Tell Me :
Talk
+ 1
+ 100.000.000.000.000 (fill in please) lol
The Some Girls stuff is great, but every single song played on both shows is better on Brussels. Not even close. Taylor ruins nothing. And the GHS songs on Brussels are just as fresh as the Some Girls songs on Texas.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-29 10:00 by 71Tele.
Hey Erik, how do you know?
Did you cheat on us, when you told us that you are saving the DVD for Christmas:
[www.iorr.org]
And what do you say about the Love In Vain-version from Texas? Fun? Party band? Or just a downright awesome, further advancely developed blues song played like there was no tomorrow?
Sheer brilliance, imo. The same goes for Star Star and the 2 (!) warhorses.
Don't get me wrong, I love Brussels, but imo what you are saying just doesn't make sense to me. It almost sounds like you're listening to Mick Taylor and not The Rolling Stones. And it wasn't even Taylor's greatest night!
Hey Hans Jo; no - not cheating, I'm very familiar with the audio of Fort Worth 1978 due to Handsome Girls
I can reveal that the mix is very different
That is to be expected. Just hoping that it's not too compressed; but I'm guessing that it isn't - since there hasn't been any complaints here about it.
But is there something wrong with the sound on SL16? It starts a little lower in volume, and a bit softer in sound, on my DVD.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
ryanpow
()
Date: November 28, 2011 22:30
both are excellent but Live In Texas is the one I get more enjoyment out of. '73 was a decedent era for the Stones and I feel it in the music. By contast, '78 is fresh and rocks more.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
frtg55
()
Date: November 28, 2011 23:42
Sure 78 was a different aera ... but
the 73-Tour was their best ever!
Even better than the 72-Tour!
The Brussels-Bootleg ist also better than the official one!
And it is also the best live-album of the Band that we have!
The solo-playing of Mick Taylor is so much better than Ron Wood!
Alsolutely great solo-work!
Ronnie interacts with Keith. That's a different guitar work-out!
His soloing is rough and hard.
Fort Worth'78 is rough and powerful! Fine!
But 73 was their best tour! No chance to beat!
the 73-Tour was their best ever!
Even better than the 72-Tour!
The Brussels-Bootleg ist also better than the official one!
And it is also the best live-album of the Band that we have!
The solo-playing of Mick Taylor is so much better than Ron Wood!
Alsolutely great solo-work!
Ronnie interacts with Keith. That's a different guitar work-out!
His soloing is rough and hard.
Fort Worth'78 is rough and powerful! Fine!
But 73 was their best tour! No chance to beat!
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
TooTough
()
Date: November 28, 2011 23:44
78 has all what I like about the Stones. Best live DVD ever!
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
microvibe
()
Date: November 28, 2011 23:59
brussels is so much better. it's not even close.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: November 29, 2011 00:37
Quote
microvibe
brussels is so much better. it's not even close.
+ 1
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
hedegaard
()
Date: November 29, 2011 00:58
Quote
71TeleQuote
microvibe
brussels is so much better. it's not even close.
+ 1
+ 100.000.000.000.000 (fill in please) lol
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
vermontoffender
()
Date: November 29, 2011 01:29
Some Girls Live In Texas crushes Brussels.
Mick Taylor ruins Brussels by playing on an island, unto himself. Ronnie is working his ass off in '78 and playing as an integral PART of the greatest band ever.
Also, playing a long stretch of great, fresh new songs from Some Girls may not have been an incredibly popular move in 1978, but the show holds up astonishingly well because of the energy and effort going into the new songs.
'73 Brussels is a joke compared to '78.
Mick Taylor ruins Brussels by playing on an island, unto himself. Ronnie is working his ass off in '78 and playing as an integral PART of the greatest band ever.
Also, playing a long stretch of great, fresh new songs from Some Girls may not have been an incredibly popular move in 1978, but the show holds up astonishingly well because of the energy and effort going into the new songs.
'73 Brussels is a joke compared to '78.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
MadMax
()
Date: November 29, 2011 01:33
Live In Texas is the greatest rocknroll concert film of all time. I've been waiting for its release ever since I heard Handsome Girls. Had no idea how great it would be. I'm sure a multi-cam concert film of Brussels would be cool too, but not nearly as intense and awesome as Texas 78. The main thing for me: The dueling guitars. Keith and Ronnie are on an even playing field. Its glorious
COULDN'T HAD said it better meself! '78 slightly wins!
COULDN'T HAD said it better meself! '78 slightly wins!
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
MadMax
()
Date: November 29, 2011 01:36
Mick Taylor ruins Brussels by playing on an island, unto himself. Ronnie is working his ass off in '78 and playing as an integral PART of the greatest band ever.
Also Truth!!! MT bascially on some numbers play to himself, alas not on every tune.
HTW is the song which sounds equally as good. ADTL too. But Brown SUgar is better in '78, but Tumbling Dice is a little better in '73. Happy?? Both too.... Man is it hard!! But overall '78 beats '73.
Also Truth!!! MT bascially on some numbers play to himself, alas not on every tune.
HTW is the song which sounds equally as good. ADTL too. But Brown SUgar is better in '78, but Tumbling Dice is a little better in '73. Happy?? Both too.... Man is it hard!! But overall '78 beats '73.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
Loudei
()
Date: November 29, 2011 01:57
Two bad there isn't a film of the Brussels affair show. It's great to read this debate... Obviously these are two different bands, different sound... I love the tempo of Tumblin Dice on Live in Texas better although some here say the Brussels version is their greatest live moment. Is like watching two differents bands, even Keith plays totally different here. Live in Texas is this Garage band playing totally loose and cool and the keyboards sound its pure rock n roll. Love Billy Preston too. But the Brussels band is a tighter band, specially Keith, he was on and his playing was amazing. I just wish they would release something better so we can start a whole new thread. Tour of the Americas maybe.... How about a good show with Brian?
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
Edward Twining
()
Date: November 29, 2011 09:33
The music had greater scope with Mick Taylor, i believe. TEXAS 78 is incredible, and as a piece of rock 'n' roll film it even beats LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, but i think that is perhaps because the film/DVD is much better presented visually, and sound quality wise, than the performance ultimately being genuinely superior. The Stones in 78 were awesome, musically, vocally, visually, in every way possible, but BRUSSELS AFFAIR has that extra dimension, that extra element - Taylor - which for me gave the Stones far more musical scope, and a greater level of musical sophistication. What the Stones do in 78 is fabulous, but to a point many of those uptempo songs begin to sound all very much alike, within their sort of punky rock 'n' roll inspired credentials. To a point, that's perhaps not altogether a bad thing within the context of this concert setting, because the adrenaline really does pump, and not just from the band themselves, but from the audience too (and even those watching from their armchairs at home too!). However,i'm not so sure it is so truly indicative of the greatness of the Stones outside of that one perspective. When the Stones were live in 73 there were many more musical textures available to them (and not just Taylor, but Billy Preston and the horn section too), which gave their sound a richness and a depth, and there was much more soul at times from Jagger too, in terms of his vocal performance. True, there were times just as on the TEXAS 78 shows where he blasted through songs in his raw rock 'n' roll voice, which to a degree is what Jagger's best known for, and perhaps his greatest asset, but also there were moments of transcendence, where the Stones truly took their muse to another place, as on 'You Can't Always Get What You Want'. That transcendence, or to put it another way, beauty, extends even to moments on songs like 'Tumbling Dice', and 'Gimmie Shelter', too. To a point though with TEXAS 78, the Stones adopt a rock/punk pose, and especially on 'When The Whip Comes Down', 'Shattered' and 'Respectable' which works brilliantly in the context of this show, but i'm not so sure these songs leave such a lasting taste, in terms of perhaps their sincerity. Only on 'Beast Of Burden' do the Stones really turn on the soul, and they do it brilliantly. Ultimately, i believe that the Stones were as effective in what they set out to achieve in 78, as they were in 73, only their source influences were that much more limited. True, the Stones became ever more musically indulgent and excessive after 73, and it was perhaps a great idea to get back to a more basic sound around 77/78. However, live in 73, they were still just about managing to hold it all together, and rather magnificently at that.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-29 10:14 by Edward Twining.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-29 10:14 by Edward Twining.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: November 29, 2011 09:56
Quote
vermontoffender
Some Girls Live In Texas crushes Brussels.
Mick Taylor ruins Brussels by playing on an island, unto himself. Ronnie is working his ass off in '78 and playing as an integral PART of the greatest band ever.
Also, playing a long stretch of great, fresh new songs from Some Girls may not have been an incredibly popular move in 1978, but the show holds up astonishingly well because of the energy and effort going into the new songs.
'73 Brussels is a joke compared to '78.
The Some Girls stuff is great, but every single song played on both shows is better on Brussels. Not even close. Taylor ruins nothing. And the GHS songs on Brussels are just as fresh as the Some Girls songs on Texas.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-29 10:00 by 71Tele.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: November 29, 2011 10:07
I love Some Girls, and I really enjoyed seeing them in '78, but '78 marks the point where the Stones became more or less a party band on stage. Don't get me wrong, they played some great music and looked like they were having a hell of a time - all good. But they never again reached the musical heights, colorations, nuance, texture, and sheer menacing intensity that the 1969-1973 live band had. They could not have pulled off a version of YCAGWYW in '78 that was as majestic as the Brussels version. Every player rose to new heights in '73. When I want to demonstrate to someone how good the band used to be, I play them Brussels.
It's two different bands, really. There are plenty of great things about the '78 band, but frankly I skip through HTW, Love In Vain, Tumbling Dice, etc. on Texas because they so pale in comparison with the '72-'73 versions, and not just because of the Taylor-to-Wood change. However, I love watching them play the fresh Some Girls material. But frankly, if there were a quality DVD of Brussels released, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-29 10:08 by 71Tele.
It's two different bands, really. There are plenty of great things about the '78 band, but frankly I skip through HTW, Love In Vain, Tumbling Dice, etc. on Texas because they so pale in comparison with the '72-'73 versions, and not just because of the Taylor-to-Wood change. However, I love watching them play the fresh Some Girls material. But frankly, if there were a quality DVD of Brussels released, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-29 10:08 by 71Tele.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
1962
()
Date: November 29, 2011 10:18
Yes it is.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
Rank Stranger
()
Date: November 29, 2011 10:35
Quote
Erik_Snow
They're both ace. No need in saying which is the better of the two; for me, anyway
Hey Erik, how do you know?
Did you cheat on us, when you told us that you are saving the DVD for Christmas:
[www.iorr.org]
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
klrkcr
()
Date: November 29, 2011 10:35
[ But frankly, if there were a quality DVD of Brussels released, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.[/quote]
Agree 71 Tele.
Agree 71 Tele.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 29, 2011 10:35
Quote
71Tele
I love Some Girls, and I really enjoyed seeing them in '78, but '78 marks the point where the Stones became more or less a party band on stage. Don't get me wrong, they played some great music and looked like they were having a hell of a time - all good. But they never again reached the musical heights, colorations, nuance, texture, and sheer menacing intensity that the 1969-1973 live band had. They could not have pulled off a version of YCAGWYW in '78 that was as majestic as the Brussels version. Every player rose to new heights in '73. When I want to demonstrate to someone how good the band used to be, I play them Brussels.
It's two different bands, really. There are plenty of great things about the '78 band, but frankly I skip through HTW, Love In Vain, Tumbling Dice, etc. on Texas because they so pale in comparison with the '72-'73 versions, and not just because of the Taylor-to-Wood change. However, I love watching them play the fresh Some Girls material. But frankly, if there were a quality DVD of Brussels released, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
And what do you say about the Love In Vain-version from Texas? Fun? Party band? Or just a downright awesome, further advancely developed blues song played like there was no tomorrow?
Sheer brilliance, imo. The same goes for Star Star and the 2 (!) warhorses.
Don't get me wrong, I love Brussels, but imo what you are saying just doesn't make sense to me. It almost sounds like you're listening to Mick Taylor and not The Rolling Stones. And it wasn't even Taylor's greatest night!
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: November 29, 2011 11:16
Quote
Rank StrangerQuote
Erik_Snow
They're both ace. No need in saying which is the better of the two; for me, anyway
Hey Erik, how do you know?
Did you cheat on us, when you told us that you are saving the DVD for Christmas:
Hey Hans Jo; no - not cheating, I'm very familiar with the audio of Fort Worth 1978 due to Handsome Girls
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 29, 2011 11:19
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
Rank StrangerQuote
Erik_Snow
They're both ace. No need in saying which is the better of the two; for me, anyway
Hey Erik, how do you know?
Did you cheat on us, when you told us that you are saving the DVD for Christmas:
Hey Hans Jo; no - not cheating, I'm very familiar with the audio of Fort Worth 1978 due to Handsome Girls
I can reveal that the mix is very different
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: November 29, 2011 11:29
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I can reveal that the mix is very different
That is to be expected. Just hoping that it's not too compressed; but I'm guessing that it isn't - since there hasn't been any complaints here about it.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
Father Ted
()
Date: November 29, 2011 12:25
Quote
Edward Twining
The music had greater scope with Mick Taylor, i believe./quote]
Oh dear...<puts on Taylor-Wood flame-proof suit and waits for the inevitable shooting match to start>...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-29 12:38 by Father Ted.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
Big Al
()
Date: November 29, 2011 12:37
I'm looking forward to finally getting round to watching the Texas show later, but I already know that I'll prefer the Brussels performance. The late 70's Stones lack any of the late 60's - early-70's majesty of the Taylor era. I was totally blown away upon first listening to Ya-Ya's and brussels. I had no idea my favourite group became such master instrumentalists on the live stage of departure of Jones.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: November 29, 2011 12:39
I guess this discussion goes back to the classical issue between BRUSSELS AFFAIR and HANDSOME GIRLS, which, once again, is not far from the debates between the Taylor era vs. the Wood era. And there are two schools here. Both having excellent arguments.
Anyways, we are talking about the peaks in both cases. Great to have them both. I have been now watching TEXAS '78 for a day now, and its quality goes beyond comprehension, so it is impossible for me to find anything that is 'wrong' with it, or what would make it any better. I just can't think how rock and roll could be played or sound any better. (But that was the thought I had last week while listening to THE BRUSSELS AFFAIR...)
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-29 12:41 by Doxa.
Anyways, we are talking about the peaks in both cases. Great to have them both. I have been now watching TEXAS '78 for a day now, and its quality goes beyond comprehension, so it is impossible for me to find anything that is 'wrong' with it, or what would make it any better. I just can't think how rock and roll could be played or sound any better. (But that was the thought I had last week while listening to THE BRUSSELS AFFAIR...)
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-29 12:41 by Doxa.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 29, 2011 12:43
Quote
Doxa
I guess this discussion goes back to the classical issue between BRUSSELS AFFAIR and HANDSOME GIRLS, which, once again, is not far from the debates between the Taylor era vs. the Wood era. And there are two schools here. Both having excellent arguments.
Anyways, we are talking about the peaks in both cases. Great to have them both. I have been now watching TEXAS '78 for a day now, and its quality goes beyond comprehension, so it is impossible for me to find anything that is 'wrong' with it, or what would make it any better. I just can't think how rock and roll could be played or sound any better. (But that was the thought I had last week while listening to THE BRUSSELS AFFAIR...)
- Doxa
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: November 29, 2011 13:11
But since we are here touching THE issue here, let me just say that what both TEXAS '78 and BRUSSELS show is that whatever happened since 1989, or how the band turned to sound since then, didn't have anything to do with who was the 'second guitarist' next to Keith Richards. Both these documents show clearly what an incredible guitar-driven hot rock and roll band the Rolling Stones used to be in their prime. Why they are not that any longer - or since 1989 - is nothing to do with having Ron Wood onboard nor lacking Mick Taylor there. It doesn't have ANYTHING to do with those two guitarists. Both do an excellent job if the rest of band is alright.
I am almost satisfied that TEXAS '78 wasn't around when I started to dig the band in the early 80's. If I have taken that as the model or criterion of how 'Ronnie Wood era Rolling Stones' should or could sound, I'd been much more disappointed ever since. I'm glad that my first idea came 'only' from LET'S SPEND THE NIGHT TOGETHER (and then from HAMPTON '81)... what happened since 1989 was easier to relate to that than to the hectic over-whelming kick ass energy of TEXAS...
- Doxa
I am almost satisfied that TEXAS '78 wasn't around when I started to dig the band in the early 80's. If I have taken that as the model or criterion of how 'Ronnie Wood era Rolling Stones' should or could sound, I'd been much more disappointed ever since. I'm glad that my first idea came 'only' from LET'S SPEND THE NIGHT TOGETHER (and then from HAMPTON '81)... what happened since 1989 was easier to relate to that than to the hectic over-whelming kick ass energy of TEXAS...
- Doxa
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 29, 2011 13:19
They still have their moments:
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: November 29, 2011 13:39
Since they nailed "Little Queenie" in Little Boy Blue and the Blues Boys' tape, they have never failed to make a decent performance of it...
But goddaman that "Sweet Little Sixteen" does not leave much hostages in TEXAS '78... That's how a Berry rocker is played with an attitude...
- Doxa
But goddaman that "Sweet Little Sixteen" does not leave much hostages in TEXAS '78... That's how a Berry rocker is played with an attitude...
- Doxa
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 29, 2011 13:45
Quote
Doxa
Since they nailed "Little Queenie" in Little Boy Blue and the Blues Boys' tape, they have never failed to make a decent performance of it...
But goddaman that "Sweet Little Sixteen" does not leave much hostages in TEXAS '78... That's how a Berry rocker is played with an attitude...
- Doxa
But is there something wrong with the sound on SL16? It starts a little lower in volume, and a bit softer in sound, on my DVD.
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
keith56
()
Date: November 29, 2011 13:57
Mick is playing, Ronnie is working that's all the difference
Re: Live in Texas better Than Brussels Affair?
Posted by:
OpenG
()
Date: November 29, 2011 14:09
I prefer Brussels. LIV on Live in Texas - RW did not even attempt a single note solo at end it was all slide.
Did you notice on Happy on Live in Texas - At the end Keith takes RW slide and plays slide at the very end.
Keith was more locked in and focused on Brussels - he had to be just to keep up with MT's pace.
play the guitar boy.
Did you notice on Happy on Live in Texas - At the end Keith takes RW slide and plays slide at the very end.
Keith was more locked in and focused on Brussels - he had to be just to keep up with MT's pace.
play the guitar boy.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
adrianmfa2 , Asgard60 , chrisvw , DEmerson , gotdablouse , gtx8834 , Irix , J.J.Flash , Jeter1984 , kickit , kish_stoned , LeonidP , LSTNT , steffialicia , stones94 , TooTight , vlover
Guests:
1612
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10