sympathy,may have been keiths best solo in 25 years!!

When did Keith start dressing like Bruce Springsteen?

Quote
nonfilter

Quote
vermontoffender
"Anyone who thinks playing music in a band is work, has never done REAL WORK."

That statement is moronic on any number of levels. In fact, it's kind of astoundingly idiotic.

That's just funny. Anyone who's never played music in a band doesn't know what real work is. I work in construction in the day, farm on the side, and my weekend gigs with the band are what really kicks my ass.

[www.non-filters.com]

funny eh?

Well, why dont you explain it to us... We are talking about The Stones here... so please tell us how big time players like the Stones, who have other people taking care of tuning the guitars and hauling the equipment, work so hard, for maybe 4 hours, every 3-4 days (maybe they do....but not for years)... and how they have it so much harder than people who do real work for a living.. like doing rough-in construction work or running a jack hammer EVERY DAY, 8-9 HOURS PER DAY, 50 WEEKS A YEAR.... all ears eyes... go ahead.

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
DoomandGloom
Great show in Brooklyn, Stones prove they are forever young but is that really necessary? I'd like to see them kick back a little on stage like the elder statesman they are. Remarkable, Midnight Rambler was one of the highlights despite M.T.'s absence, Keith and Ronnie love a challenge. I was there to see the Stones and didn't care about guests.

Agreed
I see no need to quit.... or hanging it up... we could see another transition with my favorite band.... if they feel like it... where they just hang out and do smaller shows... mellower... not jumping rocking and running and rolling.... how about playing some acoustic blues... not selling out 20,000 seats....That would fine with me.... unles it is just required to sell out 20,000 seat arenas.... but I see John Lee Hooker having a pretty good time doing smaller stuff..... JLH aint hanging it up... he aint quitting.

He also ain't breathing....since 2001. But you're right, he never did retire.

Caption: John Lee Hooker at the Long Beach Blues Festival, August 31, 1997.

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
bv
I could write up a long list of issues and problems. Like the guy that arrived next to me with his "girl friend" and wanted me to leave my spot in favour of his "girl friend". He ruined most of "The Last Time", called me a looser and all other sorts of low live callings, and then I left for another spot, like I always do when there is a person that do not respect others at shows.

Your concentration and resolve to enjoy yourself is tremendous. I think if I had been in that position, I might have been fuming the rest of the show and not been able to enjoy myself.

This happened to me as well. I did one of those packages where a small group gets early entry into the venue, and I grabbed a spot on the rail, and one guy asks me to give the spot to his short but very attractive girlfriend. I said I wouldn't give up my spot, but that she could squeeze in if she wanted to. It ended up being hard to concentrate, but I did enjoy myself.

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
DoomandGloom
Great show in Brooklyn, Stones prove they are forever young but is that really necessary? I'd like to see them kick back a little on stage like the elder statesman they are. Remarkable, Midnight Rambler was one of the highlights despite M.T.'s absence, Keith and Ronnie love a challenge. I was there to see the Stones and didn't care about guests.

Agreed
I see no need to quit.... or hanging it up... we could see another transition with my favorite band.... if they feel like it... where they just hang out and do smaller shows... mellower... not jumping rocking and running and rolling.... how about playing some acoustic blues... not selling out 20,000 seats....That would fine with me.... unles it is just required to sell out 20,000 seat arenas.... but I see John Lee Hooker having a pretty good time doing smaller stuff..... JLH aint hanging it up... he aint quitting.

He also ain't breathing....since 2001. But you're right, he never did retire.

Caption: John Lee Hooker at the Long Beach Blues Festival, August 31, 1997.

I meant Buddy Guy.

Quote
JMARKO

Quote
Rokyfan


I think there is probably truth to the weakness of Keith, think it's very possible it's a huge effort for him to suck it up for these shows. That he is pulling it off so well (I'm talking about the playing, not the song selection that has some so up in arms) is impressive.

Hey, at least he is playing guitar on BOTH of the songs he gets to do.

Last time I saw them (the last time they were in New York) he did "You Got The Silver" without even trying to fake playing an instrument. His playing had deteriorated after the head injury, but when he went guitar-less on that song I knew it would probably be the last time I wanted to see them.

So far I haven't seen/heard any reason to change my mind.
The Brooklyn set list is a joke, like many have said. 4 songs they've never played before: two new ones, one old one and a blues cover. Really?


I'd lose interest after the middle portion of their sets on the last few tours, and now the middle portion consists of the two new songs. Then it's Stones-By-Numbers karaoke time.

They have how many albums? and how many songs?

Talk about cruise control.

Well yeah, if its a matter of seeing something new, that's not going to happen. This is obviously not a set put together for a tour, it is a set put together for a 5 show anniversary thing, which is what they are doing. We have heard it all before, again going just by the list of titles. On the other hand, they played and sounded great, for the most part. I guess it's just a matter if that's enough at this point. I'm surprised at you. You've lost interest, have no desire to hear them do Brown Sugan or JJF again, no matter how it sounds? I can understand that, but then there was no point in gertting interested in this thing in the first place.

Quote
Max'sKansasCity
but I see John Lee Hooker having a pretty good time doing smaller stuff..... JLH aint hanging it up... he aint quitting.

A strange statement - let me take a wild guess - you've mixed JLH up with Buddy Guy?

Quote
drbryant

Quote
Max'sKansasCity
but I see John Lee Hooker having a pretty good time doing smaller stuff..... JLH aint hanging it up... he aint quitting.

A strange statement - let me take a wild guess - you've mixed JLH up with Buddy Guy?

let me take a wild guess ... you read what I wrote above.

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
DoomandGloom
Great show in Brooklyn, Stones prove they are forever young but is that really necessary? I'd like to see them kick back a little on stage like the elder statesman they are. Remarkable, Midnight Rambler was one of the highlights despite M.T.'s absence, Keith and Ronnie love a challenge. I was there to see the Stones and didn't care about guests.

Agreed
I see no need to quit.... or hanging it up... we could see another transition with my favorite band.... if they feel like it... where they just hang out and do smaller shows... mellower... not jumping rocking and running and rolling.... how about playing some acoustic blues... not selling out 20,000 seats....That would fine with me.... unles it is just required to sell out 20,000 seat arenas.... but I see John Lee Hooker having a pretty good time doing smaller stuff..... JLH aint hanging it up... he aint quitting.

He also ain't breathing....since 2001. But you're right, he never did retire.

Caption: John Lee Hooker at the Long Beach Blues Festival, August 31, 1997.

I meant Buddy Guy.

Gotcha. But still, Buddy Guy never had the megastardom to scale down from. I don't think he ever had the popularity of an Eric Clapton where he could sell out the 20,000 plus arenas, etc. I would be surprised if BG could sell 2,000 tickets a gig, let alone 20,000. It's got to be a tough choice for an artist/performer, like planning a party where you go, "Well, those nights when we would have 20 or 30 people over were so much fun, but I think I'll just invite 2 or 3 instead." It's not the same rush of adrenalin.

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
DoomandGloom
Great show in Brooklyn, Stones prove they are forever young but is that really necessary? I'd like to see them kick back a little on stage like the elder statesman they are. Remarkable, Midnight Rambler was one of the highlights despite M.T.'s absence, Keith and Ronnie love a challenge. I was there to see the Stones and didn't care about guests.

Agreed
I see no need to quit.... or hanging it up... we could see another transition with my favorite band.... if they feel like it... where they just hang out and do smaller shows... mellower... not jumping rocking and running and rolling.... how about playing some acoustic blues... not selling out 20,000 seats....That would fine with me.... unles it is just required to sell out 20,000 seat arenas.... but I see John Lee Hooker having a pretty good time doing smaller stuff..... JLH aint hanging it up... he aint quitting.

He also ain't breathing....since 2001. But you're right, he never did retire.

Caption: John Lee Hooker at the Long Beach Blues Festival, August 31, 1997.

I meant Buddy Guy.

Gotcha. But still, Buddy Guy never had the megastardom to scale down from. I don't think he ever had the popularity of an Eric Clapton where he could sell out the 20,000 plus arenas, etc. I would be surprised if BG could sell 2,000 tickets a gig, let alone 20,000. It's got to be a tough choice for an artist/performer, like planning a party where you go, "Well, those nights when we would have 20 or 30 people over were so much fun, but I think I'll just invite 2 or 3 instead." It's not the same rush of adrenalin.

fine, we'll put you in the camp of "the Stones should just quit now".

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
nonfilter

Quote
vermontoffender
"Anyone who thinks playing music in a band is work, has never done REAL WORK."

That statement is moronic on any number of levels. In fact, it's kind of astoundingly idiotic.

That's just funny. Anyone who's never played music in a band doesn't know what real work is. I work in construction in the day, farm on the side, and my weekend gigs with the band are what really kicks my ass.

[www.non-filters.com]

funny eh?

Well, why dont you explain it to us... We are talking about The Stones here... so please tell us how big time players like the Stones, who have other people taking care of tuning the guitars and hauling the equipment, work so hard, for maybe 4 hours, every 3-4 days (maybe they do....but not for years)... and how they have it so much harder than people who do real work for a living.. like doing rough-in construction work or running a jack hammer EVERY DAY, 8-9 HOURS PER DAY, 50 WEEKS A YEAR.... all ears eyes... go ahead.

Sorry. Didn't mean to offend. I ran a jack hammer 5 hours a day every day last week and ran a shovel the other 5 of my 10 hour work days. I then went home and hung drywall on the house I'm building for myself by myself til 10:30 pm. I worked 16 hours this past Thursday hanging steel for a building and didn't wake up nearly as drained in the morning as I do after a show. Granted the Stones don't pack their own equipment, but they gotta try to please 20,000 people at their shows vs. my 100. I ain't ever weighed before and after but I'll guarantee I lose 10 lbs during a gig. And I drink quite a few beers during that time.

[www.non-filters.com]

Quote
nonfilter

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
nonfilter

Quote
vermontoffender
"Anyone who thinks playing music in a band is work, has never done REAL WORK."

That statement is moronic on any number of levels. In fact, it's kind of astoundingly idiotic.

That's just funny. Anyone who's never played music in a band doesn't know what real work is. I work in construction in the day, farm on the side, and my weekend gigs with the band are what really kicks my ass.

[www.non-filters.com]

funny eh?

Well, why dont you explain it to us... We are talking about The Stones here... so please tell us how big time players like the Stones, who have other people taking care of tuning the guitars and hauling the equipment, work so hard, for maybe 4 hours, every 3-4 days (maybe they do....but not for years)... and how they have it so much harder than people who do real work for a living.. like doing rough-in construction work or running a jack hammer EVERY DAY, 8-9 HOURS PER DAY, 50 WEEKS A YEAR.... all ears eyes... go ahead.

Sorry. Didn't mean to offend. I ran a jack hammer 5 hours a day every day last week and ran a shovel the other 5 of my 10 hour work days. I then went home and hung drywall on the house I'm building for myself by myself til 10:30 pm. I worked 16 hours this past Thursday hanging steel for a building and didn't wake up nearly as drained in the morning as I do after a show. Granted the Stones don't pack their own equipment, but they gotta try to please 20,000 people at their shows vs. my 100. I ain't ever weighed before and after but I'll guarantee I lose 10 lbs during a gig. And I drink quite a few beers during that time.

[www.non-filters.com]

There is hard work... and then there is playing... losing weight is not really a reflection of that. I have done all the work you quoted.... it is real work... not as hard as going down 300 feet in a coal mine and to mine coal (which I am happy to say I have never done)... I just get weary of hearing actors or ball players or other people who basically play for a living while make millions and millions of Dollars complain of the hard work and long hours, I say in in a coal bucket and go down 400 ffet and mine coal, and the come talk to us about hard work.... The reality is, if they think playing is hard work they have either forgotten, or never knew, what it is like to do REAL work for a fraction of the money. I understand playing on stage take concentration, but it is far from hard work.

And BIG CHEERS to the music players who play (work) just as hard (or harder) for 100 people in a bar to only earn $105.00... it is disappointing to hear some players demand millions to do the exact same job or they wont do it.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-10 06:08 by Max'sKansasCity.

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Agreed
I see no need to quit.... or hanging it up... we could see another transition with my favorite band.... if they feel like it... where they just hang out and do smaller shows... mellower... not jumping rocking and running and rolling.... how about playing some acoustic blues... not selling out 20,000 seats....That would fine with me.... unles it is just required to sell out 20,000 seat arenas.... but I see John Lee Hooker having a pretty good time doing smaller stuff..... JLH aint hanging it up... he aint quitting.

hmmm... I tend to think that if that's what they wanted to do, they'd be doing it already. There seems to be no let up of the jumping and running around at these shows. I don't know where it comes from, if its from Mick or from the Stones collectivley, but it just seems like when they go out there they have to go full tilt and put on a big show. But then again , I remember saying on this board after ABB that if they played again they should just do a limited tour with just a few shows and the general consenus was that if they were gunna play shows again it would have to be a full tour or they wouldn't do it. So, you never know...



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-10 06:45 by ryanpow.

Quote
Max'sKansasCity
fine, we'll put you in the camp of "the Stones should just quit now".

What for? I think The Stones should go on and on.

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
nonfilter

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
nonfilter

Quote
vermontoffender
"Anyone who thinks playing music in a band is work, has never done REAL WORK."

That statement is moronic on any number of levels. In fact, it's kind of astoundingly idiotic.

That's just funny. Anyone who's never played music in a band doesn't know what real work is. I work in construction in the day, farm on the side, and my weekend gigs with the band are what really kicks my ass.

[www.non-filters.com]

funny eh?

Well, why dont you explain it to us... We are talking about The Stones here... so please tell us how big time players like the Stones, who have other people taking care of tuning the guitars and hauling the equipment, work so hard, for maybe 4 hours, every 3-4 days (maybe they do....but not for years)... and how they have it so much harder than people who do real work for a living.. like doing rough-in construction work or running a jack hammer EVERY DAY, 8-9 HOURS PER DAY, 50 WEEKS A YEAR.... all ears eyes... go ahead.

Sorry. Didn't mean to offend. I ran a jack hammer 5 hours a day every day last week and ran a shovel the other 5 of my 10 hour work days. I then went home and hung drywall on the house I'm building for myself by myself til 10:30 pm. I worked 16 hours this past Thursday hanging steel for a building and didn't wake up nearly as drained in the morning as I do after a show. Granted the Stones don't pack their own equipment, but they gotta try to please 20,000 people at their shows vs. my 100. I ain't ever weighed before and after but I'll guarantee I lose 10 lbs during a gig. And I drink quite a few beers during that time.

[www.non-filters.com]

There is hard work... and then there is playing... losing weight is not really a reflection of that. I have done all the work you quoted.... it is real work... not as hard as going down 300 feet in a coal mine and to mine coal (which I am happy to say I have never done)... I just get weary of hearing actors or ball players or other people who basically play for a living while make millions and millions of Dollars complain of the hard work and long hours, I say in in a coal bucket and go down 400 ffet and mine coal, and the come talk to us about hard work.... The reality is, if they think playing is hard work they have either forgotten, or never knew, what it is like to do REAL work for a fraction of the money. I understand playing on stage take concentration, but it is far from hard work.

It's not necessarily concentration. It's physically draining. Just cause you enjoy it (if I was in it for the money I would have quit a long time ago) doesn't mean it isn't hard work. Coal is a product that people are paid to mine by a corporation who sells it for a profit, and entertainment is also a product that corporations sell. Strongly agree that entertainers, whether it be musicians or athletes, are over-payed, but some of them still work really hard. Actors...no comment.

[www.non-filters.com]

Quote
ryanpow

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Agreed
I see no need to quit.... or hanging it up... we could see another transition with my favorite band.... if they feel like it... where they just hang out and do smaller shows... mellower... not jumping rocking and running and rolling.... how about playing some acoustic blues... not selling out 20,000 seats....That would fine with me.... unles it is just required to sell out 20,000 seat arenas.... but I see John Lee Hooker having a pretty good time doing smaller stuff..... JLH aint hanging it up... he aint quitting.

hmmm... I tend to think that if that's what they wanted to do, they'd be doing it already. There seems to be no let up of the jumping and running around at these shows. I don't know where it comes from, if its from Mick or from the Stones collectivley, but it just seems like when they go out there they have to go full tilt and on a big show. But then again , I remember saying on this board after ABB that if they played again they should just do a limited tour with just a few shows and the general consenus was that if they were gunna play shows again it would have to be a full tour or they wouldn't do it. So, you never know...

Right on Ryan.

I am simply saying... if people are arguing they need to quit and be buried today, before they are geriatric, or too old to do it... then I am saying maybe they when they get too old to do it like they have always done it, they can do differently, I am ok with that. They wont be too old to do it like some other aging performers are doing it. How old is Chuck Berry?

Mick is obviously able to still run and gun.... and appears to be having a great time... so I ask "What the hell is people's problem?" why is this even being brought up? I am only replying to the peole who want to put them all 6 feet under yesterday.... I say there are other ways than that.... THEY DONT HAVE TO QUIT.



Then again some people just love to bash on the Stones, while I give them credit.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-10 06:22 by Max'sKansasCity.

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Max'sKansasCity
fine, we'll put you in the camp of "the Stones should just quit now".

What for? I think The Stones should go on and on.

I think The Stones should go on and on too....

Quote
nonfilter

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
nonfilter

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
nonfilter

Quote
vermontoffender
"Anyone who thinks playing music in a band is work, has never done REAL WORK."

That statement is moronic on any number of levels. In fact, it's kind of astoundingly idiotic.

That's just funny. Anyone who's never played music in a band doesn't know what real work is. I work in construction in the day, farm on the side, and my weekend gigs with the band are what really kicks my ass.

[www.non-filters.com]

funny eh?

Well, why dont you explain it to us... We are talking about The Stones here... so please tell us how big time players like the Stones, who have other people taking care of tuning the guitars and hauling the equipment, work so hard, for maybe 4 hours, every 3-4 days (maybe they do....but not for years)... and how they have it so much harder than people who do real work for a living.. like doing rough-in construction work or running a jack hammer EVERY DAY, 8-9 HOURS PER DAY, 50 WEEKS A YEAR.... all ears eyes... go ahead.

Sorry. Didn't mean to offend. I ran a jack hammer 5 hours a day every day last week and ran a shovel the other 5 of my 10 hour work days. I then went home and hung drywall on the house I'm building for myself by myself til 10:30 pm. I worked 16 hours this past Thursday hanging steel for a building and didn't wake up nearly as drained in the morning as I do after a show. Granted the Stones don't pack their own equipment, but they gotta try to please 20,000 people at their shows vs. my 100. I ain't ever weighed before and after but I'll guarantee I lose 10 lbs during a gig. And I drink quite a few beers during that time.

[www.non-filters.com]

There is hard work... and then there is playing... losing weight is not really a reflection of that. I have done all the work you quoted.... it is real work... not as hard as going down 300 feet in a coal mine and to mine coal (which I am happy to say I have never done)... I just get weary of hearing actors or ball players or other people who basically play for a living while make millions and millions of Dollars complain of the hard work and long hours, I say in in a coal bucket and go down 400 ffet and mine coal, and the come talk to us about hard work.... The reality is, if they think playing is hard work they have either forgotten, or never knew, what it is like to do REAL work for a fraction of the money. I understand playing on stage take concentration, but it is far from hard work.

It's not necessarily concentration. It's physically draining. Just cause you enjoy it (if I was in it for the money I would have quit a long time ago) doesn't mean it isn't hard work. Coal is a product that people are paid to mine by a corporation who sells it for a profit, and entertainment is also a product that corporations sell. Strongly agree that entertainers, whether it be musicians or athletes, are over-payed, but some of them still work really hard. Actors...no comment.

Actors.... and punters

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Max'sKansasCity
fine, we'll put you in the camp of "the Stones should just quit now".

What for? I think The Stones should go on and on.

I think The Stones should go on and on too....

But to address the point you made above about smaller, mellower shows--I think the solution is just to do shorter tours. These 2-year megatours that have been trendy in rock for the last couple of decades can be draining to a musician's creativity. Songwriters need time away from the stage to generate new material. The Stones used to be on a kind of schedule where they would tour every 3 years--a couple months in the States one year and a couple months internationally during the following year. Meanwhile, they were churning out an album a year. Now, with the expectation that they do a top-grossing trek about the globe where they tour off the same album for two and a half years is absolute madness. If they had that kind of touring commitment in their prime, they wouldn't have produced a fraction of the great material they did because all their creative energy would have been drained from continuous performance--which, by the way, is the main reason The Beatles retired from touring. There would have been no Sgt. Pepper if they hadn't, because there wouldn't have been time.

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Max'sKansasCity
fine, we'll put you in the camp of "the Stones should just quit now".

What for? I think The Stones should go on and on.

I think The Stones should go on and on too....

But to address the point you made above about smaller, mellower shows--I think the solution is just to do shorter tours. These 2-year megatours that have been trendy in rock for the last couple of decades can be draining to a musician's creativity. Songwriters need time away from the stage to generate new material. The Stones used to be on a kind of schedule where they would tour every 3 years--a couple months in the States one year and a couple months internationally during the following year. Meanwhile, they were churning out an album a year. Now, with the expectation that they do a top-grossing trek about the globe where they tour off the same album for two and a half years is absolute madness. If they had that kind of touring commitment in their prime, they wouldn't have produced a fraction of the great material they did because all their creative energy would have been drained from continuous performance--which, by the way, is the main reason The Beatles retired from touring. There would have been no Sgt. Pepper if they hadn't, because there wouldn't have been time.

Facts be known I publically withdrew from making predictions or suggestion about what The Stones would(should) or would(should) not, do back in the 90s.... Damned if I know what they should do... that is up to them... they do their thing... I do mine... and together we meet, and it has laways been a blast... a lot of fun, quite party. I only made that suggestion in reply to some here who seemingly want to drag them out to the vacant field and plug em.... put em out of their (imagined) misery... that is crazy talk. Why the hell party poopers always wanna poop on the party in beyond me.

Why cant we just wait and see...
as opposed to ANYONE saying they should quit... just because... fk that talk

I am listening to a Beethoven warhorse Symphony No.7 in A, (1811-1812) exactly 200 years old. Yet it sounds as good as ever. Nobody complained about his setlist because he put out something new all the time.

video: [i1294.photobucket.com]

IMHO THE STONES were smoking last night. It was my tenth "STONES" show the first was 1966 at THe Atlantic City Steel Pier. Yes tickets were too much but I had to get pass that because number one my 20 year old daughter wanted very badly to see them and secondly this was going to be my last chance to see my favorite band Obviously watching the show from the pit the sound was superior to many parts of the arena. And I don't care if it's sports or rock shows the closer to the action you are the better the show. What I saw was a band having a good time and as I go through my photos I'm sure of it. Charlie as always smiling at the antics and playing a small kit of drums like no one else does,he was awesome. Richards and Woods guitars were sounding great to me, real loud the way R&R was meant to be played but still maintained a clean sound.I saw both of them enjoying and smiling at Jagger and everyone else on the stage.I wouldn't put too much into Keith leaning and stretching behind the set. While doing it I saw him look over at someone and laugh. Mick was the ultimate showmen and once again made Rock and Roll fun. Thats my reason I go to shows is to have fun and I listen to rock to feel good. Few things make me happier then music,I never try to over analyze a show after all "IT'S ONLY ROCK AND ROLL AND I LIKE IT". Peace, I hope you enjoy the pictures.

I did something wrong posting pic's> I'll figure it out and get them up in a couple minutes.

Quote
The Sicilian
I am listening to a Beethoven warhorse Symphony No.7 in A, (1811-1812) exactly 200 years old. Yet it sounds as good as ever. Nobody complained about his setlist because he put out something new all the time.

Dont just say it... PLAY IT... That dude rocks!

Quote
The Sicilian
I am listening to a Beethoven warhorse Symphony No.7 in A, (1811-1812) exactly 200 years old. Yet it sounds as good as ever. Nobody complained about his setlist because he put out something new all the time.

What ruined Beethoven for me is all the cover bands making a living of his stuff.

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
stonesnow

Quote
Max'sKansasCity
fine, we'll put you in the camp of "the Stones should just quit now".

What for? I think The Stones should go on and on.

I think The Stones should go on and on too....

But to address the point you made above about smaller, mellower shows--I think the solution is just to do shorter tours. These 2-year megatours that have been trendy in rock for the last couple of decades can be draining to a musician's creativity. Songwriters need time away from the stage to generate new material. The Stones used to be on a kind of schedule where they would tour every 3 years--a couple months in the States one year and a couple months internationally during the following year. Meanwhile, they were churning out an album a year. Now, with the expectation that they do a top-grossing trek about the globe where they tour off the same album for two and a half years is absolute madness. If they had that kind of touring commitment in their prime, they wouldn't have produced a fraction of the great material they did because all their creative energy would have been drained from continuous performance--which, by the way, is the main reason The Beatles retired from touring. There would have been no Sgt. Pepper if they hadn't, because there wouldn't have been time.

Facts be known I publically withdrew from making predictions or suggestion about what The Stones would(should) or would(should) not, do back in the 90s.... Damned if I know what they should do... that is up to them... they do their thing... I do mine... and together we meet, and it has laways been a blast... a lot of fun, quite party. I only made that suggestion in reply to some here who seemingly want to drag them out to the vacant field and plug em.... put em out of their (imagined) misery... that is crazy talk. Why the hell party poopers always wanna poop on the party in beyond me.

Why cant we just wait and see...
as opposed to ANYONE saying they should quit... just because... fk that talk

im a 100% with you!!!! how dare they sait....they fuc-in never been better...the whole farm is jumping in the air...and Jagger jumped again...that was a long time not see ya do that Mick...now also dothe water bucket throwin again!!!! ok!~!!?? please tell mick to throw water will you? Rooster

Quote
The Sicilian
I am listening to a Beethoven warhorse Symphony No.7 in A, (1811-1812) exactly 200 years old. Yet it sounds as good as ever. Nobody complained about his setlist because he put out something new all the time.

Yes, but the recording is quite new, as are the instruments used to play it and the musicians who play them. Technically, it's just another cover version.

People who say they listen to Beethoven have never actually heard Beethoven, because you would have to have lived well over 200 years to have heard the man perform.

Didn't he compose Moonlight Sonata to impress/seduce a young female student? We should call him BillWymoven.