Tell Me :
Talk
Nice one. I'll be over with some Puerto Rican girls in just a mo.
TGIF!!! Gonna be a good night! ITS BEER:30
I'll have one of those in that case.
from your little picture there, looks like a pair
Well, one for now and if I'm still standing, one for later.
24FPS, I don't really disagree with you, because (I think) we are both essentially hoping for the same thing - namely that the Stones give us a few more laps around the park.
But - Bruce seems to have come along later than the Stones; still he is barely a year older than Ronnie. And once a rocker hits 60, they are all in the same pot anyway.
Dylan was 'gone for a few years', yes. But released music all throughout. And this absence was about 3-4 years - the Stones have waited as long in between albums. Not just recently, but 86-89 was a long time. And no tour for 8 years.
I am no big fan of Paul McC, but do feel that he has pretty much followed his own course in regards to Stones. He has put a much younger band together, and is able to dig into the catalog.
Van Morrison has not gone a year w/o releasing an album; sometime more than one. new material, performing a classic album, putting out old shows. What would I give for a cl;eaned up Brian era show?
But , I dont have a problem with the Stones. I think they can keep going. I just think they should really scale it down. And there are plenty of older rockers who are doing just fine.
Personally, I think they set out with something to prove with these five shows. To both themselves, and to an increasingly doubtful and sceptical fanbase. OK, they've done great, they're looking and sounding better than in the fall of 2007 - which is when they last played and when we last saw them.
From hereon, I think that as long as they play infrequently enough, and keep it both interesting for themselves and us their fans, I see no reason why they should discretely call it a day right now. Their current form is fantastic, they're proved that more than convincingly with just these five shows. I cannot imagine how a handful of carefully selected performances scattered throughout 2013 is going to see them perform at any less of a level than they did with these five. I think the secret is (from their perspective) not to allow themselves to get roped into doing a "tour" of any greater length or intensity than they want to, and all the indications are in fact that they don't wish to undertake too much. So if a handful of performances, perhaps weeks or even months apart, is all we're going to see of them in 2013, then all the better as far as I'm concerned. Better for them, better for us.
And anyway, RW summed it up perfectly ..... "we're gonna rock till we drop" !! I for one believe him.
[ I want to shout, but I can hardly speak ]
sigh. use of "personally, I" and "I for one" in the same post?? surely, there must be a penalty that can be exacted for such a heinous infraction?
Here you go, StonesTod.
Infraction of what precisely ? Do explain - if you can be arsed that is ! Anyway f**k the grammar, just expressing an opinion in response to the question, thass'all !
[ I want to shout, but I can hardly speak ]
I for one, think it's more of a style than grammar issue. That's speaking personally, of course.
Touche 71Tele, touche.
it always confused and irritated me that the three musketeers added a fourth. anyone else?
But according to the candy bar, there were only three.
And all that's been added since is a bit of mint.
Well if it's true about the fourth musketeer, then I think Mars, Inc. ought to make their candy bars 25% bigger.
Well I had my first 3 Musketeers bar long before reading the novel, which I've never read, to be honest. In fact, I had my first 3 Musketeers bar even before seeing the movie on TV. So, the candy bar came first--I think this is true in everyone's life. What 5-year-old reads Dumas before they've had their first ever candy bar?
who are you calling dumbass???
Oh, not you, just some dumbass who spelled Alexander in a dumbass way.
that makes sense. but i still don't get the whole fourth musketeer thing. so unnecessary. it's like adding another warhorse to the end of the show. enough already.
As long as they make a bigger candy bar, they can have as many musketeers as they want.
a bigger bang...a bigger bar. it just never ends.
Yes! But the Marx Bros. went the other way and shitcanned Zeppo to make three. Hard to figure these things out.
Probably because Zeppo didn't look goofy enough. He seemed to be the only one who never donned a disguise or exaggerate his appearance. Or maybe they found that 3 worked better than 4. There were more than 3 stooges, but never more than the 3 Stooges at one time--just a rotating cast of Curlys.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
Silver Dagger
()
Date: December 28, 2012 23:17
Anybody fancy a pint?
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: December 28, 2012 23:18
Quote
Silver Dagger
Anybody fancy a pint?
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
Silver Dagger
()
Date: December 28, 2012 23:23
Quote
Max'sKansasCityQuote
Silver Dagger
Anybody fancy a pint?
Nice one. I'll be over with some Puerto Rican girls in just a mo.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: December 28, 2012 23:27
Quote
Silver DaggerQuote
Max'sKansasCityQuote
Silver Dagger
Anybody fancy a pint?
Nice one. I'll be over with some Puerto Rican girls in just a mo.
TGIF!!! Gonna be a good night! ITS BEER:30
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 28, 2012 23:31
lupulus blonde tonight. like most belgians - at 25.4 oz and 8.5% apv, it's like having four, four, four beers in one....or something
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
Silver Dagger
()
Date: December 28, 2012 23:38
Quote
StonesTod
lupulus blonde tonight. like most belgians - at 25.4 oz and 8.5% apv, it's like having four, four, four beers in one....or something
I'll have one of those in that case.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 28, 2012 23:43
Quote
Silver DaggerQuote
StonesTod
lupulus blonde tonight. like most belgians - at 25.4 oz and 8.5% apv, it's like having four, four, four beers in one....or something
I'll have one of those in that case.
from your little picture there, looks like a pair
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
Silver Dagger
()
Date: December 28, 2012 23:45
Quote
StonesTodQuote
Silver DaggerQuote
StonesTod
lupulus blonde tonight. like most belgians - at 25.4 oz and 8.5% apv, it's like having four, four, four beers in one....or something
I'll have one of those in that case.
from your little picture there, looks like a pair
Well, one for now and if I'm still standing, one for later.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
Palace Revolution 2000
()
Date: December 29, 2012 07:24
Quote
24FPS
PALACE REVOLUTION 2000 - And no more of this nonsense about "nobody has ever gone this far; we're writing the rules as we go along". That is crap - Dylan, Young, Van Morrison, McCartney,Springsteen - they are all doing exactly what we wish the Stones would do. (/quote]
Yes, but no one has done it consistently like the Stones. First off, Springsteen is from a younger generation. Dylan spent years in the wilderness before righting his ship. Van Morrison? Does he even tour? No disrespect, but Van Morrison is living off the fumes of long ago. McCartney didn't tour for a long time, and probably was inspired to get off his ass and get out there and do a nostalgia tour by the Stones success. (Although he has started to do some interesting things, ala performing with the Nirvana survivors).
There were times during the recent PPV that I cringed. The first few numbers sounded like some old guys doing their old songs at a slower tempo. Then Lady Ga Ga goosed their ass and they woke up. From then on I realized they can still do it a high level, and they can even come up with a new, decent song like Doom and Gloom. My worry is Keith Richards, who appears not in the best of health. Maybe more stage time will get him in better shape and get those fingers more fluid.
So, no, they don't need to quit yet. I think performing with other top grade musicians helps them. They can't pull off a decent album without a shakeup in their studio help. Darryl Jones is not a high level rock bassist with any feeling. He will not add anything to their studio music. The problem with the post Wyman era is too much rock and not enough roll. The sensitivity is gone and they just bash at things. Which worked on Doom and Gloom but would not sustain an album. Jack White doesn't have to produce, but I sure as hell wish he would.
24FPS, I don't really disagree with you, because (I think) we are both essentially hoping for the same thing - namely that the Stones give us a few more laps around the park.
But - Bruce seems to have come along later than the Stones; still he is barely a year older than Ronnie. And once a rocker hits 60, they are all in the same pot anyway.
Dylan was 'gone for a few years', yes. But released music all throughout. And this absence was about 3-4 years - the Stones have waited as long in between albums. Not just recently, but 86-89 was a long time. And no tour for 8 years.
I am no big fan of Paul McC, but do feel that he has pretty much followed his own course in regards to Stones. He has put a much younger band together, and is able to dig into the catalog.
Van Morrison has not gone a year w/o releasing an album; sometime more than one. new material, performing a classic album, putting out old shows. What would I give for a cl;eaned up Brian era show?
But , I dont have a problem with the Stones. I think they can keep going. I just think they should really scale it down. And there are plenty of older rockers who are doing just fine.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
paulywaul
()
Date: December 29, 2012 10:58
Quote
BlackHat
Five great shows, the legacy enhanced, everybody in a happy place. Is there any benefit in prolonging the experience and watering down the feelgood factor? A great comparison would be the Cream concerts in 2005. May in London everybody had a great time. October in New York not such a great time.
Personally, I think they set out with something to prove with these five shows. To both themselves, and to an increasingly doubtful and sceptical fanbase. OK, they've done great, they're looking and sounding better than in the fall of 2007 - which is when they last played and when we last saw them.
From hereon, I think that as long as they play infrequently enough, and keep it both interesting for themselves and us their fans, I see no reason why they should discretely call it a day right now. Their current form is fantastic, they're proved that more than convincingly with just these five shows. I cannot imagine how a handful of carefully selected performances scattered throughout 2013 is going to see them perform at any less of a level than they did with these five. I think the secret is (from their perspective) not to allow themselves to get roped into doing a "tour" of any greater length or intensity than they want to, and all the indications are in fact that they don't wish to undertake too much. So if a handful of performances, perhaps weeks or even months apart, is all we're going to see of them in 2013, then all the better as far as I'm concerned. Better for them, better for us.
And anyway, RW summed it up perfectly ..... "we're gonna rock till we drop" !! I for one believe him.
[ I want to shout, but I can hardly speak ]
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: December 29, 2012 11:01
What if they want to call it a night?
Or an afternoon even?
It's a knotty one.
Or an afternoon even?
It's a knotty one.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 29, 2012 18:16
Quote
paulywaul
Personally, I think....And anyway, RW summed it up perfectly ..... "we're gonna rock till we drop" !! I for one believe him.
sigh. use of "personally, I" and "I for one" in the same post?? surely, there must be a penalty that can be exacted for such a heinous infraction?
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
latebloomer
()
Date: December 29, 2012 18:46
Quote
StonesTodQuote
paulywaul
Personally, I think....And anyway, RW summed it up perfectly ..... "we're gonna rock till we drop" !! I for one believe him.
sigh. use of "personally, I" and "I for one" in the same post?? surely, there must be a penalty that can be exacted for such a heinous infraction?
Here you go, StonesTod.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
paulywaul
()
Date: December 29, 2012 19:11
Quote
StonesTodQuote
paulywaul
Personally, I think....And anyway, RW summed it up perfectly ..... "we're gonna rock till we drop" !! I for one believe him.
sigh. use of "personally, I" and "I for one" in the same post?? surely, there must be a penalty that can be exacted for such a heinous infraction?
Infraction of what precisely ? Do explain - if you can be arsed that is ! Anyway f**k the grammar, just expressing an opinion in response to the question, thass'all !
[ I want to shout, but I can hardly speak ]
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: December 29, 2012 19:28
Quote
latebloomerQuote
StonesTodQuote
paulywaul
Personally, I think....And anyway, RW summed it up perfectly ..... "we're gonna rock till we drop" !! I for one believe him.
sigh. use of "personally, I" and "I for one" in the same post?? surely, there must be a penalty that can be exacted for such a heinous infraction?
Here you go, StonesTod.
I for one, think it's more of a style than grammar issue. That's speaking personally, of course.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
latebloomer
()
Date: December 29, 2012 19:36
Quote
71TeleQuote
latebloomerQuote
StonesTodQuote
paulywaul
Personally, I think....And anyway, RW summed it up perfectly ..... "we're gonna rock till we drop" !! I for one believe him.
sigh. use of "personally, I" and "I for one" in the same post?? surely, there must be a penalty that can be exacted for such a heinous infraction?
Here you go, StonesTod.
I for one, think it's more of a style than grammar issue. That's speaking personally, of course.
Touche 71Tele, touche.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 29, 2012 21:28
you two, for two, are appreciated by me, for one...or something.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
mgguy
()
Date: December 29, 2012 22:06
all for one or one for all?
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 29, 2012 22:12
Quote
mgguy
all for one or one for all?
it always confused and irritated me that the three musketeers added a fourth. anyone else?
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
stonesnow
()
Date: December 29, 2012 22:24
Quote
StonesTodQuote
mgguy
all for one or one for all?
it always confused and irritated me that the three musketeers added a fourth. anyone else?
But according to the candy bar, there were only three.
And all that's been added since is a bit of mint.
Well if it's true about the fourth musketeer, then I think Mars, Inc. ought to make their candy bars 25% bigger.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 29, 2012 22:27
which came first - the candy bar or the novel?
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
stonesnow
()
Date: December 29, 2012 22:29
Quote
StonesTod
which came first - the candy bar or the novel?
Well I had my first 3 Musketeers bar long before reading the novel, which I've never read, to be honest. In fact, I had my first 3 Musketeers bar even before seeing the movie on TV. So, the candy bar came first--I think this is true in everyone's life. What 5-year-old reads Dumas before they've had their first ever candy bar?
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 29, 2012 22:30
Quote
stonesnowQuote
StonesTod
which came first - the candy bar or the novel?
Well I had my first 3 Musketeers bar long before reading the novel, which I've never read, to be honest. In fact, I had my first 3 Musketeers bar even before seeing the movie on TV. So, the candy bar came first--I think this is true in everyone's life. What 5-year-old reads Dumas before they've had their first ever candy bar?
who are you calling dumbass???
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
stonesnow
()
Date: December 29, 2012 22:32
Quote
StonesTodQuote
stonesnowQuote
StonesTod
which came first - the candy bar or the novel?
Well I had my first 3 Musketeers bar long before reading the novel, which I've never read, to be honest. In fact, I had my first 3 Musketeers bar even before seeing the movie on TV. So, the candy bar came first--I think this is true in everyone's life. What 5-year-old reads Dumas before they've had their first ever candy bar?
who are you calling dumbass???
Oh, not you, just some dumbass who spelled Alexander in a dumbass way.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 29, 2012 22:35
Quote
stonesnowQuote
StonesTodQuote
stonesnowQuote
StonesTod
which came first - the candy bar or the novel?
Well I had my first 3 Musketeers bar long before reading the novel, which I've never read, to be honest. In fact, I had my first 3 Musketeers bar even before seeing the movie on TV. So, the candy bar came first--I think this is true in everyone's life. What 5-year-old reads Dumas before they've had their first ever candy bar?
who are you calling dumbass???
Oh, not you, just some dumbass who spelled Alexander in a dumbass way.
that makes sense. but i still don't get the whole fourth musketeer thing. so unnecessary. it's like adding another warhorse to the end of the show. enough already.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
stonesnow
()
Date: December 29, 2012 22:38
Quote
StonesTodQuote
stonesnowQuote
StonesTodQuote
stonesnowQuote
StonesTod
which came first - the candy bar or the novel?
Well I had my first 3 Musketeers bar long before reading the novel, which I've never read, to be honest. In fact, I had my first 3 Musketeers bar even before seeing the movie on TV. So, the candy bar came first--I think this is true in everyone's life. What 5-year-old reads Dumas before they've had their first ever candy bar?
who are you calling dumbass???
Oh, not you, just some dumbass who spelled Alexander in a dumbass way.
that makes sense. but i still don't get the whole fourth musketeer thing. so unnecessary. it's like adding another warhorse to the end of the show. enough already.
As long as they make a bigger candy bar, they can have as many musketeers as they want.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 29, 2012 22:40
Quote
stonesnowQuote
StonesTodQuote
stonesnowQuote
StonesTodQuote
stonesnowQuote
StonesTod
which came first - the candy bar or the novel?
Well I had my first 3 Musketeers bar long before reading the novel, which I've never read, to be honest. In fact, I had my first 3 Musketeers bar even before seeing the movie on TV. So, the candy bar came first--I think this is true in everyone's life. What 5-year-old reads Dumas before they've had their first ever candy bar?
who are you calling dumbass???
Oh, not you, just some dumbass who spelled Alexander in a dumbass way.
that makes sense. but i still don't get the whole fourth musketeer thing. so unnecessary. it's like adding another warhorse to the end of the show. enough already.
As long as they make a bigger candy bar, they can have as many musketeers as they want.
a bigger bang...a bigger bar. it just never ends.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: December 29, 2012 23:33
Quote
StonesTodQuote
mgguy
all for one or one for all?
it always confused and irritated me that the three musketeers added a fourth. anyone else?
Yes! But the Marx Bros. went the other way and shitcanned Zeppo to make three. Hard to figure these things out.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
stonesnow
()
Date: December 29, 2012 23:47
Quote
71TeleQuote
StonesTodQuote
mgguy
all for one or one for all?
it always confused and irritated me that the three musketeers added a fourth. anyone else?
Yes! But the Marx Bros. went the other way and shitcanned Zeppo to make three. Hard to figure these things out.
Probably because Zeppo didn't look goofy enough. He seemed to be the only one who never donned a disguise or exaggerate his appearance. Or maybe they found that 3 worked better than 4. There were more than 3 stooges, but never more than the 3 Stooges at one time--just a rotating cast of Curlys.
Re: Does anyone else think the Stones should discretely call it a day? (An honest question hijacked by a few paranoid nut jobs)
Posted by:
mgguy
()
Date: December 29, 2012 23:51
all four won, or won four all? or four all won.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-29 23:53 by mgguy.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-29 23:53 by mgguy.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
crholmstrom , daspyknows , drwatts , EddieByword , keef62 , keefmick , keefriffhards , kkhoranstoned , legin , mariano , MelBelli , Pvk2 , riccardo99 , stereomanic , witterings , wupperstein
Guests:
1755
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10