I thought I'll post it because "mikey" mentioned it in another thread.
------
Not their best. It’s now more than seven years since The Stones last studio album and, since 1997’s underwhelming 'Bridges To Babylon', they’ve fashioned themselves into something resembling a mobile theme park. A spectacularly successful one, at that. Rather in the way that no childhood these days is complete without a visit to Legoland, seeing The Stones live in the flesh has become one of those must-do-once experiences for grown-up children. The obligatory live album that duly follows is the rock equivalent of the souvenir snapshot of your sulky, snot-nosed little smasher being photographed next to the Spinning Spider. Album and photo are guaranteed to end up stuffed in a bottom drawer, unseen and unlistened to, but at least they offer tangible proof that you were there.

Documenting their World Tour of 2002/2003 across two CDs, "Live Licks" is the band’s seventh live album. Their previous live recordings fall into two easily demarcated camps. There’s the ones worth owning 'Got Live If You Want It'. "Get Yer Ya Ya’s Out" and "Stripped". Then there’s the rest, of which 1977’s "Love You Live" and 1991’s "Flashpoint" scraped closest to the bottom of the barrel. Until now, that is.

This time around, they at least offer a unique selling point: - an entire side of songs never before recorded live. At best, these offerings lend some modest support to the argument that the last Stones tour was their most riveting for years. A taut version of "Can’t You Hear Me Knocking", with Keef and Ronnie interlocking like teeth in a zipper. A cover of "That’s How Strong My Love Is" that aspires to and damn near reaches the Stax soulfulness of the original. And "Everybody Needs Somebody To Love" that the band carry off through sheer over-exuberance by way of finale.

Apart from that, it’s hard to escape the thought that you’re listening to the world’s most expensive tribute band. Perfunctory versions of songs from "Tattoo You" and "Bridges To Babylon" that sounded fairly perfunctory in their original forms. Near complete desecrations of "Rocks Off" and "Beast Of Burden". And the spectacle of Keith warbling his way through Hoagy Carmichael’s "The Nearness Of You", which at least provides some measure of comic relief.

Aside from a beautifully restrained "Angie" and Keef in his piratical swaggering element throughout “Happy”, the other CD of Stones classics has precisely naught to recommend it. Unless, that is, your idea of money well spent is listening to a band pummel their finest songs (“Paint It Black”, “Brown Sugar”, “Gimme Shelter”) into the dust. Main offender is Sir Mick himself, who appears to be singing entirely from memory: mostly off-key and reduced to a messy stockpile of vocal tics and campy affectations. The album finally hits rock bottom with a “Honky Tonk Women” that’s so pedestrian it’s practically still-born. Halfway through the song, just when you think it can’t possibly get any worse, on strolls Sheryl Crow.

Jon Wilde

Main offender is Sir Mick himself, who appears to be singing entirely from memory: mostly off-key and reduced to a messy stockpile of vocal tics and campy affectations.

This is just bullshit, IMO - you can critisise lots of the last tour, but Mick delievered a great performance!

Yep. I agree with KR. The whole review is bullshit in every sense of the word. Although I do agree that HTW sucks.

JumpingKentFlash

It sounds like he pulled the review off of this board - there's nothing he said that hasn't been said here! Well, except the bit about Mick, perhaps.

Yes, exactly, sjs12! But we are the only ones allowed to critizise something like Live Licks. It has not met our expectations, but it is still high above most of the other crap out there that Uncut raves about. Since they don´t ship the extra CD anymore (but take the money) I have not renewed my Uncut subscription. Otherwise I would cancel now, those bastards!

Well, I think that the critic got it mostly right. We are talking about the most unneeded and boring Rolling Stones product ever (that wouldn't ever been released if it has been in the control of Sir Mick - that at least is what he says!). The best describing line is:

"you’re listening to the world’s most expensive tribute band"

Well, has Flip the Switch got a rival?


- Doxa

Don't expect Keef to give Uncut an interview like in 2002 anytime soon. What a bunch of bastards working at Uncut.

JumpingKentFlash

The reviewer got it completely right, and you know it.

Mathijs

Indeed Mathijs. Mabe it is not what you want to hear but sadly it's true.

Cheers,
Wuudy

I think LL is very good. We don't share the opinion. But that's OK.

JumpingKentFlash

There's also an error in this article. "Live Licks" is actually the band's eighth live album, not their seventh as quoted.

I don't think that Stripped counts as a live album in their opinion.

JumpingKentFlash

Hmmm, perhaps not, though I fail to see the reasoning why it wouldn't be included as such.

"The reviewer got it completely right, and you know it"
"Maybe it is not what you want to hear but sadly it's true"

I have to agree, too...

[There'll be no wedding today...]

<The reviewer got it completely right, and you know it.>

Of course, some of it is correct, but picking on Jagger is childish. The reviewer's musical knowledge is at best weak.

Apart from the bit about Mick's singing, its not far off the mark...

what IS so ridiculous is that so many people here seem to think the band dont deserve any flak whatsoever for another shameless cash-in. And a shoddily packaged, amateurishly edited one at that. No wonder this band are so bloody creatively lazy and unambitious

Apart from a few sycophants on the internet, you wont find too many people arguing that this is anything but an entirely pointless release. If Uncut are a bunch of bastards for giving them shit over it, then so are the vast majority of their fans who have voted with their pockets and chose not to buy it (look at the sales of tickets for the last tour, and then look at the sales for this album and you'll get the percentage of the 'bastards' in question..)

Pull the wool from over your eyes, folks.

It´s not that bad and you know that too. Stuff like Monkey Man worked extremly well at Madison Square Garden, they screwed it up everywhere else. There could be a worse live album if you have a closer listen to some concerts from the tour... I mean what about a @#$%& up Brown Sugar intro on record? It really could be worse.
But the problem is: WE KNOW SAME TIME THAT IT COULD BE BETTER. But those Uncut reviewers and all those other writers have no clue. They all write the same @#$%&: CD1 is from a stadium and boring, CD2 is from a club and has its moments.... Well Start Me Up is from the Garden, Monkey Man too....
I would have loved someone writing a big story about @#$%& up live records with cuts like in Rocks Off - BUT most of those reviewers did not even recognize this.

What those reviewers also don´t realize: The Stones are simply high above in another league. I like some of those new guitar bands they sometimes rave about too (those pale boys that have only 15 songs or something and play 45-minute-gigs), but take a look a The Hives for example. I mean the singer is alright, but what about the other guys, can you imagine these (I don´t dare to say ugly) boys to be still there in 40 years? I think they won´t have enough hits but they also don´t have the charisma. The Stones are a miracle, there´s no band like them. It´s more than just guitar playing, Mathijs. If they are gone, we only got tribute bands left. But this is not the same.

I actually disagree with the reviewer! He may be right about it being a pointless souvenir album, but even Mick said he wanted a double live album of rareties and the record company wouldn't have it. So they can't really be blamed for that now, can they?

What he has missed is that, in terms of sound and mix, it is the best live album for a long time. Certainly since LYL and possibly even since GYYYO. But then, the reviewer views LYL as scraping the bottom of the barrel. (Some may agree, but I love that album).

Sometimes readers prefer to read bad reviews and some reviewers play up to this - a bit like Michael Winner.

Of course everything comes down to the matter of individual taste, but when I say that the reviewer's musical knowledge is weak, I'm thinking of the examples he/she uses:

The version of Happy, for instance, is pure bollocks - one of the worst versions ever! It's named as one of the greats.

The Nearness Of You: Off course it's about fun. How little irony does the reviewer think Keith has got??

Why isn't Monkey Man mentioned positively?

Agree with HTW, Neighbours (if that was the song from TY he thought about) and Rocks Off.

I think the atmosphere in Beast Of Burden is great, but the version is weakened by poor guitar playing.

The warhorses are OK, not perfect, not bad. Still, we can only count on one hand bands that could have played them better (please don't forget this )

AND: I've never understood why the Olympia version of That's How Strong My Love Is is so great? IMHO, the version is lame, and Mick is not singing very well (heard that one better before...)

I don't get the point, in the review and in most of your comments.

It makes me feel good to read every now and then some bad reviews of the big names' stuff. It's a free world and if Mr. Wilde thinks that LL is a crap cd, he has all the rights in the world to say it!

Still I don't agree with what he writes.

LL is not the Stones best live album. True. It is also true that it is the budget souvenir of the past licks tour (the first class one being 4F). But what has all this to do with the fact that it’s more than seven years since B2B?

They are performers and they have spent a life on the road. That is what they have always done. And that is what they were doing in the last 7 years. Does this mean that that they are a "mobile theme park"?

Is there a rule somewhere that says that you are allowed to tour only after having released a new work (like mummy saying to the kid you can go to play only after you have done your homework)?

Marketing is marketing. It is true that local promoters find it easy to present a Stones show like one of those must-do-once experiences for grown-up children. But this is also true for all the big acts around (Springsteen, U2, Floyd etc.). Are we so naive to expect that stadiums should be full of only "true" stones fans?

After all, who cares. If Britney Spears or Madonna ever came up with something good, I would buy it even if they don't have the early "Rage against the machine" punk attitude.

We have discussed the edits and stuff. Here uncut's review is fair enough.

What I don't get is the "world’s most expensive tribute band" point. It's the last thing that comes into my mind when listening to LL. You might not like the "vegas act" or CL plink plonk, but this is just a matter of taste. Who cares. MY ears tell me that they are still damn good (even if, to be honest, I agree 100% with Uncut re "The Nearness Of You" and HTW). Not only way better than what I had expected.


C

The problem is guys: I like it wether you say it's weak or not. I think it's great. There's some bad things on it sure. But the cool things outnumber the bad for sure. Also It's the best live cd since LYL.

JumpingKentFlash

Are all you Live Licks enthusiasts saying that you'd prefer to add this so-so effort to your collection rather than a real enthusiast's idea of a Stones live album say one from the 1972 or 73 shows or even one from the "lost" tour of 1970?

Get real guys!

It is an honest review, and the writer has a right to his opinion, whether we agree with him or not. I happen to agree nearly 99% with everything he says. Sadly, the Stones could care less about putting out anything of quality these days, and because of their lack of concern, the new release is a lousy reflection of the 40 LICKS tour. I happened to have the good fortune of seeing numerous shows last tour like most of us here, including several club shows, and everyone would have to admit that actually being at a Stones show these days - with all the excitement, confetti, explosions, etc., is alot more intersting than hearing any of the recorded results of the shows. There are a couple of club shows from last tour that might be an exception, but overall, not much is worth cherishing in the same ways as anything from the late '60's, early '70's and up to 1981. It's really a matter of listening time...life is short. I don't have time to listen to inferior product anymore. So the question is...would I rather listen to Keith warble out "The Nearness Of You" from the last tour...Or would I rather kick back and hear the band in their all-time early '70's prime by enjoying some of the early boots? The answer is obvious to me as I'm sure it is to the rest of everyone here. But still, there's nothing like being at a live Stones show with the roar of the crowd, fireworks, etc...even the 40 Licks tour experience was superior to all other bands these days. It's just too bad that the official recorded history of that tour is so bad that it only worsens the bands reputation and can only hurt the bands place in rock and roll history as "The Worlds Gtreatest Rock and Roll Band".

i agee with the Uncut critic. ive listened to Live Licks once, and its @#$%&!!
But..... I still love the Stones immensely and hope to catch tem when they play Holland next time!! They are still a bunch of @#$%& great guys!!
bye bye jeroen

Don't listen to it just once. Listen to it a lot and you'll discover that it's great.

JumpingKentFlash

wandering spirit was the last great stones album! Even without keith and charlie and ron



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2004-12-22 00:16 by Railing staine.

So Railing...........you do remember to take your pills right???

JumpingKentFlash

It has become the norm to critise & slag off the Stones (including you Mathijs)
which is absolotely pathetic.
I have listened & been to Stones concerts since 1964 and i am always prepared to critise when necessary.
There is so much drivel from so called experts ( guitar players included)
about the Stones don't sound or play like they did in the 70's

When the next tour comes round in September 2005 please don't bother to turn -up for the Stones concerts.
For all out there who have heavily critised the Stones please be forthcoming and pledge that you will not buy the new album or tickets for the next tour.

Stones40: Maybe that's a little too much to ask of people.

JumpingKentFlash

Live Licks is my favorite live Stones release since Ya Ya's. I like the raw mix of it. Is it as good from start to finish as Ya Ya's? Certainly not...and no live album the Stones ever put out again will be as totally satisfying as Ya Ya's.

But what all the live albums since Ya Ya's have, at least for me, is a couple of gems that make the album worth having. Street Fighting Man, Can't You Hear Me Knocking, That's How Strong My Love Is, Rock Me Baby, Worried About You alone make this album worth having for me.

I find it rather ironic that a fan board like this, where so many fans collect as many boot shows as they can, that the Stones release ONE official document and it gets torn to shreds by the "hardcore fans".

Certainly, it could have been better...but...past live releases also tell me it could have been alot worse. I say just enjoy the gems from it and skip the rest.

Roger