This certainly is a surprise. I'll have to download it tonight and give it a listen. Wasn't looking forward to a SW release but since it's apparently one of the best shows to offer us..it'll be a good use of $5.

Big surprise. Is being surprised good?


incomplete samples:
[wtrns.fr]

Quote
Munichhilton
Big surprise. Is being surprised good?


incomplete samples:
[wtrns.fr]

Many thanks for the samples. Based on your samples the sound is allright. Only the bass is undefined and a bit boomy, but maybe that is the case because of mp3 sound. Looking forward in getting this nontheless (in flac)

Quote
Justin
This certainly is a surprise. I'll have to download it tonight and give it a listen. Wasn't looking forward to a SW release but since it's apparently one of the best shows to offer us..it'll be a good use of $5.

Sounds good to me. I'll buy it when I get home.

Awful year (second year of the horrible Vegas shite), boring "correct" versions of all songs, Happy is really embarrassing, JJF a parody, Brown Sugar a family party, SFTD totally harmless.

A very straight boring white Anglo-saxon pathetic Disney version of the once coal dark, queer, afro, glammy, sexy, pre-funk rhythm based menacing dirty clean or garage sounding and glittery Rolling Stones - the first and only band that became a lifestyle.

And please dont report me for saying that.

Quote
Munichhilton
Big surprise. Is being surprised good?

A three hour tour...a three hour tour...

Quote
Redhotcarpet
A very straight boring white Anglo-saxon pathetic Disney version of the once coal dark, queer, afro, glammy, sexy, pre-funk rhythm based menacing dirty clean or garage sounding and glittery Rolling Stones - the first and only band that became a lifestyle.

the grateful dead beat them to the lifestyle thing. but, they do get the honor and credit of the other stuff you mention.

Thanks for the video, Lien!

Hmm..something tells me that the Toronto 2005 release was a fake all along.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-10 20:46 by Justin.

Quote
Justin
Thanks for the video, Lien!

Hmm..something tells me that the Toronto 2005 release was a fake all along.

Or perhaps the next one...

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Redhotcarpet
A very straight boring white Anglo-saxon pathetic Disney version of the once coal dark, queer, afro, glammy, sexy, pre-funk rhythm based menacing dirty clean or garage sounding and glittery Rolling Stones - the first and only band that became a lifestyle.

the grateful dead beat them to the lifestyle thing. but, they do get the honor and credit of the other stuff you mention.

The Stones beat them to a Lifestyle you WANTED to have.

Oh, by the way, downloaded it. Can't wait to hear Midnight Rambler, which was a highlight of the tour (for me).

Quote
24FPS

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Redhotcarpet
A very straight boring white Anglo-saxon pathetic Disney version of the once coal dark, queer, afro, glammy, sexy, pre-funk rhythm based menacing dirty clean or garage sounding and glittery Rolling Stones - the first and only band that became a lifestyle.

the grateful dead beat them to the lifestyle thing. but, they do get the honor and credit of the other stuff you mention.

The Stones beat them to a Lifestyle you WANTED to have.

At least there was no goth

Quote
keith56

Quote
Justin
Thanks for the video, Lien!

Hmm..something tells me that the Toronto 2005 release was a fake all along.

Or perhaps the next one...

Yes could be. It's just a little strange if we were to guess that they decided to switch out the releases simply because of the heavy flack they saw across the boards for releasing this particular show, what makes them think people would be warmed up to it later?

Quote
Justin

Quote
keith56

Quote
Justin
Thanks for the video, Lien!

Hmm..something tells me that the Toronto 2005 release was a fake all along.

Or perhaps the next one...

Yes could be. It's just a little strange if we were to guess that they decided to switch out the releases simply because of the heavy flack they saw across the boards for releasing this particular show, what makes them think people would be warmed up to it later?

you take this board far too serious...

Quote
falo01

Quote
Justin

Quote
keith56

Quote
Justin
Thanks for the video, Lien!

Hmm..something tells me that the Toronto 2005 release was a fake all along.

Or perhaps the next one...

Yes could be. It's just a little strange if we were to guess that they decided to switch out the releases simply because of the heavy flack they saw across the boards for releasing this particular show, what makes them think people would be warmed up to it later?

you take this board far too serious...

Ahhhhh. Don't tell him falo, then he'd be in on it too.

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
liddas
BUT it just aged bad.

That's my impression as well. But it was fantastic seeing them back in 1990. And the bootlegs sounded great a couple of years after that. But suddenly in the mid 90s....it sounded so "80s"

Yeah, the whole 'project': from the single and video of "Mixed Emotions", STEEL WHEELS, tour(s) of 1989/90, FLASHPOINT, sounded awesome at the time, but no glory has ever disappeared as quickly and clearly as that did then. BY VOODOO LOUNGE it was all so dated, so "80's" as you mentioned... In five yaers the world has changed so much.

But anyway, I have started lately to approciate the whole 1989/90 project a bit more. No, it will never satisfy my own aesthetic taste (they even looked terrible, espceially Mick's hair cut and forced pseudo-michaeljackson-movements), but I respect the drive to update the sound and to learn new tricks. The whole new "professionalism". It was their biggest musical reinvention since 1969. Well, in order to rebuild the building, they needed to burn the old house down, I think they lost (for good) in the process something essential I love so much in their sound (and I never can love the new sound as I loved the old one). But like said, I appreciate the effort of re-inventing their act.

I also feel that, after years considering STEEL WHEELS album maybe their weakest ever, I think it is not such a bad album after all - it is, for example, clearly better than the three that followed it, an maybe even the two that preceeded it (close to UNDERCOVER me thinks). Yeah, it is thin and shallow, damn 80's-like, but there is an artistic point in that album - they still are looking forward with it, breathing the music. It is no 'Stones-by-numbers'. it would take until VOODOO LOUNGE when the muse finally said goodbye, and the band put the autopilot on.

So I am really looking forward hearing this new bootleg, and listening closely the details. What is great in bootleg series is that it really puts a certain tour (and era) under microscope, and like forces one to listen it more closely, paying attention to details, and like giving it more time and space. Well, maybe it is different with some folks who know every show by heart, but I think even with them, the focus that is put on a given show, gives a change to relisten the stuff with a bit more fresh ears. And once again, refresh one's feelings how great the band actually is... Our ears also go easily autopilot...

- Doxa



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-10 21:22 by Doxa.

I hope you buy the flac files and not the shitty mp3.

By the way Brussels was well known but the official has some never released songs.

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"

Ojala salga este audio Original... Este DVD lo compre en un "Quiosco" venia con una revista de farandula, jejeje, al tipo le dije "dame el Dvd y quedate con la revista"

Quote
toomuchforme
I hope you buy the flac files and not the shitty mp3.

By the way Brussels was well known but the official has some never released songs.

Don't forget, the "Brussels" we all had before the official "archives" release, was from the first show that day. (and some bootlegs had tracks from other cities inserted)
The Archives release is (except for 3 tracks) from the second show that day (and the first Stones concert I attended )

Chris from Belgium

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
liddas
BUT it just aged bad.

That's my impression as well. But it was fantastic seeing them back in 1990. And the bootlegs sounded great a couple of years after that. But suddenly in the mid 90s....it sounded so "80s"

Yeah, the whole 'project': from the single and video of "Mixed Emotions", STEEL WHEELS, tour(s) of 1989/90, FLASHPOINT, sounded awesome at the time, but no glory has ever disappeared as quickly and clearly as that did then. BY VOODOO LOUNGE it was all so dated, so "80's" as you mentioned... In five yaers the world has changed so much.

But anyway, I have started lately to approciate the whole 1989/90 project a bit more. No, it will never satisfy my own aesthetic taste (they even looked terrible, espceially Mick's hair cut and forced pseudo-michaeljackson-movements), but I respect the drive to update the sound and to learn new tricks. The whole new "professionalism". It was their biggest since musical reinvention since 1969. Well, in order to rebuild the building, they needed to burn the old house down, I think they lost (for good) in the process something essential I love so much in their sound (and I never can love the new sound as I loved the old one). But like said, I appreciate the effort of re-inventing their act.

I also feel that, after years considering STEEL WHEELS album maybe their weakest ever, I think now it is not such a bad album after all - it is, for example, clearly better than the three that followed it. Yeah, it is thin and shallow, damn 80's-like, but there is an artistic point in that album - they still are looking forward with it, breathing the music. It is no 'Stones-by-numbers'. it would take until VOODOO LOUNGE when the muse finally said goodbye, and the band put the autopilot on.

So I am really looking forward hearing this new bootleg, and listening closely the details. What is great in bootleg series is that it really puts a certain tour (and era) under microscope, and like forces one to listen it more closely, paying attention to dettals, and like giving it time and space. Well, maybe it is different with some folks who know every show by heart, but I think even with them, the focus that is put on it, gives a change to relisten the stuff with a bit more fresh ears. And once again, refresh one's feelings how great the band actually is...

- Doxa

I'm sorry to say I have to agree. Your analysis is 100% correct. Steel Wheels is underrated and at the same time it has a couple of horrible tracks, one of their worst ever (Rock and a hard place). Maybe it is indeed the best album since 1989. Thief in the night however is Keiths best since Take it so hard. And Infamy I like.

I too have a huge problem with their image back then and also since (Keith lost all sense in 1989 and never really recovered until now, in 2012). But its not just the image, its the way they sounded, the whole package. I understand why they did it but I dont like it. I really hate the versions of Happy and JJF, and also BS and SFTD. HTW is torture.

Quote
Doxa

But anyway, I have started lately to approciate the whole 1989/90 project a bit more. No, it will never satisfy my own aesthetic taste (they even looked terrible, espceially Mick's hair cut and forced pseudo-michaeljackson-movements), but I respect the drive to update the sound and to learn new tricks. The whole new "professionalism". It was their biggest since musical reinvention since 1969. Well, in order to rebuild the building, they needed to burn the old house down, I think they lost (for good) in the process something essential I love so much in their sound (and I never can love the new sound as I loved the old one). But like said, I appreciate the effort of re-inventing their act.

Good point, and I agree with you. As you say, their most drastic change since 1969. But they threw out the baby with the washing water. Some things might have needed to be change but they lost the spontaneity and the life of their live performances after this big change in delivering the music and the controlled "leadership" each and everyone had in each place of each song - and the safe forumla each song was builded up on.....it wasn't up to the guitarists to get a "drive" - something which gave them a kick when they succeeded in doing....in the 1969-1982 era, I mean

But in 1989/1990 we didn't know better, and thought that this new direction was something that could lift the last part of their career to something even better.
At least a lot of people and journalists thought so.

The only 89/90 songs I can listen to now, after 1993, is the songs that suit the "new" treatment, like Ruby Tuesday, Almost Hear You Sigh and Harlem Shuffle. Not many others, and surely not the "60s/70s rockers", like Brown Sugar, Happy, IORR etc etc. They just sound so forced and unreal.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-10 21:28 by Erik_Snow.

What do you all think of the Urban Jungle version of 'Shelter' w/o Lisa?

Quote
Mabru
Why did they leave out the Continental Drift intro?? The was so great in combination with Start Me Up

No idea, and a bad decision, I think. Just as they omitted the intro from LA Friday. It's part of the show and builds up the excitement.

Quote
jazzbass
What do you all think of the Urban Jungle version of 'Shelter' w/o Lisa?

Nothing beats their definitive live version from Paradiso 1995! Taylor made it too much noodling, while Ronnie and Keith made it thrilling and haunting like hell in Paradiso..

Quote
Muddyw

Quote
jazzbass
What do you all think of the Urban Jungle version of 'Shelter' w/o Lisa?

Nothing beats their definitive live version from Paradiso 1995! Taylor made it too much noodling, while Ronnie and Keith made it thrilling and haunting like hell in Paradiso..

I like the Paradiso one very much,but Taylor made it too much noodling ?
No.

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
Muddyw

Quote
jazzbass
What do you all think of the Urban Jungle version of 'Shelter' w/o Lisa?

Nothing beats their definitive live version from Paradiso 1995! Taylor made it too much noodling, while Ronnie and Keith made it thrilling and haunting like hell in Paradiso..

I like the Paradiso one very much,but Taylor made it too much noodling ?
No.

Wrong word of choice i guess, but I didn't like his solo on this song. It's much more of a Keith song, and his style of solo. Ronnie and Keith are much more closer with their styles and that helps this song a lot, for my taste anyway :-).

Looking forward to it

-------------------
Keep On Rolling