This Dead Flowers might be the best rendition they've ever done, imo.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
This Dead Flowers might be the best rendition they've ever done, imo.

It is a good one. I' not so familiar with other 'recent' versions (of which I know Paradiso '95 is also a good one, though), but if we compare it to 70's renditions, it doesn't pale at all.

I think one big difference to the live versions of '71/'72 is that Jagger is able to interpret the song better nowadays than in then. Especially the low register verse seemed to be a struggle for Jagger back then. Maybe it is this kind of material - a slow c%w song, with lower register - is easier to do wen you are older...

But then again, what makes the old versions unique are, of course, Taylor's fluidy guitar solos and Mick and Keith's joined chorus vocals. Keith puts his stamp on this one also, but his voice lacks that bright naturalness it used to had then.

But over-all it is a joyful, compact perforance from anyone - a nice listening!

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-22 13:25 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
This Dead Flowers might be the best rendition they've ever done, imo.

It is a good one. I' not so familiar with other 'recent' versions (of which I know Paradiso '95 is also a good one, though), but if we compare it to 70's renditions, it doesn't pale at all.

I think one big difference to the live versions of '71/'72 is that Jagger is able to interpret the song better nowadays than in then. Especially the low register verse seemed to be a struggle for Jagger back then. Maybe it is this kind of material - a slow c%w song, with lower register - is easier to do wen you are older...

But then again, what makes the old versions unique are, of course, Taylor's fluidy guitar solos and Mick and Keith's joined chorus vocals. Keith puts his stamp on this one also, but his voice lacks that bright naturalness it used to had then.

But over-all it is a joyful, compact perforance from anyone - a nice listening!

- Doxa

I agree, but Keith's vocals are quite prominent in the mix here, and I really like Ronnie's wild B-Bender solos and licks on this version - suits the song better than Taylor's "pretty-solo", imo.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
This Dead Flowers might be the best rendition they've ever done, imo.

It is a good one. I' not so familiar with other 'recent' versions (of which I know Paradiso '95 is also a good one, though), but if we compare it to 70's renditions, it doesn't pale at all.

I think one big difference to the live versions of '71/'72 is that Jagger is able to interpret the song better nowadays than in then. Especially the low register verse seemed to be a struggle for Jagger back then. Maybe it is this kind of material - a slow c%w song, with lower register - is easier to do wen you are older...

But then again, what makes the old versions unique are, of course, Taylor's fluidy guitar solos and Mick and Keith's joined chorus vocals. Keith puts his stamp on this one also, but his voice lacks that bright naturalness it used to had then.

But over-all it is a joyful, compact perforance from anyone - a nice listening!

- Doxa

I agree, but Keith's vocals are quite prominent in the mix here, and I really like Ronnie's wild B-Bender solos and licks on this version - suits the song better than Taylor's "pretty-solo", imo.

Well, that's a question of taste, and I think both of them do alright, and it reflects nicely the difference between Taylor and Wood. In a way Wood is more like a team player doing his stuff with a good taste, supporting the whole, while Taylor really shines in his 'isolated realm', and lifts the song higher by his own. Both strategies work and suit to the song very well me thinks.

- Doxa

...is it possible to have link with flac?
Tanks a lot!

filoca@yahoo.it

Quote
filoca
...is it possible to have link with flac?
Tanks a lot!

[email protected]

The FLAC version hasn't been made available yet.


"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Erik_Snow

Oh you meant it that way; yes you're right. But they've allready lost lotsa customers by now, too, due to the waiting.
In either case, they don't make much money on these series, and since they're cashing in to the extreme on the 4 shows they're playing this year, maybe they simply look at the vault-releases as a "gift" to the fans, and don't care too much about the income.
The income probably is no more than another pair of handmade Nike sneakers for Jagger and other ancient gun for CHarlie's collection

The Stones couldn't care less how many people buy this -they got their money when they sold the six shows to Google, whom use it to push their Google Music thing.

Mathijs

Oh yes that's true. It really makes no big difference if they care or not, point is that they're losing out on money by delaying the European release with a week, doesn't matter if it's google or RS losing. So maybe they have plans for a different show to available as lossless from stonesarchive, for us europeans

They haven't released it in Europe only to prove that Gazza's insinuations (there was a sordid marketing strategy behind the StonesArchive presale and the announcement of this release) were wrong ...

As a matter of fact the StonesArchive presale sold 1 ticket (and I know the purchaser) and so far no new boot ...

C

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
genco

Mathijs, for european people is not Google. We buy through stonesarchive.com

True, but the Stones run the Stonesarchive-site themselves, but already got paid for the Google Music-thing - hence the archve will never be priority # 1, unfortunately...

From Stones Archive privacy policy statement :
"This website, located at http:/ /www.livenation.com (the "Site" ), is owned and operated by Bravado International Group, Inc."
[media.musictoday.com]

The Stones archive website is run by Bravado, a company specialized in merchandising items. I guess they are currently more interested in promoting their super expensive box sets (which don't seem to sell so well) than releasing a 7$ download...

Quote
kowalski

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
genco

Mathijs, for european people is not Google. We buy through stonesarchive.com

True, but the Stones run the Stonesarchive-site themselves, but already got paid for the Google Music-thing - hence the archve will never be priority # 1, unfortunately...

From Stones Archive privacy policy statement :
"This website, located at http:/ /www.livenation.com (the "Site" ), is owned and operated by Bravado International Group, Inc."
[media.musictoday.com]

The Stones archive website is run by Bravado, a company specialized in merchandising items. I guess they are currently more interested in promoting their super expensive box sets (which don't seem to sell so well) than releasing a 7$ download...

Sorry, you're right of course. But isn't Bravado merely running the net shop-solutions + marketing the releases, and not paying the Stones zillions for releasing these shows, like Google does?

Still not on stonesarchive

Quote
liddas

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Erik_Snow

Oh you meant it that way; yes you're right. But they've allready lost lotsa customers by now, too, due to the waiting.
In either case, they don't make much money on these series, and since they're cashing in to the extreme on the 4 shows they're playing this year, maybe they simply look at the vault-releases as a "gift" to the fans, and don't care too much about the income.
The income probably is no more than another pair of handmade Nike sneakers for Jagger and other ancient gun for CHarlie's collection

The Stones couldn't care less how many people buy this -they got their money when they sold the six shows to Google, whom use it to push their Google Music thing.

Mathijs

Oh yes that's true. It really makes no big difference if they care or not, point is that they're losing out on money by delaying the European release with a week, doesn't matter if it's google or RS losing. So maybe they have plans for a different show to available as lossless from stonesarchive, for us europeans

They haven't released it in Europe only to prove that Gazza's insinuations (there was a sordid marketing strategy behind the StonesArchive presale and the announcement of this release) were wrong ...

As a matter of fact the StonesArchive presale sold 1 ticket (and I know the purchaser) and so far no new boot ...

C

I didn't know the 'dualist deal' they had here: getting certain money from Google Music, no matter how much the six bootlegs sell, and then releasing the stuff by their own through StonesArchive. This is also means that they are not contractually forced to release anything via StonesArchive, if they don't feel to. The real deal is only with Google.

This starts to look bad. Was it that that - for example, The Tokio show - didn't sell so well through StonesArchive, that they don't bother to release anything through that medium any longer? No more that 'voluntary' act. In any case, I don't think for The Stones this any big deal (financially) at all (and they already got the money from Google), so could they actually 'forget' the whole thing, since there are other things going hot at the moment????

I hope I am totally wrong here.

- Doxa

It would actually surprise me a lot if it won't be available thru Stones Archive, eventually...

Quote
Deltics

Quote
filoca
...is it possible to have link with flac?
Tanks a lot!

[email protected]

The FLAC version hasn't been made available yet.

sorry!!
mp3 would be ok...
thanks

Still not on stonesarchive.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
It would actually surprise me a lot if it won't be available thru Stones Archive, eventually...

But still does not make sense. Why to postpone that because it only means losing money... this is not 1965 when they could relaese "Satisfaction" some three monts later in UK than in US, but in today's technology, potentially everyone is able to get the show one way or another if one wants, as I think the hardcore fans will do (and there is not anyone else who is interested). If they release the show in December, let's see how many will have such strong morals that goes and buys the stuff officially then.... (I won't wait for a long either).

Yeah, it is not any big bucks for sure, but still, damn stupid business...

- Doxa

Probably too busy creating "lots of lovely box-sets" over there at stonesarchive.

Maybe Europe (and the rest of the countries that are neglected) get a tailor-made £500 Toronto box-set, with copies of Keith's court order + audio and a book, signed by the "blind angel"?

I asked on twitter if the stonesarchive recordings would be coming out on CD: I bet I get ignored ?

I've sent to e-mails to stonesarchive. The reply: Nada...

While we wait for this release to be available also for us Europeans, a couple of words on the performance.

Background: I loved the ABB tour. Sort of a "naked" version of Licks, in the sense that the 4 stones were carrying the wagon this time, with warts and all. Guitars way upfront and crystal clear PA sound. TWO guitars loud and clear, not only Keith. A bad night for Keith or Ronnie (and there were quite a few) automatically meant a train-wreck of a concert. But on a good night, the Stones were absolutely great. I was lucky to see 2 really great concerts (Milano and Zurich) 1 very good one (Lousanne). But I enjoyed even the 2 almost trainwrecks (Werchter and Paris).

So after giving a quick listen to this one, I can say that the Toronto show is no exception.

The guitars make the show, for good (almost all songs) and for bad (TD is quite lame).

Rhythm section swings (or wobbles) like hell (no matter what DJones detractors may think).

Get up is the best reggae by the stones ever.

Ronnie is inspired. And Keith is Keith.

BU singers and instrumentalists add here and there nice touches, but its the core band that's driving the show.

Nice to have a true ABB show available (well, when it will be) with ABB songs. From this point of view SaL as great as it is (or as I find it to be) was not a proper ABB show. DVD Austin was over overdubbed and badly so too.

Stones 2007, like Led Zeppelin of Celebration day and many others of their age, are niche products by now. The world moved forwards. They are completely out of whatever is the "cultural" movement of this age. Yet, they remain inimitable musicians. As strange as it may seem, the 400 p I just paid to see them in London, for me, is still justified by the music only. I still love it.

C

Which show are you attending, liddas?

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Which show are you attending, liddas?

Nov. 29. I was able to find a floor seat on Keith side. 406£ ... Insane!

C

Quote
liddas

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Which show are you attending, liddas?

Nov. 29. I was able to find a floor seat on Keith side. 406£ ... Insane!

C

Yeah, insane indeed. I'll be there the 25th, A1, row U - even more insane price-wise - crazy, but it's gonna be great fun

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kowalski

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
genco

Mathijs, for european people is not Google. We buy through stonesarchive.com

True, but the Stones run the Stonesarchive-site themselves, but already got paid for the Google Music-thing - hence the archve will never be priority # 1, unfortunately...

From Stones Archive privacy policy statement :
"This website, located at http:/ /www.livenation.com (the "Site" ), is owned and operated by Bravado International Group, Inc."
[media.musictoday.com]

The Stones archive website is run by Bravado, a company specialized in merchandising items. I guess they are currently more interested in promoting their super expensive box sets (which don't seem to sell so well) than releasing a 7$ download...

Sorry, you're right of course. But isn't Bravado merely running the net shop-solutions + marketing the releases, and not paying the Stones zillions for releasing these shows, like Google does?

You must be right. Maybe it's just Google who had the Toronto show released too early.

Quote
kowalski

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kowalski

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
genco

Mathijs, for european people is not Google. We buy through stonesarchive.com

True, but the Stones run the Stonesarchive-site themselves, but already got paid for the Google Music-thing - hence the archve will never be priority # 1, unfortunately...

From Stones Archive privacy policy statement :
"This website, located at http:/ /www.livenation.com (the "Site" ), is owned and operated by Bravado International Group, Inc."
[media.musictoday.com]

The Stones archive website is run by Bravado, a company specialized in merchandising items. I guess they are currently more interested in promoting their super expensive box sets (which don't seem to sell so well) than releasing a 7$ download...

Sorry, you're right of course. But isn't Bravado merely running the net shop-solutions + marketing the releases, and not paying the Stones zillions for releasing these shows, like Google does?

You must be right. Maybe it's just Google who had the Toronto show released too early.

THAT might actually be the reason

Quote
Munichhilton
It's decent enough, but I think the complaints are stemming from the gazillion shows they could have chosen from. There are far far far better than this era...

correct. the problems with this show is that it's not the show it should be...or something.

i hear keystone is venturing into belgian-stylings, btw....

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Munichhilton
It's decent enough, but I think the complaints are stemming from the gazillion shows they could have chosen from. There are far far far better than this era...

correct. the problems with this show is that it's not the show it should be...or something.

i hear keystone is venturing into belgian-stylings, btw....

Belgian? Like waffles? Like beer waffles?
Not sure how I feel about that...

Quote
Munichhilton

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Munichhilton
It's decent enough, but I think the complaints are stemming from the gazillion shows they could have chosen from. There are far far far better than this era...

correct. the problems with this show is that it's not the show it should be...or something.

i hear keystone is venturing into belgian-stylings, btw....

Belgian? Like waffles? Like beer waffles?

they weren't specific...

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Munichhilton

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Munichhilton
It's decent enough, but I think the complaints are stemming from the gazillion shows they could have chosen from. There are far far far better than this era...

correct. the problems with this show is that it's not the show it should be...or something.

i hear keystone is venturing into belgian-stylings, btw....

Belgian? Like waffles? Like beer waffles?

they weren't specific...

No they never are. I'm still not even clear if its actually beer...liars

There is a way to get the mp3s officially outside the US.

Just install and run the program "hotspot shield". It gives your PC a US IP-adress. Now you can access google play and buy the album.

Hope I was able to help some of ya to get the album.

Here it comes...

MP3
[www.stonesarchivestore.com]
FLAC
[www.stonesarchivestore.com]