I reckon 1971 live Stones sucks!

I don't know what it is but this year of touring (the short Farewell Tour of UK) lacked any real spark whatsoever!!

Listen to the few boots available:
Leeds: mediocre performance, very laid back with little energy
Marquee Club: no energy at all - one of the bands most boring shows during the Mick Taylor period.
Coventry: this is OK - certainly better show than Leeds IMO
London Roundhouse: mediocre

I don't know what it is....perhaps the band was going through a difficult phase with Keith heavily into drugs, Mick & Bianca? Leaving England? The Klein problem?
Anyone have an idea?

Compare these perfromances to the great 1970 European Tour & later the 1972 US Tour ! They improved so much from 1971 to 1972 !!

It just seems out of the Mick Taylor Live years with the band that 1971 stands out as the poorest.

Weird.

Esky

I agree with you esky, the marquee show is boring and overrated, and the stones played like a new band on the 72-73 tours. Mick Taylor for example, listen how his guitarplaying developed from the 69 tour to the 72 tour!

Esky: Leeds 1971 is a classic. The ROCKED! You can still be laid back an rock! Taylor took some briljant solo's during this tour! The played much better than 1969 / 1970 IMHO. The following tour was to different to compare, but 1972 was a great tour, I agree on that.

Yep, I agree - it's easily the worst Taylor-era year for live performances, judging by what's available. But there are only 4 recordings available (not sure about Newcastle?) out of a total of 15 or 16 concerts played, so they might not necessarily be representative of the whole tour.

It's like the band's sound completely changed.

Definately agree with The Worst about Mick Taylor, his guitar sound changed significantly from 1971 to 1972/73 - incredible transition. It's like going on the road again spraked them back to life....

Although Leeds is excellent soundboard, I still reckon it lacks any real spark...

Esky

Just listen to Midnight Rambler Esky!

Most performances of songs in '71 are relatively close to the '69 peformances - but without the vigor. They needed fresh material and a new spirit. I agree that there is a much bigger jump from '71 to '72 than from '69 to '71.

Still, the laid back Leeds show remains one of my fave boots: best to be enjoyed by the fireplace, along with a good port and a fine cigar.

----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."

"Shit!... No shit, awright!"

Yes Greg, nothing beats a 1971 Bitch at the fireplace (the song that is.......)!

Listen to Midnight Rambler from any show on the 69 tour, yes it rocked, but listen to Bruxelles 1973 - how they played MR is maybe the best song recorded live I've ever heard! And that is the big diffrent, they played good in 69 (I don't want to mention 70-71, they're just a shadow) but in 1872 and 1873 they really played like the greatest rock'n'roll band in the world.

I belive Rolling Stones live in 72-73 is the best rock'n'roll ever performed.

of course I ment 1972 and 1973, not 1872 and 1873... I know they are old, but ...

The thing is - listen to all the songs the band played in 1969 that they played in 1971:

Street Fighting Man
Midnight Rambler
Satisfaction
Live With Me
Love In Vain
etc...

They ALL are performed better in 1969/70....

I suppose in 1971's defence, there is not alot to compare the 1969/70 & 1972/73 Tours to....but to me the energy is definately lacking with what we have!

Esky

As a band performance, I generally agree.

But I prefer Taylor in DF and BS at Leeds--where his solos are structured more like his signature classics--over the '72 versions I've heard.

Asie from the lack of energy in 1971, I really don't like the sound. Instead of the piles of Ampeg SVT amps, they experimented with Fender Twin Reverb amps. The Leeds gigs just sound way too clean. Combine that with a lack of stage tuners and a Ampeg Armstrong guitar with tuning instabillity....no, not my favourite tour.

Mathijs

Esky, your my mate but I have to disagree with you, at least about Leeds. Keith's performance on "Let It Rock" is one my all time favorites of any Stones performance and Mick's solo on "Love In Vain" stands as on of my favorites as well. I also liked the reworking of 'Satisfaction." Granted, it would nice to have a few more recordings for comparative purposes but Leeds at least is a classic in my mind. And Mathijs, why are you wasting your time here when you could be playing your new guitar? Merry Christmas to the lot of ya!

Mathijs thanks for pointing out the different guitar/amp setups used for this Tour. It now makes alot more sense.

Chris me mate, yes I agree about Keith's work on Let It Rock, but just the general feel of Leeds is too clean and lacks a bit of spark....IMO.

Have a good one.

Esky

I love the way mick laughs at keith when he hits that bum note
during midnight rambler at the marquee 71, and as for the 71 tour it was kind of boring

The reason 1971 sucked was simple: Keith was so junked out he couldn't have told you who was buried in Grant's Tomb.

"The wonder of Jimi Hendrix was that he could stand up at all he was so pumped full of drugs." Patsy, Patsy Stone

the 71 version of satisfaction is awful,what where they thinking

Leeds is laidback but it works,
they got a nice groove going.
For me tho, the Marquee doesn't
really click.

In retrospect, '71 was a bit like Ronnie's first tour in '75, except the band sounded brilliant in '69 and sublime, absolutely perfect, in 1970. I've been listening to my '70 boots and I'm just amazed at how fresh and hungry and 'kicking the stall all night' they sounded.

I know Keith started using heroin after his return from the '69 tour, but I think that by March '71 it became his life.



"The wonder of Jimi Hendrix was that he could stand up at all he was so pumped full of drugs." Patsy, Patsy Stone

Esky wrote, "I don't know what it is....perhaps the band was going through a difficult phase with Keith heavily into drugs, Mick & Bianca? Leaving England? The Klein problem?"

All of the above, mate!

"The wonder of Jimi Hendrix was that he could stand up at all he was so pumped full of drugs." Patsy, Patsy Stone

I think it may be the Stones were taking a different approach playing smaller venues- less amplification and more laid back sound. The concerts at the Marquee and Leeds are well below the Stones standards of this period and the most effective songs are the less rocky such as Dead Flowers and I Got The Blues.I also think Jaggers vocals begin to sound a little hoarse after a while at the Marquee.
I would agree it sounds from what i have heard the Stones most ineffective tour with Mick Taylor in the group.

Can you really tell how they sounded live, in real, from a live recording, without actually being there? I never saw them live until 1973, so I am not able to tell how they sounded in 1971. But in 1973 I just loved them. Then 1982 was probably the tour I thought their sound was not as good as before/after. The rest has been excellent all the way. Sure not technically briliant always, but just great, complete. Would not have mised a single show. I think that is the measure. If they are not great then you could have missed a show. I would not part with a single one.

Just for the record. I have friends who saw them live in 1964. They did not hear anything. Because of all the screaming and noise. That is when they built their entire career. Did they sound great then? Who would be able to tell? From their live records?

PS. Sure they sounded great. I know. But how do we know?

Bjornulf

BV - of course you can tell how they sounded from a live recording! Just listen to say MSG 1969 or Altamont 1969 - check out how Mick was really into his singing, how Keith slammed away at his guitar. Check out most US 1972 shows, Aussie '73, Brussels 1973 - check out the Mick & Keith, add Taylor in the mix....amazing.

Check out Leeds 1971, Marquee (the 2 really good quality shows) - Mick was going through the motions, Keith probably too drugged out to care.....

Yes you can tell if it's a boring show or not without being there...IMO

And to further add to Menace's post about how perfect they were on the 1970 European Tour, Bill Wyman says in his book that they rehearsed & rehearsed and were well prepared for that Tour which explains why each show was great. I have a feeling they didn't spend much time on the Farewell 1971 Tour....

Esky

Ive always wondered why 71 is sopposed to be so good, the sound is so thin almost neat and Mick is still stuck in his '69 style and maybe Keith too. '72 and '73 is so much better and I agree on MR versions from these two years. It is the best rock performance on stage ever. SFTD from LA 75 is second and then Mocambo of course.

Keith was AT LEAST as much a junkie in 1972 - 73 as 1970. I think they were trying out the soul-band approach, influenced by Delaney & Bonnie (& soul bands) in 1971, figuring out how to integrate & make room for horns etc (I mean, horns on 'Stray Cat'?!). Mathijs & ChrisM make great points too, & I think Leeds (the only 71 boot I have) seems like they're going for more laidback in a small space (University gig), as opposed to spectacle/rock-out the arenas '72. The boogie w/Bo intro to MR on '71 is terrific & unique. In '73, the reflective, weary low-key mood of Goats Head is at total odds with the fall tour, some of the hardest rock they ever made - & even here they're starting to experiment with funk & more cross rhythms (unsurprising they would have Ollie Brown in '75 - 77, however one sees the results). BTW I have the Swingin Pig 24-bit (tsp 215) 'Leeds Lungs' & assume it's still the best - has it been improved upon significantly?

I recall reading in one of Bill Wyman's books (the second one?) that Keith showed up way late for the Marquee taping. He also destroyed the Marquee sign and generally acted angry. He had a habit of being late for the entire tour. Keith has said he was angry at the time over the change in his relationship with Mick, mostly due to Bianca. They used to hang out together whenever they wanted and Mick wasn't allowed to do that when he took up with Bianca, versus when he was with Marianne Faithfull. The guys had houses on the same street, and then the Allen Klein thing forced the move to France. Bianca wanted Mick to herself. They also spoke French in front of other people, and one doubts that Keith knows much French. Altogether, it led to a passive-aggressive fight between the two guys, also apparent on the Exile on Main Street stories. Probably by 1972, Keith adjusted a bit more to the new situations. Mick Taylor also got stuck in the middle, so to speak, so it probably improved for him as well.

1971 was a great year for the Stones (Brown Sugar) and music in general.

I've often thought 1971 wasn't so good because English audiences were perhaps a bit more tame than in the USA, which may have fed back to the band's enthusiasm for playing well.

We're comparing a gig at an English university (!) with a gig at Madison Square Garden.

Just a thought.

<figuring out how to integrate & make room for horns etc (I mean, horns on 'Stray Cat'?!).>

Horns on Stray Cat was imo one of the few things that worked really well on the Leeds-show. Brilliant version!