Quote
Gazza

Quote
deadegad

Quote
Gazza

Quote
deadegad
Any boot/torrent yet? Nothing at DimeaDozen.

Are you not excited to hear it?

Yes - of course. But considering only about 200-300 fans got in and security was extremely tight, its unlikely someone made an audio recording of it and a bit premature to assume it'll be on a torrent site within 24 hours.

About 25% of the shows on the last Stones tour never even circulated - and many of those took place in stadiums. Getting this one would be a long shot at best. Hope I'm wrong, but there have been a few other warm up gigs that never circulated either as audience recordings.

While I have seen impossibly quick posting of recordings, better than I could do, yes, it is early. We can hope though.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
24FPS
Please. Mick Taylor did his thing and lifted a certain era. Ron Wood had his day with the Stones and really shined through about 1980. Since then he's been really good on slide. Face it, there's not a musician in the Stones today who is knocking it out of the park creativity wise. They're sound like they're having enough on their hands with trying to get the warhorses up to Stones level. And if all we're going to get on this 50th Whatever Tour is 95% warhorses, I don't expect the excitement level to last among a lot of long time fans.

It's good to see them up there on stage, but this tour is for the bucks only, and memories of what was, not what is. Hell, they used to at least mixup the warhorses and the arrangments varied on different tours. That's over with. I'm happy for them and I could live with letting the poor guys retire and thank them for the incredible, unequaled ride. Thank you Brian, Bill, Mick Taylor, Mick Jagger, Keith Richard(s), Charlie Watts, Ron Wood, Ian Stewart, and the magnificient sidemen who used to enchance your sound many, many years ago.

A fair and reasonable post.

that's bordering on saying we're now in the no spin zone...or something....

Quote
Duane in Houston
I applaud The Stones for 50 years of great music and all that goes along with it. I think it's fantastic that they are taking the dinosaur out (one last time?) to celebrate their 5Oth anniversay as the world's greatest rock-n-roll band. And I am verily impressed that they are getting people to pay $1000 for a ticket.... God Bless free enterprise and good old western capitalism! BUT if you think this is going to be anything other than a public display of how far they have fallen (in a musical sense) then we must simply agree to disagree. I'm not trying to be negative. I'm just trying to keep it real. I love the Stones as much as anybody and I would have LOVED to have seen this club show (even if it looked like it was a complete "sausagefest" ) but I'm not going to put lipstick on a pig and call it Playmate of The Year. By the way, this thread is the funniest thing I've read in months. God bless this website and all of the incredible posters who have the best sense of humor and wit in the world. But you're not going to get this band to play any better next month than they have been playing for the last 10 years. It just ain't gonna happen. The only thing that can save this thing, for me anyway, is to bring in Taylor and Wyman immediately for EVERY song for EVERY show. Am I crazy?

Good post Duane, but yes, you may be crazy. I would LOVE to see MT and Wyman back as much as the next fan but to say that is the answer to all the bands problems is silly. Bringing them in would be fun but they are still OLD AS HELL too. MT and Wyman will not make them play like it's 1973. Or even 2003.

Quote
Duane in Houston
I applaud The Stones for 50 years of great music and all that goes along with it. I think it's fantastic that they are taking the dinosaur out (one last time?) to celebrate their 5Oth anniversay as the world's greatest rock-n-roll band. And I am verily impressed that they are getting people to pay $1000 for a ticket.... God Bless free enterprise and good old western capitalism! BUT if you think this is going to be anything other than a public display of how far they have fallen (in a musical sense) then we must simply agree to disagree. I'm not trying to be negative. I'm just trying to keep it real. I love the Stones as much as anybody and I would have LOVED to have seen this club show (even if it looked like it was a complete "sausagefest" ) but I'm not going to put lipstick on a pig and call it Playmate of The Year. By the way, this thread is the funniest thing I've read in months. God bless this website and all of the incredible posters who have the best sense of humor and wit in the world. But you're not going to get this band to play any better next month than they have been playing for the last 10 years. It just ain't gonna happen. The only thing that can save this thing, for me anyway, is to bring in Taylor and Wyman immediately for EVERY song for EVERY show. Am I crazy?

the only thing you got wrong there is that you're not as big a fan as me. but, otherwise, a very swell post...

Quote
Gazza

Quote
deadegad

Quote
Gazza

Quote
deadegad
Any boot/torrent yet? Nothing at DimeaDozen.

Are you not excited to hear it?

Yes - of course. But considering only about 200-300 fans got in and security was extremely tight, its unlikely someone made an audio recording of it and a bit premature to assume it'll be on a torrent site within 24 hours.

About 25% of the shows on the last Stones tour never even circulated - and many of those took place in stadiums. Getting this one would be a long shot at best. Hope I'm wrong, but there have been a few other warm up gigs that never circulated either as audience recordings.

The show was being professionally filmed. On the Shattered/Whip Comes Down clip in between songs at 3:20 to 3:40 you can see the guy with the video camera in front of the audience filming stage angles, and therefore an official filming [presumably with audio as well]. The only hope is that this will leak onto bootleg at some point.

Quote
Duane in Houston
I applaud The Stones for 50 years of great music and all that goes along with it. I think it's fantastic that they are taking the dinosaur out (one last time?) to celebrate their 5Oth anniversay as the world's greatest rock-n-roll band. And I am verily impressed that they are getting people to pay $1000 for a ticket.... God Bless free enterprise and good old western capitalism! BUT if you think this is going to be anything other than a public display of how far they have fallen (in a musical sense) then we must simply agree to disagree. I'm not trying to be negative. I'm just trying to keep it real. I love the Stones as much as anybody and I would have LOVED to have seen this club show (even if it looked like it was a complete "sausagefest" ) but I'm not going to put lipstick on a pig and call it Playmate of The Year. By the way, this thread is the funniest thing I've read in months. God bless this website and all of the incredible posters who have the best sense of humor and wit in the world. But you're not going to get this band to play any better next month than they have been playing for the last 10 years. It just ain't gonna happen. The only thing that can save this thing, for me anyway, is to bring in Taylor and Wyman immediately for EVERY song for EVERY show. Am I crazy?

I concur. I know it is naïve and utterly unrealistic, but one would have thought that since this spate of shows...only 4, after all...was more a special celebration of 50 years than a presentation of a new iteration of the Stones or new music (OK...one, perhaps 2 new songs) that they would have understood that the excitement would have been to see Wyman and Taylor back for a limited and very special engagement. This would have made the 4 shows a treat. As it looks, they will be fortunate to be up to the already-extremely-compromised levels of the latter part of the Bigger Bang tour. I saw many shows on that tour...one was transcendent (in Budapest)...some competently professional (Stüttgart, Madrid, Boston) and some disastrous (Frankfurt). If that is all the special engagement of 4 shows (and next year's proposed tour) are offering then I am profoundly grateful that we have the Stones back on stage, but I cannot justify -- in this horrific economic climate -- spending the ducats to attend...and if this is what they have to offer in 2013 on a world-wide basis (no new album, no Wyman, no Taylor) I fear that -- away from the wealthy economic centers (New York, London, Paris, Tokyo) tickets at the current prices will be a hard sell. A very hard sell.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-27 01:06 by Turd On The Run.

Quote
Dreamer
Fantastic to see Jagger move around but it seems to me more and more he is doing so to distract us from how they are playing..........and it worries me also that nobody else gave a review.

Oh that's because it's all a conspiracy. The audience members were asked to each sign a waver to only provide GOOD reviews to their family, friends and online messageboards. If they had any bad opinions about the show there were specifically instructed not to share them with anyone, per specific request from the band. Anyone breaking that rule is subject to a large fine.

Quote
Dreamer
Conclusion: they have lots and lots of work to do.
And they already did...

They have a lot of work to do what exactly?...be 40 years younger? They better try harder at being younger...they don't have much time!


I totally get everyone breaking down the performance especially after this being their first performance in 5 years but I wish everyone could honestly stand back and realize what exactly they're doing. You're critiquing a group of 70 year old dudes. Do some of you scream at your elderly family members for not being able to move or run as fast they used to? "Grandpa, you have a lot of work to do if you want to walk as fast as you did when you were 42. You better get to work!"

Do I think they sounded absolutely awesome? No! They weren't amazing...they weren't shite...they were fine--exactly as I'd expect them to sound at this age. It's funny: we hear these songs being performed and we want to forget how old they (and we!) really are. We try to not notice. We instantly think of of "Jumpin Jack Flash" on Ya-Ya's, or that clip we saw on Youtube from the B2B tour, or that DVD we watched from the '78 tour...there are so many different versions of the Stones that we conjure up when we hear those songs being played. To many of us, the Stones were ageless and for the longest time we had absolutley no reason step out of that small fantasy. Every tour that's passed: we tried to push it out of our minds. But here they are today: older than when we last saw them together; age has finally caught up to them and no one wants to forgive them for it. It will not get any better as we move forward, folks. This is not the band we used to know from the 30--or even 10 years ago. Slowly, things got worse and worse as the tours went on in the last 2 decades (some of us noticed early on). Here they are today as a band after 50 years of drugs, alcoholism, cancer, brain surgery, and arthritis. What are people honestly expecting after that?

It's very hard to have any compassion for these guys when they're charging a house for one measily concert ticket and they mouth off in interviews with smarmy comments but really all that has absolutely nothing to do with what they do on stage and the music that comes through those speakers. They're playing a few shows this year (and maybe next year) because that's apparently what they want to do. The name "Rolling Stones" has been around for 50 years so this is how they want to commemorate it. It's one last "flatbed-truck drive" through Manhattan, if you will. Let them go and just wave when they pass you.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-27 01:46 by Justin.

Quote
lettingitbleed

Quote
Duane in Houston
I applaud The Stones for 50 years of great music and all that goes along with it. I think it's fantastic that they are taking the dinosaur out (one last time?) to celebrate their 5Oth anniversay as the world's greatest rock-n-roll band. And I am verily impressed that they are getting people to pay $1000 for a ticket.... God Bless free enterprise and good old western capitalism! BUT if you think this is going to be anything other than a public display of how far they have fallen (in a musical sense) then we must simply agree to disagree. I'm not trying to be negative. I'm just trying to keep it real. I love the Stones as much as anybody and I would have LOVED to have seen this club show (even if it looked like it was a complete "sausagefest" ) but I'm not going to put lipstick on a pig and call it Playmate of The Year. By the way, this thread is the funniest thing I've read in months. God bless this website and all of the incredible posters who have the best sense of humor and wit in the world. But you're not going to get this band to play any better next month than they have been playing for the last 10 years. It just ain't gonna happen. The only thing that can save this thing, for me anyway, is to bring in Taylor and Wyman immediately for EVERY song for EVERY show. Am I crazy?

Good post Duane, but yes, you may be crazy. I would LOVE to see MT and Wyman back as much as the next fan but to say that is the answer to all the bands problems is silly. Bringing them in would be fun but they are still OLD AS HELL too. MT and Wyman will not make them play like it's 1973. Or even 2003.

The key phrase there was for me. meaning I would be MUCH more excited about the whole affair and we would have that much more to talk about. Wether or not it would raise the quality of the music, of course, would remain to be seen....or heard in this case.

Quote
Turd On The Run

Quote
Duane in Houston
I applaud The Stones for 50 years of great music and all that goes along with it. I think it's fantastic that they are taking the dinosaur out (one last time?) to celebrate their 5Oth anniversay as the world's greatest rock-n-roll band. And I am verily impressed that they are getting people to pay $1000 for a ticket.... God Bless free enterprise and good old western capitalism! BUT if you think this is going to be anything other than a public display of how far they have fallen (in a musical sense) then we must simply agree to disagree. I'm not trying to be negative. I'm just trying to keep it real. I love the Stones as much as anybody and I would have LOVED to have seen this club show (even if it looked like it was a complete "sausagefest" ) but I'm not going to put lipstick on a pig and call it Playmate of The Year. By the way, this thread is the funniest thing I've read in months. God bless this website and all of the incredible posters who have the best sense of humor and wit in the world. But you're not going to get this band to play any better next month than they have been playing for the last 10 years. It just ain't gonna happen. The only thing that can save this thing, for me anyway, is to bring in Taylor and Wyman immediately for EVERY song for EVERY show. Am I crazy?

I concur. I know it is naïve and utterly unrealistic, but one would have thought that since this spate of shows...only 4, after all...was more a special celebration of 50 years than a presentation of a new iteration of the Stones or new music (OK...one, perhaps 2 new songs) that they would have understood that the excitement would have been to see Wyman and Taylor back for a limited and very special engagement. This would have made the 4 shows a treat.

+1 Duane +1 Turd

This is not a Wood V. Taylor argument; rather, as a celebration of 50 years (this is not a celebration of new, inspiring material ), giving creedence to the Golden Age with the inclusion of Taylor and Wyman is only appropriate. Plus, it would give this dogged performance some interest, IMO.

I will always watch these clips and read these threads with interest, but at this point reading the threads is more entertaining than watching the band



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-27 01:12 by paulm.

Thanks to all for the reviews, pictures and links....It almost felt I was there

__________________________




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-27 12:09 by NICOS.

Quote
ZantiMisfit
BV needs to just shut it down.

He's not exactly a Taylorite, I believe.

Quote
Justin

Quote
Dreamer
Fantastic to see Jagger move around but it seems to me more and more he is doing so to distract us from how they are playing..........and it worries me also that nobody else gave a review.

Oh that's because it's all a conspiracy. The audience members were asked to each sign a waver to only provide GOOD reviews to their family, friends and online messageboards. If they had any bad opinions about the show there were specifically instructed not to share them with anyone, per specific request from the band. Anyone breaking that rule is subject to a large fine.

Quote
Dreamer
Conclusion: they have lots and lots of work to do.
And they already did...

They have a lot of work to do what exactly?...be 40 years younger? They better try harder at being younger...they don't have much time!


I totally get everyone breaking down the performance especially after this being their first performance in 5 years but I wish everyone could honestly stand back and realize what exactly they're doing. You're critiquing a group of 70 year old dudes. Do some of you scream at your elderly family members for not being able to move or run as fast they used to? "Grandpa, you have a lot of work to do if you want to walk as fast as you did when you were 42. You better get to work!"

Do I think they sounded absolutely awesome? No! They sounded just fine. Why can't others just be happy with that as well? They weren't amazing...they weren't shite...they were just fine--exactly as I'd expect them to sound at this age. It's funny: we hear these songs being performed and we want to forget how old they (and we!) really are. We try to not notice. We instantly think of of "Jumpin Jack Flash" on Ya-Ya's, or that clip we saw on Youtube from the B2B tour, or that DVD we watched from the '78 tour...there are so many different versions of the Stones that we conjure up when we hear those songs being played. To many of us, the Stones were ageless and for the longest time we had absolutley no reason step out of that small fantasy. Every tour that's passed: we tried to push it out of our minds. But here they are today: older than when we last saw them together; age has finally caught up to them and no one wants to forgive them for it. It will not get any better as we move forward, folks. This is not the band we used to know from the 30--or even 10 years ago. Slowly, things got worse and worse as the tours went on in the last 2 decades. Here they are today as a band after 50 years of drugs, alcoholism, cancer, brain surgery, and arthritis. What are people honestly expecting after that?

It's very hard to have any compassion for these guys when they're charging a house for one measily concert ticket and they mouth off in interviews with smarmy comments but really all that has absolutely nothing to do with what they do on stage and the music that comes through those speakers. They're playing a few shows this year (and maybe next year) because that's what they want to do. The name "Rolling Stones" has been around for 50 years so this is how they want to commemorate it. It's one last "flatbed-truck drive" through Manhattan, if you will. Let them go and just wave when they pass you.

They sounded just fine. Why can't others just be happy with that as well?

Because I don't think they sounded just fine. What is just fine to you??
Gimme a review of the gig instead of this believe you are defending??!!? I aint buying what you are so desperately trying to sell. This is just your believe you are talking about and you think I don't give you the right to believe just because I don't find the music acceptable to my standards...
Just because I dare to criticise.
Very weak to compare them to elderly family members. What bs is that??
And I should give them a wave when they pass me??
They wanna go onstage and charge 800 dollars or so: I wanna find out if they are worth it but nobody here is giving an honest review.
All I find here is just lots of over the top admiring bs. Like you guys are from scientology or something. Or school girls talking about Britney Spears: AWESOME!
Just grow up and dare judging them Justin instead of defending them while I'm not even attacking them.

Quote
Duane in Houston
The only thing that can save this thing, for me anyway, is to bring in Taylor and Wyman immediately for EVERY song for EVERY show. Am I crazy?

Yes you are crazy, have you heard Taylor lately? he is absolute rubbish, much worse than Ronnie. I would not mind him doing a guest spot but on every song? now that would be a disaster.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-27 01:50 by Ket.

Quote
Dreamer

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
roby
What a disembodied version. No energy. No guitars.

Quote
MRambler




Little bit longer version in hd quality in RS youtube channel

No guitars, really? What are you talking about?

Come on Dandy: this is poor quality! Don't be selective deaf.

I wonder why a newbee on this board calls me selctive deaf because I like something? Really?

Musically and historically I know more about the Stones than most people I know of, and I´ve proven that. I don´t need anybody to tell me what I think should be good or not when it comes to the Stones.

I´ve heard ridiculous trainwrecks of JJF from all eras; 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1979(!), 1981, 1982, 1989, 1990, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2002, 2003, 2005 and 2007 before this version - that we heard a one minute clip from at the end of the show.

If I like what I hear (and see), it is because I´m really impressed by the magic this bunch of 70 year olds still can create, although in smaller doses than before.

If you or other guys here only judge the Stones from how good the guitar solos are, I´m vowed by your short term memory. There is no guitar solo on the original JJF-version, and it stands as a rock among popular music recordings of all time. Think of that - just for a second.

A bunch of 70 year olds (that IS what they should be judged by anyway) playing our favourite music (that´s why we post here, right?), maybe with some former band members guesting later on - what more can we ask for?

Quote
Dreamer
Because I don't think they sounded just fine. What is just fine to you??
Gimme a review of the gig instead of this believe you are defending??!!? I aint buying what you are so desperately trying to sell. This is just your believe you are talking about and you think I don't give you the right to believe just because I don't find the music acceptable to my standards...
Just because I dare to criticise.
Very weak to compare them to elderly family members. What bs is that??
And I should give them a wave when they pass me??
They wanna go onstage and charge 800 dollars or so: I wanna find out if they are worth it but nobody here is giving an honest review.
All I find here is just lots of over the top admiring bs. Like you guys are from scientology or something. Or school girls talking about Britney Spears: AWESOME!
Just grow up and dare judging them Justin instead of defending them while I'm not even attacking them.

I just think you're wasting a whole lot of energy on this. I'm confused what you are saying I am trying to "sell." What am I selling exactly?...the fact that you should be reminded how old these guys are before you buy a ticket? Wow, what a scam! Don't give me a lesson about being an overzealous fanboy when you are the one who is very upset about the Rolling Stones not playing to your "standards." You're still expecting A LOT from this band--I am not. Who exactly is living in denial here?

You've seen enough of the video to judge for yourself. If you are such a fan, you'd be able to tell immediately the current state of the band by watching those videos. It's VERY clear to me. No review from any person attending the show will be "neutral" enough for you to make a decision. The decision to spend $800 is yours and yours alone. One thing is clear, these are not the same guys from 2002--and definitley not the same guys from 1981. If that is the band you want to see, you should definitely NOT go see their show. You won't find them there and you'll only be mad at the Stones when you are dissapointed by that fact--when really you should be mad at yourself for ignoring the signs.

If you are going to attend a show at least be completely honest with yourself and know WHY you are going. Are you going to hope to see see this music performed to your standards? Are you just curious to see them? Or are you just swept up in all the hype and just want to go? Once you realize your personal motivation--your expensive purchase will be justified. Good luck.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-27 02:16 by Justin.

oh man, this board is heating up!!! and might i state again, based all on a 1 min clip! A tiny portion of 1 song!

Hm, I seem to be one of the few that actually really like that clip of JJF. I listened to it again and again during the past hours (why is it just this short glimpse?) and truely enjoy it. My impressions:

I expected the worst of Mick's singing after some horrible nasal singing in recent years and am very positively surprised! He also sang JJF terrible often. Keith has recovered a great deal and is probably getting better still (they have a month more of concentrated rehearsing and warming up, I guess, and Keith already seems like a different musician compared to what we saw of him on stages recently). He's is very focused on playing and I quite like what he plays.

I got the feeling they (especially Mick) didn't work on full power yet, did leave some room to better themselves in future gigs. After one hour of singing Mick didn't seem to be out of breath like in the White House right at the beginning, where he did too much. He (and the others) seem quite relaxed in the clip, able to do more if he wants. Maybe Mick was cautious, wanted to test himself, not overexert at the first longer gig after many years. After all it was a WARM UP gig.

And I liked the approach to be more true to the recording. Some versions I heared were just a run through the song, while here it sounds fresher again, just with a rest of rehearsal mood, not on full power, but very promising.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-27 02:46 by StrawberriesBlueberries.

Congrats to the guy with the cell, now his video has been shown on TF1





HMN

Quote
marclaff
And what about Mick?
He plays guitar on Whip, D&G and MY, harp on Champagne, MY (for the end of the song) and MR obviously.
I saw Mick worrying sometimes on stage, yesterday he looks pretty confident and relax;
But on another hand, i think he is more the chef d'orchestre now. If Chuck does the counting in, Mick closes some songs with just a glance or finger (meaning one time) to Charlie and/or Keith.
This role was more Keith's work in the past (just a thought from yesterday).
During MR, i have a sensation of déjà vu : omg i saw this song for the first time in Brussels back in 73 and i'm sure Mick did the same routine and he's so slim that he could put the 72-73 suits today. Spacio-temporal journey if you can imagine

To conclude, i'm afraid i will never be able to thank enough Bjornulf for his gift.
I have a debt but may be, who knows, StonesLand is so wide...

All good points Marc, I'd pointed that out in my comments too, it's really Mick's show now with Keith putting on a good face, maybe because he knows where he comes from and is just grateful to be there...it's good to be anywhere. It worked fine last night, no trainwrecks and the dudes certainly didn't inspire pity, something that Keith's videos from last year did to some extent. Lean, mean (Keith acting that killer look and playing these slashing chords on JJF) and generally rocking it out. What more can you ask for?

Sure, I bumped into a video of "Flip the Switch", Keith played better, moved around more...that was 15 years ago. Anyway there wasn't much room to swing around with a guitar in your hand yesterday. A good show is guaranteed to all who'll see them in 2012 and that in itself is something.

Sorry I didn't get to meet you 10+ years after you kindly shared the Rotterdam '75 tapes, I'd missed the message where Bjornulf said his extra ticket had gone to you.

I totally agree to ure view!

For my first post i'll join u in the conversation With a small review

I'm a fan i admit it. I can't afford the tickets and won't go to the show in London. Same as u i'm not advocating those @#$%& prices. I was really dying thinking i could not see them again because of that.

I was one of the lucky ones yesterday, i found the Stones exactely where they should be! It was the best concert of my life!! after the 9th ive seen of them!
Yes they are not playing the song the same way they've been performing them during the last 5 decades!
I'm 32 and if i can sign to be as fit and good as mick at this age where should i sign!! ???
Keith and Ronnie were brothers on this gig, the band was tight, aware comunicating, looking at each others, smiling aloooot!! HAVING FUN!! SAME AS WE DID!!! And for me that's the most important!

It was also a risk for them to start a warm up gig with this configuration. The stones and one keyboard! That's it!! No circus around it! Pure sound! A Brown Sugar with Ronnie doing the saxophone solo i have never heard any version of it so far!!

Cheers!

Hey, great first post if I may say so myself, that UserID sounds partly familiar, do I maybe know you from somewhere, like since Tuesday ? ;-)

Since you mention communication, one of the most striking things for me was seeing these 6 guys communicate like any normal band, not this big oiled machine you imagine playing to 80,000 people, sounds idiotic I know, but that puts a human light on them, after they've done it all and seen it all over the past 50 years, they're sill there rockin' it out like there's no tomorrow!

Crazy when you stop and think of it really. Obviously they get a rush from showing they can still do it and the response of the crowd must be exhilarating, yesterday it was wild, never seen anything else like that before really. The only calm moment was during Shattered (never particularly like that one) when Mick couldn't work the crowd as much as he was busy taking cues from his prompter for the rather dense lyrics...Mick, please drop that one for the next show

Oh and did I already say I'm fond of these two pictures :

Before :


After :


Rock on !



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-27 03:22 by gotdablouse.

Quote
Justin

Quote
Dreamer
Because I don't think they sounded just fine. What is just fine to you??
Gimme a review of the gig instead of this believe you are defending??!!? I aint buying what you are so desperately trying to sell. This is just your believe you are talking about and you think I don't give you the right to believe just because I don't find the music acceptable to my standards...
Just because I dare to criticise.
Very weak to compare them to elderly family members. What bs is that??
And I should give them a wave when they pass me??
They wanna go onstage and charge 800 dollars or so: I wanna find out if they are worth it but nobody here is giving an honest review.
All I find here is just lots of over the top admiring bs. Like you guys are from scientology or something. Or school girls talking about Britney Spears: AWESOME!
Just grow up and dare judging them Justin instead of defending them while I'm not even attacking them.

I just think you're wasting a whole lot of energy on this. I'm confused what you are saying I am trying to "sell." What am I selling exactly?...the fact that you should be reminded how old these guys are before you buy a ticket? Wow, what a scam! Don't give me a lesson about being an overzealous fanboy when you are the one who is very upset about the Rolling Stones not playing to your "standards." You're still expecting A LOT from this band--I am not. Who exactly is living in denial here?

You've seen enough of the video to judge for yourself. If you are such a fan, you'd be able to tell immediately the current state of the band by watching those videos. It's VERY clear to me. No review from any person attending the show will be "neutral" enough for you to make a decision. The decision to spend $800 is yours and yours alone. One thing is clear, these are not the same guys from 2002--and definitley not the same guys from 1981. If that is the band you want to see, you should definitely NOT go see their show. You won't find them there and you'll only be mad at the Stones when you are dissapointed by that fact--when really you should be mad at yourself for ignoring the signs.

If you are going to attend a show at least be completely honest with yourself and know WHY you are going. Are you going to hope to see see this music performed to your standards? Are you just curious to see them? Or are you just swept up in all the hype and just want to go? Once you realize your personal motivation--your expensive purchase will be justified. Good luck.

The world according to Justin...
Maybe it's better that I answer the questions you ask me instead of you giving the answers as well. First, I'm not expecting anything here: just looking for honest information in a review. You on the other hand are accepting everything so it seems. You ask me "Are you going to hope to see see this music performed to your standards?" Sure! At least I have standards. You make it look like that's hardly allowed by you...
And I certainly don't like to be swept up in all the hype when it comes to yes or no attending a show.
About wasting energy: just asked a couple of times for reviews: you are the one that looks like a crusader here against me and superrevvy and anybody who just want neutral information.
Do you go without hoping this music performed to your standards? I don't mind if you have them and if they are different. And I don't mind if you don't have them. But don't blame me I have my own.

thanks ))

I'm not good at finding out who is what nickname on iorr lol! But what i know for sure is that if u were there! we know each others !! )

I want more Stones !! Love them so much! And all of u are part of the show! I was so happy to make this thing with my close friends, some i had not seen for long and sharing this exciting moment, some i discovered along the journey! What a day my friend! what a day!!

Can't sleep ))

Quote
Dreamer

Quote
Justin

Quote
Dreamer
Because I don't think they sounded just fine. What is just fine to you??
Gimme a review of the gig instead of this believe you are defending??!!? I aint buying what you are so desperately trying to sell. This is just your believe you are talking about and you think I don't give you the right to believe just because I don't find the music acceptable to my standards...
Just because I dare to criticise.
Very weak to compare them to elderly family members. What bs is that??
And I should give them a wave when they pass me??
They wanna go onstage and charge 800 dollars or so: I wanna find out if they are worth it but nobody here is giving an honest review.
All I find here is just lots of over the top admiring bs. Like you guys are from scientology or something. Or school girls talking about Britney Spears: AWESOME!
Just grow up and dare judging them Justin instead of defending them while I'm not even attacking them.

I just think you're wasting a whole lot of energy on this. I'm confused what you are saying I am trying to "sell." What am I selling exactly?...the fact that you should be reminded how old these guys are before you buy a ticket? Wow, what a scam! Don't give me a lesson about being an overzealous fanboy when you are the one who is very upset about the Rolling Stones not playing to your "standards." You're still expecting A LOT from this band--I am not. Who exactly is living in denial here?

You've seen enough of the video to judge for yourself. If you are such a fan, you'd be able to tell immediately the current state of the band by watching those videos. It's VERY clear to me. No review from any person attending the show will be "neutral" enough for you to make a decision. The decision to spend $800 is yours and yours alone. One thing is clear, these are not the same guys from 2002--and definitley not the same guys from 1981. If that is the band you want to see, you should definitely NOT go see their show. You won't find them there and you'll only be mad at the Stones when you are dissapointed by that fact--when really you should be mad at yourself for ignoring the signs.

If you are going to attend a show at least be completely honest with yourself and know WHY you are going. Are you going to hope to see see this music performed to your standards? Are you just curious to see them? Or are you just swept up in all the hype and just want to go? Once you realize your personal motivation--your expensive purchase will be justified. Good luck.

The world according to Justin...
Maybe it's better that I answer the questions you ask me instead of you giving the answers as well. First, I'm not expecting anything here: just looking for honest information in a review. You on the other hand are accepting everything so it seems. You ask me "Are you going to hope to see see this music performed to your standards?" Sure! At least I have standards. You make it look like that's hardly allowed by you...
And I certainly don't like to be swept up in all the hype when it comes to yes or no attending a show.
About wasting energy: just asked a couple of times for reviews: you are the one that looks like a crusader here against me and superrevvy and anybody who just want neutral information.
Do you go without hoping this music performed to your standards? I don't mind if you have them and if they are different. And I don't mind if you don't have them. But don't blame me I have my own.

There is no neutral information or review when u talk about MUSIC! It's not a mathématical thing... On a review u give ure emotions, what U heard an see and nobody else. If u wanna read something neutral go to scientific revues there u'll find what u seek.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Dreamer

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
roby
What a disembodied version. No energy. No guitars.

Quote
MRambler




Little bit longer version in hd quality in RS youtube channel

No guitars, really? What are you talking about?

Come on Dandy: this is poor quality! Don't be selective deaf.

I wonder why a newbee on this board calls me selctive deaf because I like something? Really?

Musically and historically I know more about the Stones than most people I know of, and I´ve proven that. I don´t need anybody to tell me what I think should be good or not when it comes to the Stones.

I´ve heard ridiculous trainwrecks of JJF from all eras; 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1979(!), 1981, 1982, 1989, 1990, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2002, 2003, 2005 and 2007 before this version - that we heard a one minute clip from at the end of the show.

If I like what I hear (and see), it is because I´m really impressed by the magic this bunch of 70 year olds still can create, although in smaller doses than before.

If you or other guys here only judge the Stones from how good the guitar solos are, I´m vowed by your short term memory. There is no guitar solo on the original JJF-version, and it stands as a rock among popular music recordings of all time. Think of that - just for a second.

A bunch of 70 year olds (that IS what they should be judged by anyway) playing our favourite music (that´s why we post here, right?), maybe with some former band members guesting later on - what more can we ask for?

I wonder why a scandinavian on this board likes to call me a newbee all of a sudden?
At least you do your best to try to explain why you like it: I appreciate that.
As well as your knowledge of music.
Shaking the tree always gives result
But don't hide behind the 70 year old trees!
Oh and I wasn't talking about a solo on JJF! So spare me the lecture. It's the general impression it gives me. MJ is not singing very good here, do you think he is??
But maybe I should not ask such questions to 60 or 70 year old historians from scandinavia...?

Yeah to almost everybody. There was certainly no intent on my part, or almost
anybody's, to tell anyone else how they should react to the only decent-quality
piece of information we all share: That one-minute vid.

That one-minute vid both turned me off and changed my mind for the worse about what
is happening. If it did not turn you off, or if it turned you on, great!

I hope for everybody's sake that Keith makes a fool out of me for once again
seriously doubting him.

Quote
happyparis

Quote
Dreamer

Quote
Justin

Quote
Dreamer
Because I don't think they sounded just fine. What is just fine to you??
Gimme a review of the gig instead of this believe you are defending??!!? I aint buying what you are so desperately trying to sell. This is just your believe you are talking about and you think I don't give you the right to believe just because I don't find the music acceptable to my standards...
Just because I dare to criticise.
Very weak to compare them to elderly family members. What bs is that??
And I should give them a wave when they pass me??
They wanna go onstage and charge 800 dollars or so: I wanna find out if they are worth it but nobody here is giving an honest review.
All I find here is just lots of over the top admiring bs. Like you guys are from scientology or something. Or school girls talking about Britney Spears: AWESOME!
Just grow up and dare judging them Justin instead of defending them while I'm not even attacking them.

I just think you're wasting a whole lot of energy on this. I'm confused what you are saying I am trying to "sell." What am I selling exactly?...the fact that you should be reminded how old these guys are before you buy a ticket? Wow, what a scam! Don't give me a lesson about being an overzealous fanboy when you are the one who is very upset about the Rolling Stones not playing to your "standards." You're still expecting A LOT from this band--I am not. Who exactly is living in denial here?

You've seen enough of the video to judge for yourself. If you are such a fan, you'd be able to tell immediately the current state of the band by watching those videos. It's VERY clear to me. No review from any person attending the show will be "neutral" enough for you to make a decision. The decision to spend $800 is yours and yours alone. One thing is clear, these are not the same guys from 2002--and definitley not the same guys from 1981. If that is the band you want to see, you should definitely NOT go see their show. You won't find them there and you'll only be mad at the Stones when you are dissapointed by that fact--when really you should be mad at yourself for ignoring the signs.

If you are going to attend a show at least be completely honest with yourself and know WHY you are going. Are you going to hope to see see this music performed to your standards? Are you just curious to see them? Or are you just swept up in all the hype and just want to go? Once you realize your personal motivation--your expensive purchase will be justified. Good luck.

The world according to Justin...
Maybe it's better that I answer the questions you ask me instead of you giving the answers as well. First, I'm not expecting anything here: just looking for honest information in a review. You on the other hand are accepting everything so it seems. You ask me "Are you going to hope to see see this music performed to your standards?" Sure! At least I have standards. You make it look like that's hardly allowed by you...
And I certainly don't like to be swept up in all the hype when it comes to yes or no attending a show.
About wasting energy: just asked a couple of times for reviews: you are the one that looks like a crusader here against me and superrevvy and anybody who just want neutral information.
Do you go without hoping this music performed to your standards? I don't mind if you have them and if they are different. And I don't mind if you don't have them. But don't blame me I have my own.

There is no neutral information or review when u talk about MUSIC! It's not a mathématical thing... On a review u give ure emotions, what U heard an see and nobody else. If u wanna read something neutral go to scientific revues there u'll find what u seek.

So you just have to accept my not neutral opinion...which is not so positive based on what I hear in the videos. But...I seem to be a little different: people here just want positive reviews and not even the neutral ones.
Well happyparis; hope you just find your happyness here! Mathematical, neutral or emotional

I watched the clips to JJF and Shattered. (Didn't make it through Shattered to WTWCD.) JJF was strictly okay. Nothing to write home about. And, now, if you like this rendition of Shattered... God love ya. Enjoy it. It's no skin off my nose. But it ain't great rock and roll. Not in my book. I wouldn't buy it.

This "they're great for their age" rap doesn't hold water for me. I might see it if they charged a fee that was "great for their age" to go along with it ($40 on my budget) but when you're charging twice what my monthly mortgage payment is, you should be doing a show that blows 1973 out of the water. And they ain't gonna.

Another argument I can't hang with is "if people wanna pay that, let 'em charge that!" Capitalism, charging what the market will bear, etc. Well, calling it that doesn't make it right. Lot's of people are stupid/naive/giddy enough to pay it, but that doesn't make it right. It's just taking advantage of people, especially if you're going to play like old men.

Quote
superrevvy
That one-minute vid both turned me off and changed my mind for the worse about what
is happening. If it did not turn you off, or if it turned you on, great!

I hope for everybody's sake that Keith makes a fool out of me for once again
seriously doubting him.

Fair enough, but it's called a warmup gig for a reason. Their age and years between gigs makes that incubation period longer than before. I appreciate what you say about hoping Keith proves you wrong. There were so many here who insisted that he just can't play anymore, period. One down, one to go!