Tell Me :
Talk
...and that's the impression you get even when they do a club show for a hundred people?
The Stones are hostages in their own legacy. Why bother making new music when A) fans will pay ridiculous amounts of money to see them play all the same shite anyway B ) the fans crap on every new song they write C) fans want every new album to be the next Exile. The "nostalgia" is a corner we've all painted them in. They're lucky they can still play JJF because that's the only they give us at this point.
I'm sort of amused that anyone is still treating them as if they're some kind of working band today. They're not. Creatively dead? Well obviously. But after fifty years...what else is there to do? You look at all the issues this band has got going: two primary songwriters that don't work closely together anymore, Mick a guy who's heart is really in other things besides the Stones, a guitar player who is suffering from arthritis and some effects of a head injury...this is a team that's been falling apart.
And in the end I say to all this: who really cares? I don't take any of this stuff seriously anymore. They gave me what I needed and I am completely content. I have no more room. I needed to come to terms with that in order to accept the present. By doing that, all the anger and hostility towards the band faded. When I realized that I didn't need MORE from this band--the scars healed.
Keith's BS, his lazy playing this, that, and the other...who cares anymore? It's all over folks. Anything coming up at this point is a victory lap. Who in the hell would "boo" a runner taking his victory lap after a long, battered race? "BOO!! You suck now! GO HOME!" Arm chair critics is all it is.
The fine line between critics and fan boys is becoming more and more defined around here. The fashionable thing to do is to return the same amount of crap Keith dished out in the last few years and in doing so apparently is some kind of therapeutic cleansing for fans. So...whatever floats your boat!
A most excellent post. One of the best posts I have ever read on this forum thru the years.
Judging from these both tracks it might be a horrible release in my opinion. "Get Up" is another failed attempt to do a reggae, sorry, it is a lèse-majesty to Bob Marley and the Wailers, it is rattled off without any feeling, "Mr. Pitiful" fits indeed to the "Rolling Stones Big Band". But I don't like big bands. Both tracks are a further proof that there is mere posing in the band. There are four guys on stage pretending to play reggae, soul or whatever without any inner conviction.
What drugs are you taking??
No one knows yet. Maybe next week?
Actually their twitter account is strangely quite for almost a week. Maybe something's up?
I'm with Slick here, totally agree.
And it's You who are running to every concert, buying memberships and expensive tickets, buying nearly everything on CD and DVD, now bluray, too, and soooo many bloody boots, all to listen to this same shit?
Poor and foolish fans ...
But you'll have to regard: It's all You, not The Rolling Stones ...
I like ABB (studio) very much by reason of which is contrary to the big band sound of the tour. Essentially Keith, Ronnie, Mick and Charlie are on it playing their instruments on simple but quite good compositions (with exception of Jagger's usual disco contribution, called "Rain falls down" this time). It sounds like a real Rhythm & Blues band at work, nothing less and nothing more - the Stones I like. In contrary the tour was a musical-like self-exploitation of their history. The Stones need no Circus du Soleil like the Beatles. They are doing it by themselves.
I think you quite accurately describe the non-relevance of the Vegas Era Stones compared to teh relavance of non-Vegas Stones. I personally think that the time since 1989, and especially since LICKS TOUR has been an extra time given for the band and its fans, but there is not any longer anything to add to the real story. Just the longest farewell/celebration tour ever done (it sarted in 1989). I have enjoyed a lot going to Rolling Stones concerts, seeing my old heroes once again and once agian and once again alive, and meeting other Stones fans, and just having a great time, full of nostalgia, of course. But that's it. Due its non-evolving nature, repeative nature, every concert is about another version of the same concept (the players just getting worse by the years) there is nothing to write home about - that is: to listen it again in the form of some live document. They do not anymore offer musical adventures I get excited in listening at home; juts don't have any longer that "once in a life time" hectic moments of glory, to share that makes one want to listen them again and again.
It's totally different thing when listening bootlegs from their creative, evolving yaers. Almost every concert, every damn lick Keith, Taylor or Ronnie did (not to forget Brian), every Bill & Charlie moment, every Jagger scream, sounded like they were in a process of reaching somewhere they didn't know, nor did us. But they were in a creative process all the time. Moving forwards. No matter how sloppy, now much mistakes they did, it was always exciting. That's something I haven't heard during the Vegas era. I might listen some concert of theirs - I prefer watching - but I never re-listen it again, no matter how "exciting" the set list might be. The question for me is only just (a) being there present and having the experience, or (b) listening it afterwards once, and that's it. I don't feel like owning music that I know I will only listen once in my life. The difference between subjective experience being in concert and listening it 'objectively' afterwards is too big these days, and I rather skip the latter.
That's why I am not much interested in listening to any documents of any Vegas era shows, no matter how 'rare' it is (club, unusual set list, etc.). I guess this new bootleg is great by modern standards because it is an expection to a rule (somehow). But that's not enough for me. I don't download modern shows even for free, so why should I pay for that?
But I hope some "fans" quit their habit of calling names fellow fans who don't think alike. This is not a case of being "foolish" or not. Justin, I have wanted to ask you this for some time, and I do it now: you make wonderful, insightful posts here but why do the personal opinions of fellow Stones fans matter to you so much that you need start bashing them way too often?
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-05 17:59 by Doxa.
I would be so pleased to be informed of this that I ran twenty red lights in His honor, thank you Jesus, thank you Lord.
Well said, Doxa. The problem with the "modern-era" Stones in a nutshell is that, for example, covers like Mr. Pitiful or Get Up, Stand Up could be Mick Jagger backed by anyone - the SNL houseband, the Hall % Oates Orchestra, the backing band of the "Concert For New York City",the Grammy Awards backing band...whatever, all in all: the pretty generic Blues Brothers Revue sound.
Anyway, I will buy the new release just to get Back Of My Hand in perfect stereo!
The lame duck version of 19th Nervous Breakdown" I could do without, though.
I'll tell you why it's all been bothering me...all this harsh critical analysis of the band at this point is far too late and terribly timed. Frankly, I feel a whole bunch of people are late to the party on this. Many, many years have passed where we have gotten the same tour over and over again (in essence) yet we all went happily our way without a peep. Honestly, if there was any time to come to terms with the Stones it was immediately after the ABB tour when it was looking pretty bad for the band...I mean pretty bad--to me at least. Keith was slipping and slipping and as someone else mentioned, he had aged ten years over night after his head injury and it was disheartening and terrible to see.
At this moment, the Stones are flirting with the idea to come together one more time for some shows. And it's becoming clear that any shows/tours at this point in time is completely a BONUS now. Everything about the last few months has shown that Mick is in no hurry to get on a tour, no anxiousness to get the ball rolling and is hesitant to start right away. This is completely unheard of. Mick cautious to step his toe into a tour? No shit! Look at the state of his guitar player! It's becoming clear to me that Mick really doesn't want to do this but he is pressured from promoters, and most of all : the fans. To me, it just seems like we're constantly knocking on their door to come out and play and they keep telling us "Later, later!" Mick doesn't want to do this any more than we want them to.
As I said, any performances coming up are purely bonus rounds and victory laps....a hello and goodbye to fans. So all this armchair critics analysis waiting for the next note to be played, waiting to see if Keith can rise to occassion, waiting to see if they can still play CYHMK or if they can still write a great new number one single...TOO LATE! They may pretend to come in and try to impress us with all that but this tour is now just a celebration of all of them together.
I've been to 7 Beach Boys shows this last month and they've named their tour...not a "Reunion" tour but a "Celebration" tour. They are celebrating being together, celebrating the music and most of all, they are celebrating the fans. It isn't about how many deep cuts they're playing or who's singing what...it's about the fans seeing these guys together again and saying goodbye.
I'm realizing that although the Stones would NEVER mark any tour in that same emotional title...that's what's going to be happening in the next few months. Everyone here going on about how much this has sucked and how much it will suck and how the last few years have sucked....it's almost like you guys are taking way too long to get out of your grieving process for the band.
What's very clear is that everyone still cares a great deal for the band. It's very obvious. THis is why everyone still has a lot to say about the Vegas era and Keith and whatever else. I just think people here still expect way too much from these guys. I'm sorry to say but you guys gotta lower your expectations a bit because all this negativity is ruining your balance of logic and opinion to a point now where now you're just crapping on everything they've done since 1989. It's like a lightbulb went off somewhere in the last couple years and you've decided "Hey wait a minute! I've been ripped off here. ANd Keith is an @#$%&! Well, I'm going to show them!" And now everyone's simply written off the last 20 years. Let's have some balance shall we? I mentioned earlier that the archive releaeses really did not help matters. We're now just reminded how much has changed for the band. It isn't something to hide from but some people are using it against them as opposed to accepting the whole package.
I'm at a different place than everyone else regarding this band. I will be the first one to breakdown a Stones performance and call out its issues but right now isn't the time, I feel. I had plenty of time to do that in the last five years (and I did!). It's all passed me now and I've accepted all the BS and I find no justification to be angry or the need to "speak up" about it anymore.
I apologize if Ive been snipey. I"m all for everyone's opinion---that's why we're here. But that doesn't have to stop me from reacting to it--especially when it's become quite unbearable around here for a while.
In that case... the fifteen minutes that I personally wasted up the ATTIC.
What do you discribe as "relevant" and "creative" concerts? OK, I remember Berlin, Waldbühne 1965 and Altamont 1969. Is that the kind of creativity you want them to celebrate, again and again, now in their 70s?
After Brian lost his "creativity", he joint the 27th-club. Mick, Keef, Bill and Charlie tried to drive on, some of them by using heavy drugs. Is this the kind of creativity and circus you want them to do now again and again, while sitting in the sofa by yourself and watching them in their continual self-destuctions?
I could ask you more like this, but I'll stopp now.
And I'll be thankful for everything they put on the table now, some releases from their archives and, hopefully, some more Vegas like clubshows, perhaps.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
Justin
()
Date: June 5, 2012 10:50
Quote
Doxa
The Stones are creatively speaking dead and live just in nostalgia they reproduce with latest stage technology.
...and that's the impression you get even when they do a club show for a hundred people?
The Stones are hostages in their own legacy. Why bother making new music when A) fans will pay ridiculous amounts of money to see them play all the same shite anyway B ) the fans crap on every new song they write C) fans want every new album to be the next Exile. The "nostalgia" is a corner we've all painted them in. They're lucky they can still play JJF because that's the only they give us at this point.
I'm sort of amused that anyone is still treating them as if they're some kind of working band today. They're not. Creatively dead? Well obviously. But after fifty years...what else is there to do? You look at all the issues this band has got going: two primary songwriters that don't work closely together anymore, Mick a guy who's heart is really in other things besides the Stones, a guitar player who is suffering from arthritis and some effects of a head injury...this is a team that's been falling apart.
And in the end I say to all this: who really cares? I don't take any of this stuff seriously anymore. They gave me what I needed and I am completely content. I have no more room. I needed to come to terms with that in order to accept the present. By doing that, all the anger and hostility towards the band faded. When I realized that I didn't need MORE from this band--the scars healed.
Keith's BS, his lazy playing this, that, and the other...who cares anymore? It's all over folks. Anything coming up at this point is a victory lap. Who in the hell would "boo" a runner taking his victory lap after a long, battered race? "BOO!! You suck now! GO HOME!" Arm chair critics is all it is.
The fine line between critics and fan boys is becoming more and more defined around here. The fashionable thing to do is to return the same amount of crap Keith dished out in the last few years and in doing so apparently is some kind of therapeutic cleansing for fans. So...whatever floats your boat!
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
terraplane
()
Date: June 5, 2012 11:22
Don't think I want to wade through eight pages to find out: When is this being released?
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
Palace Revolution 2000
()
Date: June 5, 2012 12:49
Quote
JustinQuote
Doxa
The Stones are creatively speaking dead and live just in nostalgia they reproduce with latest stage technology.
...and that's the impression you get even when they do a club show for a hundred people?
The Stones are hostages in their own legacy. Why bother making new music when A) fans will pay ridiculous amounts of money to see them play all the same shite anyway B ) the fans crap on every new song they write C) fans want every new album to be the next Exile. The "nostalgia" is a corner we've all painted them in. They're lucky they can still play JJF because that's the only they give us at this point.
I'm sort of amused that anyone is still treating them as if they're some kind of working band today. They're not. Creatively dead? Well obviously. But after fifty years...what else is there to do? You look at all the issues this band has got going: two primary songwriters that don't work closely together anymore, Mick a guy who's heart is really in other things besides the Stones, a guitar player who is suffering from arthritis and some effects of a head injury...this is a team that's been falling apart.
And in the end I say to all this: who really cares? I don't take any of this stuff seriously anymore. They gave me what I needed and I am completely content. I have no more room. I needed to come to terms with that in order to accept the present. By doing that, all the anger and hostility towards the band faded. When I realized that I didn't need MORE from this band--the scars healed.
Keith's BS, his lazy playing this, that, and the other...who cares anymore? It's all over folks. Anything coming up at this point is a victory lap. Who in the hell would "boo" a runner taking his victory lap after a long, battered race? "BOO!! You suck now! GO HOME!" Arm chair critics is all it is.
The fine line between critics and fan boys is becoming more and more defined around here. The fashionable thing to do is to return the same amount of crap Keith dished out in the last few years and in doing so apparently is some kind of therapeutic cleansing for fans. So...whatever floats your boat!
A most excellent post. One of the best posts I have ever read on this forum thru the years.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
RobertJohnson
()
Date: June 5, 2012 13:02
Quote
DandelionPowderman
The reason for people naming 89-07 as the "Vegas era" has a lot to do with the greatness of the band, the stadiums and the format in itself.
This is a club show, for Christ's sake! An intimate evening with the band we love.
If you don't like it, fine, but don't try to pretend this is something that it's not.
This is a club show with an ususual set list, and judging from the two pro-shot videos (Get Up, Stand Up and Mr. Pitiful) + the IORR reviews, this is gonna be a GREAT release.
A 72 show? We got that with L & G + a 1973 show.
I'm happy with this, but I really hope the 6th release will be from the Brian era.
Judging from these both tracks it might be a horrible release in my opinion. "Get Up" is another failed attempt to do a reggae, sorry, it is a lèse-majesty to Bob Marley and the Wailers, it is rattled off without any feeling, "Mr. Pitiful" fits indeed to the "Rolling Stones Big Band". But I don't like big bands. Both tracks are a further proof that there is mere posing in the band. There are four guys on stage pretending to play reggae, soul or whatever without any inner conviction.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
Paul Kersey
()
Date: June 5, 2012 13:26
Quote
TheBlockbuster
Yea, whats so bad with the Vegas era ?
Actually I think it's better than the ''Golden Years'' 1969-1981.
What drugs are you taking??
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
kowalski
()
Date: June 5, 2012 13:38
Quote
terraplane
Don't think I want to wade through eight pages to find out: When is this being released?
No one knows yet. Maybe next week?
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
HighwireC
()
Date: June 5, 2012 13:43
To the posters above:
- I never feel a "need" to listen to The Rolling Stones or to buy something of their releases. But I like to have some fun in my life and The Rolling Stones can give me some heavy fun and entertainement, sometimes.
- I can't see any lèse-majesty in the covers The Rolling Stones did, neither to Bob Marley nor to Muddy Waters, Chuck Berry and so many others, whos songs were covered by The Rolling Stones in some "different" and typical The Rolling Stones like way. BTW. almost all the tracks The Rolling Stones did in the very beginning were coverversions and funny imitations.
- The Rolling Stones are some Kings Of Performing and Entertainement, but they are not usefull to help out as some gods to build up some new kind of new religion, hardcore fans can adore to, fanatically.
- I admit: Some people here might be in a stadium of heavy disappointment or in some kind of separation anxiety. They can't see The Rolling Stones are becoming old and grey men. They feel some kind of hurt by this and some fans seems to take revenge and are starting to blame and to hurt their "boys" and The Rolling Stones now.
My English isn't good enough, but I'm sure: Some students can use this stuff to do their graduation in social psychology ...
- I never feel a "need" to listen to The Rolling Stones or to buy something of their releases. But I like to have some fun in my life and The Rolling Stones can give me some heavy fun and entertainement, sometimes.
- I can't see any lèse-majesty in the covers The Rolling Stones did, neither to Bob Marley nor to Muddy Waters, Chuck Berry and so many others, whos songs were covered by The Rolling Stones in some "different" and typical The Rolling Stones like way. BTW. almost all the tracks The Rolling Stones did in the very beginning were coverversions and funny imitations.
- The Rolling Stones are some Kings Of Performing and Entertainement, but they are not usefull to help out as some gods to build up some new kind of new religion, hardcore fans can adore to, fanatically.
- I admit: Some people here might be in a stadium of heavy disappointment or in some kind of separation anxiety. They can't see The Rolling Stones are becoming old and grey men. They feel some kind of hurt by this and some fans seems to take revenge and are starting to blame and to hurt their "boys" and The Rolling Stones now.
My English isn't good enough, but I'm sure: Some students can use this stuff to do their graduation in social psychology ...
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
Thommie
()
Date: June 5, 2012 14:11
I read an interesting part of an interview with Per Gessle (Roxette) in Swedish Dagens Nyheter last Sunday. He was quoting Björn Ulveaus (ABBA):
"Normally songwriters in rock/pop business are aging pretty badly. If you're lucky it happens once i your career that you're syncing with your time. I peaked when I wrote Joyride. Then all the worlds radio stations waited for your next move. But you reach that synce just once.
The next song was also a hit, but not as hugh as Joyride. The Earth had been rotating on..."
I think they're right. If we compare with the Stones I would say they peaked 1965-1972 which is a long period. And in a period when rock music was developing more and faster than ever, before or after. They have done a loads of good music even after that but haven't been as hot as they were then.
"Normally songwriters in rock/pop business are aging pretty badly. If you're lucky it happens once i your career that you're syncing with your time. I peaked when I wrote Joyride. Then all the worlds radio stations waited for your next move. But you reach that synce just once.
The next song was also a hit, but not as hugh as Joyride. The Earth had been rotating on..."
I think they're right. If we compare with the Stones I would say they peaked 1965-1972 which is a long period. And in a period when rock music was developing more and faster than ever, before or after. They have done a loads of good music even after that but haven't been as hot as they were then.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
kowalski
()
Date: June 5, 2012 14:32
Quote
shadoobyQuote
kowalskiQuote
shadooby
So, is tomorrow the day?
Don't think so because there has been no pre-announcement (twitter, FB...) so far.
Actually their twitter account is strangely quite for almost a week. Maybe something's up?
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
cookwazzahoe
()
Date: June 5, 2012 14:43
regardless of what they do, the Stones are still my favorite bar band, no matter how old they get
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
MuddyJaggrich
()
Date: June 5, 2012 14:53
FOUR FLICKS, LIVE LICKS, BIGGEST BANG, SHINE A LIGHT... I think this period is well presented on film and tone. Let's dig a bit deeper. Why not open the dusty cases?
Maybe they'll find Marquee 71 on film in combination with audio-material, like
LEEDS. Glyn Johns recorded fantastic. We're talking about open vaults.
We don't only want to rock, we want to roll too!
Maybe they'll find Marquee 71 on film in combination with audio-material, like
LEEDS. Glyn Johns recorded fantastic. We're talking about open vaults.
We don't only want to rock, we want to roll too!
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
carlostones10
()
Date: June 5, 2012 15:01
Very nice the Stones to release this bootleg. Who was there say the concert was fantastic.
Anxious to listen.
Anxious to listen.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
Green Lady
()
Date: June 5, 2012 15:09
Judging by the videos and the two people who were actually there, this sounds as if it might be worth risking a couple of pounds on - and if all we do with these releases is sneer and bitch and (most important to the management) NOT BUY, that is really going to encourage the band to give us any more, isn't it? Even if you think you're going to hate it, invest a couple of quid in the future and listen once. Then you can throw it away - and who knows, you might even be surprised!
(Going to be fun if it turns out to be something else after all this fuss!)
(Going to be fun if it turns out to be something else after all this fuss!)
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
HighwireC
()
Date: June 5, 2012 15:18
Quote
Green Lady
(Going to be fun if it turns out to be something else after all this fuss!)
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
Eleanor Rigby
()
Date: June 5, 2012 16:26
Quote
Slickfour flicks & biggest bang box sets, flashpoint, live licks, live at the max, st louis 97 dvd, miami 94 dvd, live security, shine a light. i think thats all of them; youve heard one of these shows, youve heard them all, jaggers phrasing never changes & the big band sounds the same.Quote
GazzaQuote
Slickalright i will scratch 'true' fans and substitute that with 'old school' fans.... and i do think they risk losing a lot of goodwill recently generated amongst the old school fans by radically jumping forward AGAIN into light-weight, watered-down stones, as there are already TONS of released material from the vegas years.Quote
GazzaQuote
Slick
disagree. if they sell a lot of this vegas show, you will only end up getting more vegas shows. best to completely boycott this trash, then they will realize that the vintage shows are what the true fans want.
Who on this board or anywhere is qualified to speak for what makes a 'true fan' or second guess what 'true fans' want?
You're missing the whole point of this archives series, which is, as far as I can see, to open their vaults and release shows from different periods of their 50-year career. To limit these releases to a span of about 10-12 years defeats the entire purpose, and to ignore totally a period which takes up almost half of the era the band has existed is nonsensical.
If you dont want it, dont buy it. There are fans here who think the '78 and '81 periods are bloody awful - should the Stones have pandered to their demands as well? Not every 'true fan' is going to love every era or every tour - if you read some of the stuff on this site, you'd be forgiven for thinking the Stones didnt exist until 1968. Should the band ignore the period before that year too because there arent enough 'true fans' left who will appreciate a release with Brian Jones?
'Jumping forward again'?
This is the first release from that era in this series.
Are you seriously suggesting that the Stones should just ignore the entire second half of their career in a series of releases that are supposed to mark their entire career - and forget about the fact that for many of their fanbase, that era represents the only era they know? Just because some fans look down on it as inferior?
Neither the 'old school fans' (and where does that era begin and end anyway? 1969? 1974? 1982? 1990?) or 'modern era fans' have any right to monopolise anything, expect to have all their whims and tastes catered for or dictate anything to any artist.
Bottom line is that it isn't all about you, me or any 'section' of fans.
It wouldn't be my personal choice of era to highlight, but once any artist allows a select group of fans to dictate the definition of what parts of their oeuvre is 'good' or 'bad' then they lose all control over their work, cease to deserve to be regarded as artists and may as well give up.
I'm with Slick here, totally agree.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
theimposter
()
Date: June 5, 2012 16:32
I figure one of the reasons behind this release is the fact that A Bigger Bang is one of the few records to have never been represented in any shape or form on a live album. The previous record - Bridges - got a healthy showcase on the No Security record, after all. I am totally okay with having some "official" live versions of those tracks, even though I am not terribly excited about the 2 covers.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
HighwireC
()
Date: June 5, 2012 16:42
Quote
Eleanor RigbyQuote
Slickfour flicks & biggest bang box sets, flashpoint, live licks, live at the max, st louis 97 dvd, miami 94 dvd, live security, shine a light. i think thats all of them; youve heard one of these shows, youve heard them all, jaggers phrasing never changes & the big band sounds the same.Quote
GazzaQuote
Slickalright i will scratch 'true' fans and substitute that with 'old school' fans.... and i do think they risk losing a lot of goodwill recently generated amongst the old school fans by radically jumping forward AGAIN into light-weight, watered-down stones, as there are already TONS of released material from the vegas years.Quote
GazzaQuote
Slick
disagree. if they sell a lot of this vegas show, you will only end up getting more vegas shows. best to completely boycott this trash, then they will realize that the vintage shows are what the true fans want.
Who on this board or anywhere is qualified to speak for what makes a 'true fan' or second guess what 'true fans' want?
You're missing the whole point of this archives series, which is, as far as I can see, to open their vaults and release shows from different periods of their 50-year career. To limit these releases to a span of about 10-12 years defeats the entire purpose, and to ignore totally a period which takes up almost half of the era the band has existed is nonsensical.
If you dont want it, dont buy it. There are fans here who think the '78 and '81 periods are bloody awful - should the Stones have pandered to their demands as well? Not every 'true fan' is going to love every era or every tour - if you read some of the stuff on this site, you'd be forgiven for thinking the Stones didnt exist until 1968. Should the band ignore the period before that year too because there arent enough 'true fans' left who will appreciate a release with Brian Jones?
'Jumping forward again'?
This is the first release from that era in this series.
Are you seriously suggesting that the Stones should just ignore the entire second half of their career in a series of releases that are supposed to mark their entire career - and forget about the fact that for many of their fanbase, that era represents the only era they know? Just because some fans look down on it as inferior?
Neither the 'old school fans' (and where does that era begin and end anyway? 1969? 1974? 1982? 1990?) or 'modern era fans' have any right to monopolise anything, expect to have all their whims and tastes catered for or dictate anything to any artist.
Bottom line is that it isn't all about you, me or any 'section' of fans.
It wouldn't be my personal choice of era to highlight, but once any artist allows a select group of fans to dictate the definition of what parts of their oeuvre is 'good' or 'bad' then they lose all control over their work, cease to deserve to be regarded as artists and may as well give up.
I'm with Slick here, totally agree.
And it's You who are running to every concert, buying memberships and expensive tickets, buying nearly everything on CD and DVD, now bluray, too, and soooo many bloody boots, all to listen to this same shit?
Poor and foolish fans ...
But you'll have to regard: It's all You, not The Rolling Stones ...
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
RobertJohnson
()
Date: June 5, 2012 16:58
Quote
theimposter
I figure one of the reasons behind this release is the fact that A Bigger Bang is one of the few records to have never been represented in any shape or form on a live album. The previous record - Bridges - got a healthy showcase on the No Security record, after all. I am totally okay with having some "official" live versions of those tracks, even though I am not terribly excited about the 2 covers.
I like ABB (studio) very much by reason of which is contrary to the big band sound of the tour. Essentially Keith, Ronnie, Mick and Charlie are on it playing their instruments on simple but quite good compositions (with exception of Jagger's usual disco contribution, called "Rain falls down" this time). It sounds like a real Rhythm & Blues band at work, nothing less and nothing more - the Stones I like. In contrary the tour was a musical-like self-exploitation of their history. The Stones need no Circus du Soleil like the Beatles. They are doing it by themselves.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: June 5, 2012 17:50
Quote
JustinQuote
Doxa
The Stones are creatively speaking dead and live just in nostalgia they reproduce with latest stage technology.
...and that's the impression you get even when they do a club show for a hundred people?
The Stones are hostages in their own legacy. Why bother making new music when A) fans will pay ridiculous amounts of money to see them play all the same shite anyway B ) the fans crap on every new song they write C) fans want every new album to be the next Exile. The "nostalgia" is a corner we've all painted them in. They're lucky they can still play JJF because that's the only they give us at this point.
I'm sort of amused that anyone is still treating them as if they're some kind of working band today. They're not. Creatively dead? Well obviously. But after fifty years...what else is there to do? You look at all the issues this band has got going: two primary songwriters that don't work closely together anymore, Mick a guy who's heart is really in other things besides the Stones, a guitar player who is suffering from arthritis and some effects of a head injury...this is a team that's been falling apart.
And in the end I say to all this: who really cares? I don't take any of this stuff seriously anymore. They gave me what I needed and I am completely content. I have no more room. I needed to come to terms with that in order to accept the present. By doing that, all the anger and hostility towards the band faded. When I realized that I didn't need MORE from this band--the scars healed.
Keith's BS, his lazy playing this, that, and the other...who cares anymore? It's all over folks. Anything coming up at this point is a victory lap. Who in the hell would "boo" a runner taking his victory lap after a long, battered race? "BOO!! You suck now! GO HOME!" Arm chair critics is all it is.
The fine line between critics and fan boys is becoming more and more defined around here. The fashionable thing to do is to return the same amount of crap Keith dished out in the last few years and in doing so apparently is some kind of therapeutic cleansing for fans. So...whatever floats your boat!
I think you quite accurately describe the non-relevance of the Vegas Era Stones compared to teh relavance of non-Vegas Stones. I personally think that the time since 1989, and especially since LICKS TOUR has been an extra time given for the band and its fans, but there is not any longer anything to add to the real story. Just the longest farewell/celebration tour ever done (it sarted in 1989). I have enjoyed a lot going to Rolling Stones concerts, seeing my old heroes once again and once agian and once again alive, and meeting other Stones fans, and just having a great time, full of nostalgia, of course. But that's it. Due its non-evolving nature, repeative nature, every concert is about another version of the same concept (the players just getting worse by the years) there is nothing to write home about - that is: to listen it again in the form of some live document. They do not anymore offer musical adventures I get excited in listening at home; juts don't have any longer that "once in a life time" hectic moments of glory, to share that makes one want to listen them again and again.
It's totally different thing when listening bootlegs from their creative, evolving yaers. Almost every concert, every damn lick Keith, Taylor or Ronnie did (not to forget Brian), every Bill & Charlie moment, every Jagger scream, sounded like they were in a process of reaching somewhere they didn't know, nor did us. But they were in a creative process all the time. Moving forwards. No matter how sloppy, now much mistakes they did, it was always exciting. That's something I haven't heard during the Vegas era. I might listen some concert of theirs - I prefer watching - but I never re-listen it again, no matter how "exciting" the set list might be. The question for me is only just (a) being there present and having the experience, or (b) listening it afterwards once, and that's it. I don't feel like owning music that I know I will only listen once in my life. The difference between subjective experience being in concert and listening it 'objectively' afterwards is too big these days, and I rather skip the latter.
That's why I am not much interested in listening to any documents of any Vegas era shows, no matter how 'rare' it is (club, unusual set list, etc.). I guess this new bootleg is great by modern standards because it is an expection to a rule (somehow). But that's not enough for me. I don't download modern shows even for free, so why should I pay for that?
But I hope some "fans" quit their habit of calling names fellow fans who don't think alike. This is not a case of being "foolish" or not. Justin, I have wanted to ask you this for some time, and I do it now: you make wonderful, insightful posts here but why do the personal opinions of fellow Stones fans matter to you so much that you need start bashing them way too often?
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-05 17:59 by Doxa.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
straycatuk
()
Date: June 5, 2012 17:54
After this latest 9 pages of BS it would be rather funny if this release turned out to be a hoax and the Roundhouse 71 show suddenly appeared for download.>
<
sc uk
<sc uk
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
GumbootCloggeroo
()
Date: June 5, 2012 17:56
I love how people are superanalyzing a Stones release that hasn't even been made official yet. Some of you are like dogs, you see the slightest hint of a bone and you start foaming at the mouth and chewing away.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
RobertJohnson
()
Date: June 5, 2012 17:59
Quote
straycatuk
After this latest 9 pages of BS it would be rather funny if this release turned out to be a hoax and the Roundhouse 71 show suddenly appeared for download.>
sc uk
I would be so pleased to be informed of this that I ran twenty red lights in His honor, thank you Jesus, thank you Lord.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
alimente
()
Date: June 5, 2012 18:14
Quote
DoxaQuote
JustinQuote
Doxa
The Stones are creatively speaking dead and live just in nostalgia they reproduce with latest stage technology.
...and that's the impression you get even when they do a club show for a hundred people?
The Stones are hostages in their own legacy. Why bother making new music when A) fans will pay ridiculous amounts of money to see them play all the same shite anyway B ) the fans crap on every new song they write C) fans want every new album to be the next Exile. The "nostalgia" is a corner we've all painted them in. They're lucky they can still play JJF because that's the only they give us at this point.
I'm sort of amused that anyone is still treating them as if they're some kind of working band today. They're not. Creatively dead? Well obviously. But after fifty years...what else is there to do? You look at all the issues this band has got going: two primary songwriters that don't work closely together anymore, Mick a guy who's heart is really in other things besides the Stones, a guitar player who is suffering from arthritis and some effects of a head injury...this is a team that's been falling apart.
And in the end I say to all this: who really cares? I don't take any of this stuff seriously anymore. They gave me what I needed and I am completely content. I have no more room. I needed to come to terms with that in order to accept the present. By doing that, all the anger and hostility towards the band faded. When I realized that I didn't need MORE from this band--the scars healed.
Keith's BS, his lazy playing this, that, and the other...who cares anymore? It's all over folks. Anything coming up at this point is a victory lap. Who in the hell would "boo" a runner taking his victory lap after a long, battered race? "BOO!! You suck now! GO HOME!" Arm chair critics is all it is.
The fine line between critics and fan boys is becoming more and more defined around here. The fashionable thing to do is to return the same amount of crap Keith dished out in the last few years and in doing so apparently is some kind of therapeutic cleansing for fans. So...whatever floats your boat!
I think you quite accurately describe the non-relevance of the Vegas Era Stones compared to teh relavance of non-Vegas Stones. I personally think that the time since 1989, and especially since LICKS TOUR has been an extra time given for the band and its fans, but there is not any longer anything to add to the real story. Just the longest farewell/celebration tour ever done (it sarted in 1989). I have enjoyed a lot going to Rolling Stones concerts, seeing my old heroes once again and once agian and once again alive, and meeting other Stones fans, and just having a great time, full of nostalgia, of course. But that's it. Due its non-evolving nature, repeative nature, every concert is about another version of the same concept (the players just getting worse by the years) there is nothing to write home about - that is: to listen it again in the form of some live document. They do not anymore offer musical adventures I get excited in listening at home; juts don't have any longer that "once in a life time" hectic moments of glory, to share that makes one want to listen them again and again.
It's totally different thing when listening bootlegs from their creative, evolving yaers. Almost every concert, every damn lick Keith, Taylor or Ronnie did (not to forget Brian), every Bill & Charlie moment, every Jagger scream, sounded like they were in a process of reaching somewhere they didn't know, nor did us. But they were in a creative process all the time. Moving forwards. No matter how sloppy, now much mistakes they did, it was always exciting. That's something I haven't heard during the Vegas era. I might listen some concert of theirs - I prefer watching - but I never re-listen it again, no matter how "exciting" the set list might be. The question for me is only just (a) being there present and having the experience, or (b) listening it afterwards once, and that's it. I don't feel like owning music that I know I will only listen once in my life. The difference between subjective experience being in concert and listening it 'objectively' afterwards is too big these days, and I rather skip the latter.
That's why I am not much interested in listening to any documents of any Vegas era shows, no matter how 'rare' it is (club, unusual set list, etc.). I guess this new bootleg is great by modern standards because it is an expection to a rule (somehow). But that's not enough for me. I don't download modern shows even for free, so why should I pay for that?
But I hope some "fans" quit their habit of calling names fellow fans who don't think alike. This is not a case of being "foolish" or not. Justin, I have wanted to ask you this for some time, and I do it now: you make wonderful, insightful posts here but why do the personal opinions of fellow Stones fans matter to you so much that you need start bashing them way too often?
- Doxa
Well said, Doxa. The problem with the "modern-era" Stones in a nutshell is that, for example, covers like Mr. Pitiful or Get Up, Stand Up could be Mick Jagger backed by anyone - the SNL houseband, the Hall % Oates Orchestra, the backing band of the "Concert For New York City",the Grammy Awards backing band...whatever, all in all: the pretty generic Blues Brothers Revue sound.
Anyway, I will buy the new release just to get Back Of My Hand in perfect stereo!
The lame duck version of 19th Nervous Breakdown" I could do without, though.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
Justin
()
Date: June 5, 2012 19:02
Quote
DoxaQuote
JustinQuote
Doxa
The Stones are creatively speaking dead and live just in nostalgia they reproduce with latest stage technology.
...and that's the impression you get even when they do a club show for a hundred people?
The Stones are hostages in their own legacy. Why bother making new music when A) fans will pay ridiculous amounts of money to see them play all the same shite anyway B ) the fans crap on every new song they write C) fans want every new album to be the next Exile. The "nostalgia" is a corner we've all painted them in. They're lucky they can still play JJF because that's the only they give us at this point.
I'm sort of amused that anyone is still treating them as if they're some kind of working band today. They're not. Creatively dead? Well obviously. But after fifty years...what else is there to do? You look at all the issues this band has got going: two primary songwriters that don't work closely together anymore, Mick a guy who's heart is really in other things besides the Stones, a guitar player who is suffering from arthritis and some effects of a head injury...this is a team that's been falling apart.
And in the end I say to all this: who really cares? I don't take any of this stuff seriously anymore. They gave me what I needed and I am completely content. I have no more room. I needed to come to terms with that in order to accept the present. By doing that, all the anger and hostility towards the band faded. When I realized that I didn't need MORE from this band--the scars healed.
Keith's BS, his lazy playing this, that, and the other...who cares anymore? It's all over folks. Anything coming up at this point is a victory lap. Who in the hell would "boo" a runner taking his victory lap after a long, battered race? "BOO!! You suck now! GO HOME!" Arm chair critics is all it is.
The fine line between critics and fan boys is becoming more and more defined around here. The fashionable thing to do is to return the same amount of crap Keith dished out in the last few years and in doing so apparently is some kind of therapeutic cleansing for fans. So...whatever floats your boat!
I think you quite accurately describe the non-relevance of the Vegas Era Stones compared to teh relavance of non-Vegas Stones. I personally think that the time since 1989, and especially since LICKS TOUR has been an extra time given for the band and its fans, but there is not any longer anything to add to the real story. Just the longest farewell/celebration tour ever done (it sarted in 1989). I have enjoyed a lot going to Rolling Stones concerts, seeing my old heroes once again and once agian and once again alive, and meeting other Stones fans, and just having a great time, full of nostalgia, of course. But that's it. Due its non-evolving nature, repeative nature, every concert is about another version of the same concept (the players just getting worse by the years) there is nothing to write home about - that is: to listen it again in the form of some live document. They do not anymore offer musical adventures I get excited in listening at home; juts don't have any longer that "once in a life time" hectic moments of glory, to share that makes one want to listen them again and again.
It's totally different thing when listening bootlegs from their creative, evolving yaers. Almost every concert, every damn lick Keith, Taylor or Ronnie did (not to forget Brian), every Bill & Charlie moment, every Jagger scream, sounded like they were in a process of reaching somewhere they didn't know, nor did us. But they were in a creative process all the time. Moving forwards. No matter how sloppy, now much mistakes they did, it was always exciting. That's something I haven't heard during the Vegas era. I might listen some concert of theirs - I prefer watching - but I never re-listen it again, no matter how "exciting" the set list might be. The question for me is only just (a) being there present and having the experience, or (b) listening it afterwards once, and that's it. I don't feel like owning music that I know I will only listen once in my life. The difference between subjective experience being in concert and listening it 'objectively' afterwards is too big these days, and I rather skip the latter.
That's why I am not much interested in listening to any documents of any Vegas era shows, no matter how 'rare' it is (club, unusual set list, etc.). I guess this new bootleg is great by modern standards because it is an expection to a rule (somehow). But that's not enough for me. I don't download modern shows even for free, so why should I pay for that?
But I hope some "fans" quit their habit of calling names fellow fans who don't think alike. This is not a case of being "foolish" or not. Justin, I have wanted to ask you this for some time, and I do it now: you make wonderful, insightful posts here but why do the personal opinions of fellow Stones fans matter to you so much that you need start bashing them way too often?
- Doxa
I'll tell you why it's all been bothering me...all this harsh critical analysis of the band at this point is far too late and terribly timed. Frankly, I feel a whole bunch of people are late to the party on this. Many, many years have passed where we have gotten the same tour over and over again (in essence) yet we all went happily our way without a peep. Honestly, if there was any time to come to terms with the Stones it was immediately after the ABB tour when it was looking pretty bad for the band...I mean pretty bad--to me at least. Keith was slipping and slipping and as someone else mentioned, he had aged ten years over night after his head injury and it was disheartening and terrible to see.
At this moment, the Stones are flirting with the idea to come together one more time for some shows. And it's becoming clear that any shows/tours at this point in time is completely a BONUS now. Everything about the last few months has shown that Mick is in no hurry to get on a tour, no anxiousness to get the ball rolling and is hesitant to start right away. This is completely unheard of. Mick cautious to step his toe into a tour? No shit! Look at the state of his guitar player! It's becoming clear to me that Mick really doesn't want to do this but he is pressured from promoters, and most of all : the fans. To me, it just seems like we're constantly knocking on their door to come out and play and they keep telling us "Later, later!" Mick doesn't want to do this any more than we want them to.
As I said, any performances coming up are purely bonus rounds and victory laps....a hello and goodbye to fans. So all this armchair critics analysis waiting for the next note to be played, waiting to see if Keith can rise to occassion, waiting to see if they can still play CYHMK or if they can still write a great new number one single...TOO LATE! They may pretend to come in and try to impress us with all that but this tour is now just a celebration of all of them together.
I've been to 7 Beach Boys shows this last month and they've named their tour...not a "Reunion" tour but a "Celebration" tour. They are celebrating being together, celebrating the music and most of all, they are celebrating the fans. It isn't about how many deep cuts they're playing or who's singing what...it's about the fans seeing these guys together again and saying goodbye.
I'm realizing that although the Stones would NEVER mark any tour in that same emotional title...that's what's going to be happening in the next few months. Everyone here going on about how much this has sucked and how much it will suck and how the last few years have sucked....it's almost like you guys are taking way too long to get out of your grieving process for the band.
What's very clear is that everyone still cares a great deal for the band. It's very obvious. THis is why everyone still has a lot to say about the Vegas era and Keith and whatever else. I just think people here still expect way too much from these guys. I'm sorry to say but you guys gotta lower your expectations a bit because all this negativity is ruining your balance of logic and opinion to a point now where now you're just crapping on everything they've done since 1989. It's like a lightbulb went off somewhere in the last couple years and you've decided "Hey wait a minute! I've been ripped off here. ANd Keith is an @#$%&! Well, I'm going to show them!" And now everyone's simply written off the last 20 years. Let's have some balance shall we? I mentioned earlier that the archive releaeses really did not help matters. We're now just reminded how much has changed for the band. It isn't something to hide from but some people are using it against them as opposed to accepting the whole package.
I'm at a different place than everyone else regarding this band. I will be the first one to breakdown a Stones performance and call out its issues but right now isn't the time, I feel. I had plenty of time to do that in the last five years (and I did!). It's all passed me now and I've accepted all the BS and I find no justification to be angry or the need to "speak up" about it anymore.
I apologize if Ive been snipey. I"m all for everyone's opinion---that's why we're here. But that doesn't have to stop me from reacting to it--especially when it's become quite unbearable around here for a while.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
keith56
()
Date: June 5, 2012 19:05
Yes, Straycatuk President !!!! The Roundhouse , just for the version of Stray cat Blues....Quote
straycatuk
After this latest 9 pages of BS it would be rather funny if this release turned out to be a hoax and the Roundhouse 71 show suddenly appeared for download.>
sc uk
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
frankotero
()
Date: June 5, 2012 19:28
Anyone here tired of the word "relevant"? The Stones are relevant to me and that's what matters, to me anyway, and many others here I suspect. This said, I'm looking forward to the so-called "Vegas Era" clubshow. Sure it's not El Mocambo as I'd wish, but I'm sure it has some great moments. Plus I'm pretty sure there are some more surprises ahead.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
schillid
()
Date: June 5, 2012 19:33
Quote
straycatuk
After this latest 9 pages of BS it would be rather funny if this release turned out to be a hoax
In that case... the fifteen minutes that I personally wasted up the ATTIC.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: June 5, 2012 19:59
I don't care what any of ya'll say. The 1999 No Security Tour was not Vegas. I was there. Rarities and good playings of new songs. And Charlie and Keith were on, period.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
HighwireC
()
Date: June 5, 2012 20:04
Quote
DoxaQuote
JustinQuote
Doxa
The Stones are creatively speaking dead and live just in nostalgia they reproduce with latest stage technology.
...and that's the impression you get even when they do a club show for a hundred people?
The Stones are hostages in their own legacy. Why bother making new music when A) fans will pay ridiculous amounts of money to see them play all the same shite anyway B ) the fans crap on every new song they write C) fans want every new album to be the next Exile. The "nostalgia" is a corner we've all painted them in. They're lucky they can still play JJF because that's the only they give us at this point.
I'm sort of amused that anyone is still treating them as if they're some kind of working band today. They're not. Creatively dead? Well obviously. But after fifty years...what else is there to do? You look at all the issues this band has got going: two primary songwriters that don't work closely together anymore, Mick a guy who's heart is really in other things besides the Stones, a guitar player who is suffering from arthritis and some effects of a head injury...this is a team that's been falling apart.
And in the end I say to all this: who really cares? I don't take any of this stuff seriously anymore. They gave me what I needed and I am completely content. I have no more room. I needed to come to terms with that in order to accept the present. By doing that, all the anger and hostility towards the band faded. When I realized that I didn't need MORE from this band--the scars healed.
Keith's BS, his lazy playing this, that, and the other...who cares anymore? It's all over folks. Anything coming up at this point is a victory lap. Who in the hell would "boo" a runner taking his victory lap after a long, battered race? "BOO!! You suck now! GO HOME!" Arm chair critics is all it is.
The fine line between critics and fan boys is becoming more and more defined around here. The fashionable thing to do is to return the same amount of crap Keith dished out in the last few years and in doing so apparently is some kind of therapeutic cleansing for fans. So...whatever floats your boat!
I think you quite accurately describe the non-relevance of the Vegas Era Stones compared to teh relavance of non-Vegas Stones. I personally think that the time since 1989, and especially since LICKS TOUR has been an extra time given for the band and its fans, but there is not any longer anything to add to the real story. Just the longest farewell/celebration tour ever done (it sarted in 1989). I have enjoyed a lot going to Rolling Stones concerts, seeing my old heroes once again and once agian and once again alive, and meeting other Stones fans, and just having a great time, full of nostalgia, of course. But that's it. Due its non-evolving nature, repeative nature, every concert is about another version of the same concept (the players just getting worse by the years) there is nothing to write home about - that is: to listen it again in the form of some live document. They do not anymore offer musical adventures I get excited in listening at home; juts don't have any longer that "once in a life time" hectic moments of glory, to share that makes one want to listen them again and again.
It's totally different thing when listening bootlegs from their creative, evolving yaers. Almost every concert, every damn lick Keith, Taylor or Ronnie did (not to forget Brian), every Bill & Charlie moment, every Jagger scream, sounded like they were in a process of reaching somewhere they didn't know, nor did us. But they were in a creative process all the time. Moving forwards. No matter how sloppy, now much mistakes they did, it was always exciting. That's something I haven't heard during the Vegas era. I might listen some concert of theirs - I prefer watching - but I never re-listen it again, no matter how "exciting" the set list might be. The question for me is only just (a) being there present and having the experience, or (b) listening it afterwards once, and that's it. I don't feel like owning music that I know I will only listen once in my life. The difference between subjective experience being in concert and listening it 'objectively' afterwards is too big these days, and I rather skip the latter.
That's why I am not much interested in listening to any documents of any Vegas era shows, no matter how 'rare' it is (club, unusual set list, etc.). I guess this new bootleg is great by modern standards because it is an expection to a rule (somehow). But that's not enough for me. I don't download modern shows even for free, so why should I pay for that?
But I hope some "fans" quit their habit of calling names fellow fans who don't think alike. This is not a case of being "foolish" or not. Justin, I have wanted to ask you this for some time, and I do it now: you make wonderful, insightful posts here but why do the personal opinions of fellow Stones fans matter to you so much that you need start bashing them way too often?
- Doxa
What do you discribe as "relevant" and "creative" concerts? OK, I remember Berlin, Waldbühne 1965 and Altamont 1969. Is that the kind of creativity you want them to celebrate, again and again, now in their 70s?
After Brian lost his "creativity", he joint the 27th-club. Mick, Keef, Bill and Charlie tried to drive on, some of them by using heavy drugs. Is this the kind of creativity and circus you want them to do now again and again, while sitting in the sofa by yourself and watching them in their continual self-destuctions?
I could ask you more like this, but I'll stopp now.
And I'll be thankful for everything they put on the table now, some releases from their archives and, hopefully, some more Vegas like clubshows, perhaps.
Re: Toronto 2005, Light the Fuse...Is this the new release from the Bootleg series?
Posted by:
Justin
()
Date: June 5, 2012 20:08
You see, 24FPS, people will write off the last twenty year saying the whole thing was one loooooong tour but then you sit and realize great moments like...the '99 tour "Oh yeah! Well I guess they had some good moments there." What about the 1997 shows? A few people (like Gazza) have mentioned how great that tour was.. "Oh well, yeah it had some pretty good moments, yeah." Oh, ok well about what the 1995 club shows? "Oh right. Hmm...oh yeah those were not so bad." Should we also elminate the Licks stadium/arena/club shows too? "Well, not all of them...some of them were great."
So now we've gone from "the whole thing was shite" to a more logical and balanced view of the last few decades. Go figure!
So now we've gone from "the whole thing was shite" to a more logical and balanced view of the last few decades. Go figure!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
bakersfield , bjornkasm , Dan , Domonkos , glimmerleo , gnillor , HotStuff92 , kkhoranstoned , letitloose6 , MartinB , maumau , Meteor , perkmo , philrock90 , rastakeith , silkcut1978_ , swaff , TooTight , wavelength , willprefecture
Guests:
1783
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10