career. And it's Vegas in sound and sight.

Quote
brownsugar86
dvd

Is this official and any good?

The music is very good, the optical quality is not so strong. They did a fantastic version of MR that night.

Quote
Redhotcarpet
I cant compare those tours because it's not the same band. Keith ran a group in 1981, with Mick. They tried and it showed. They rocked, sometimes they sucked but you got the real raw deal. And I know it wasnt good enough for 1989, they could never tour like that again.

1989 is the result of Jagger's solo career. And it's Vegas in sound and sight.

its the same band with backing musicians and for the reasons i stated earlier.and you're right,89/90 was taken for a test drive on micks tour and was deemed the right approach for the stones tour by the band.
if it was something mick forced them you would have heard about it.

we need to stop with that tired,old "vegas" cliche.all rock bands do their hits and give the best theatrical performance they can afford.
almost every band that tours goes through las vegas anyway,they have arenas there now the same as boston or detroit.
as for the production show aspect,i've seen plenty of vegas shows and trust me,none of them came within a million miles of the steel wheels/urban jungle tour.

like your username by the way but you should change it to "redcoalcarpet"

Quote
lem motlow


like your username by the way but you should change it to "redcoalcarpet"

Thanks yeah I dont know why I changed the GS lyric, cant remember. It kinda bugs me too.

"And it's Vegas in sound and sight"

I'd say And "it's safe in sound and sight".
But if it's safe it's showbiz not rock'n roll alas...