Quote
Honestman
At least , their IORR version yesterday was unbeatable, they were on fire ><

Yeah, WTF happened? Did Keith's guitar come unplugged or what? It can only be heard in the intro and then again at 40 seconds or so. That song is jinxed, they already messed up the beginning, but not so badly, at CHI/2 !

After reading all these negative reviews on last night's Sway I watched it thinking the worst. It wasn't bad. I thought Taylor did fine.

Sympathy For The Devil:





I like that a lot!!!

Quote
spsimmons
After reading all these negative reviews on last night's Sway I watched it thinking the worst. It wasn't bad. I thought Taylor did fine.

That's what this thing begun with

After that, I dunno what happened.

About Sway in Boston: It's not the guitars. Mick Jagger's voice gives in after about 30 seconds into the song. He clearly has problems with the high notes.
The song starts out well but after 30 seconds it's a transport distance to the end.

[www.gettyimages.com]

Just listened to it again, voice sounds ok, actually the whole version sounds ok, apart from the solos, a "juicier" sound on Taylor's solo certainly wouldn't have hurt.

What does Mick say before they start, that Taylor promised a "support role"?

Quote
Wild Slivovitz
Sympathy For The Devil:





I like that a lot!!!

I like it too; the hairy cape makes Mick looks like a dark version of Liberace!
Rock and roll,
Mops

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
svt22

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
svt22

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa
Thank you sabata for "Sway".

Unfortunately it is getting worse - the band has no any feel for this song, and Jagger seemingly doesn't even try to try. Taylor's improvised lyricism is nice to follow, and he won't let us down, even though Jagger rushes up the things once again.

On with the show, but unfortunately this song doesn't work.

- Doxa

Mick Taylor & his Rolling Stones...

There is no lyricism. Taylor is doing his best to plagiarize a solo he doesn't quite remember, and he's doing it ok within these circumstances, imo.

For the first time, the rhythm guitars were tighter, did you notice that?

IMO, you're not gonna get the Stones doing Sway much better than this at this stage...

Did you listen to Wood's "slide solo", an insult to the song? Not to start a new Taylor - Wood debate, but these Stones are a nostalgia act, only in it for the money and some fun. They don't give a shit anymore when it comes to quality, imo.
Actually rather naive to analyze it anyway.

It was ok (some trouble with the sound for the few first seconds, though). Taylor's solos was also ok, nothing more.

Yes, it was ok.

Not playing the slide solo note for note, is indeed an "insult to the song", imo. It's pretty easy to play, and it's very integral to the song. Mick or Ronnie should (re-)learn it, and play it...

Seriously?? The note for note studio version at a live show?

Quote
Aquamarine

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
svt22

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
svt22

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa
Thank you sabata for "Sway".

Unfortunately it is getting worse - the band has no any feel for this song, and Jagger seemingly doesn't even try to try. Taylor's improvised lyricism is nice to follow, and he won't let us down, even though Jagger rushes up the things once again.

On with the show, but unfortunately this song doesn't work.

- Doxa

Mick Taylor & his Rolling Stones...

There is no lyricism. Taylor is doing his best to plagiarize a solo he doesn't quite remember, and he's doing it ok within these circumstances, imo.

For the first time, the rhythm guitars were tighter, did you notice that?

IMO, you're not gonna get the Stones doing Sway much better than this at this stage...

Did you listen to Wood's "slide solo", an insult to the song? Not to start a new Taylor - Wood debate, but these Stones are a nostalgia act, only in it for the money and some fun. They don't give a shit anymore when it comes to quality, imo.
Actually rather naive to analyze it anyway.

It was ok (some trouble with the sound for the few first seconds, though). Taylor's solos was also ok, nothing more.

Yes, it was ok.

Not playing the slide solo note for note, is indeed an "insult to the song", imo. It's pretty easy to play, and it's very integral to the song. Mick or Ronnie should (re-)learn it, and play it...

Seriously?? The note for note studio version at a live show?

Not studio version, the slide solo. Usually, I wouldn't ask for that, but the Sway-solo is so integral to the song, so it would be cool if he managed it, yeah.

MT fans think there's too much analysis when MT's playing is "off" but not the same given to the others when they're "off."

Imo, because Taylorites have deified MT so much in the past two weeks and it's to get back at THEM. (I'm not saying it's the right thing to do.) Taylorites also vote for Sway all the time, so when it doesn't go well, the anti-Taylorites (?) are ready to pounce.


I don't think yesterday's Sway sounded that bad. Enjoy what's left of the tour and stop complaining about what they choose to play and how much MT plays. You really don't know how much he agreed to or WANTS to play. We can't get into their heads.

Thanks for the new videos.

50 years on, the Rolling Stones are still rock stars


Barry Chin/Globe Staff

By James Reed | Globe Staff June 13, 2013

Long before the Rolling Stones arrived in Boston, videos emerged online of the band bringing out special guests at earlier tour stops. Tom Waits, Taylor Swift, John Fogerty, Mary J. Blige, Lady Gaga, and Arcade Fire’s Win Butler all turned up to try to hold their own alongside Mick Jagger and the boys. Emphasis on the word “try.”

As random as they seemed, those cameos got at the heart of what has made the Rolling Stones so timeless: Their music cuts across generations and genres, a fact boldly noted at Wednesday’s performance at TD Garden. At 12,101 attendees, it was nearly sold out, and a second show is set for Friday (with tickets still available).

The Stones are on a tour they’re calling “50 & Counting,” referring, of course, to the band’s silver anniversary. The beauty of this new stretch on the road is that the Stones can — and did — play whatever they want.

To answer the questions you no doubt have: Yes, Mick sounded great, strutted like a feral alley cat, and he’s still skinnier than you and I will ever be. Yes, Keith Richards is the most unbelievable pirate guitarist who ever lived. Yes, Ronnie Wood looks like he’s having more fun than anyone else on stage. And yes, Charlie Watts remains the underrated statesman of the band, keeping the beat and regal in a polo shirt while his cohorts looked every inch the rock stars they are.

There was the standard bit of pandering expected in every city the Stones play — Jagger held up a Bruins jersey with his name on it; Richards uttered the words “Boston Strong”— but mostly the band played a set that spanned two hours and 20 minutes.

Jagger’s sweet falsetto and a two-person horn section emerged on “Emotional Rescue,” and backup singer Lisa Fischer admirably stepped in for Merry Clayton’s part on “Gimme Shelter.” Richards took the lead on “You Got the Silver” and “Before They Make Me Run,” with Wood ably assisting on slide guitar. The audience’s enthusiasm rose in synch with the house lights during “Honky Tonk Women.”

Gary Clark Jr. was the special guest on “I’m Going Down,” and former member Mick Taylor was featured on a handful of songs.

With the famous choral intro provided by Boston University’s Marsh Chapel Choir, “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” was the first encore before the night wrapped, predictably, with “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction.” That chorus contradicted everything that had just come before it.

[www.bostonglobe.com]

I've only seen ONE poster who didn't want to have Mick Taylor on this tour.

There are no "Anti-Taylorites"...

About Jagger's voice: It's noticeable that he has put some work to it. Much of the nasality is gone. However it cracks up on the high notes. Maybe his running around has something to do with that. Or age...

Quote
gotdablouse

Quote
Honestman
At least , their IORR version yesterday was unbeatable, they were on fire ><

Yeah, WTF happened? Did Keith's guitar come unplugged or what? It can only be heard in the intro and then again at 40 seconds or so. That song is jinxed, they already messed up the beginning, but not so badly, at CHI/2 !

IORR was a big mess last night in Boston. Everybody looked at each other, Mick facing Chuck asking for a cue or whatever, trying several starts, then after something that felt like a long time, the power of the song is suddenly back, and they are on.

The sound was shifting through this show. On Satisfaction Mick Taylor did not want to go on stage, Ronnie came for him but Mick T just asked him to ignore. In the end he walked forward. But there were problems.

As soon as the crowd got out into the night after the show you could see where their minds had been. In Chicago. All the TV screens at the North Station and all over with the first NHL final game going on @ Chicago were crowded. I followed the game into period 6 on triple overtime, as I returned "home" by midnight. The Boston fans are hockey punch. Hard to beat that, also hard to beat the technical issues as it seems.

Bjornulf

Quote
Stoneage
About Jagger's voice: It's noticeable that he has put some work to it. Much of the nasality is gone. However it cracks up on the high notes. Maybe his running around has something to do with that. Or age...

On the first take on Sway this tour, he managed most of the high notes. Might be he is getting tired, or that he has a slight cold - could be many reasons. But he had major trouble getting up there on this version.

Rolling Stones: Some things never get old


Photo By: Matt Stone

Thursday, June 13, 2013
By: Jed Gottlieb

Enough griping about the Rolling Stones being too old.

There are legit complaints with The 50 and Counting Tour, last night and tomorrow at the TD Garden. They charge too much for tickets (rock ‘n’ roll should never cost $500). They recruit lame guests like Katy Perry, Carrie Underwood and — for shame — Taylor Swift.

But after yesterday’s packed Garden bash, I don’t buy the too-old tag.

Mick’s shtick is largely based on sex appeal. At 69, it’s a hard sell (though not outright absurd). But from the get go (“Get Off of My Cloud”), the impossibly skinny frontman — dressed in painted-on black jeans and Liberace’s dinner jacket — cock-a-doodle-dooed across the stage like a little red rooster.

On “It’s Only Rock ‘n’ Roll,” he wagged his fingers.

On “Start Me Up,” he flailed his arms.

On “Midnight Rambler,” he pouted his lips, puffed his chest and strutted.

Oh, his voice was strong for two hours.

And Keef? Well, Mr. Richards has been 69 since ’79. That’s part of his charm.

The guitar god shined a light on “Paint It Black,” “Tumbling Dice,” and “Rock ‘n’ Roll” — ooh, those Chuck Berry riffs. He also took the mic for ace renditions of “You Got The Silver” and “Before They Make Me Run.”

But it was those “Honky Tonk Women” open G chords on that blonde, brokedown tele that killed me. Instantly Keith, instantly cool.

Ron Wood, Charlie Watts and the choice talent out of the road with the band — including ex-Stone Mick Taylor and keyboard master Chuck Leavell — oozed rock ‘n’ roll glory around the Glimmer Twins all night.

“Midnight Rambler” featured the power of a fully operational Stones, even with Watts leading the pack at 72.

And the encore of “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” with the BU’s Marsh Chapel Choir was pretty damn righteous, too.

Guest Gary Clark Jr. joined the band for “I’m Going Down.” Being in Boston, it would have fun to see Peter Wolf and Mick have a twig-thin dance-off or hear Morphine’s Dana Colley take on the sax solo on “Can’t You Hear Me Knocking.” But Clark was solid. (I liked Wood’s blues better, and Keef’s minimalist riffing even more.)

Before the show I thought this was it for the Stones. But 25 years ago, everyone thought the Stones were done so I guess we all need to reassess the Stones’ longevity. Fifty-five and Counting? I’d go, but not for $500.

[bostonherald.com]

Concert review: Rolling Stones rock TD Garden in Boston

BOSTON – Commemorating a half century of rule over the Kingdom of Rock’ n’ Roll, the Rolling Stones held court at the TD Garden on Wednesday night, performing the first of two sold out concerts as part of their “50 and Counting” tour.

The House of Jagger includes a jester (Keith Richards), knave (Ronnie Wood), and sentry (Charlie Watts), and their rule has gone largely uncontested. While they may not be writing relevant music anymore (and honestly haven’t in decades) they don’t have to; the Rolling Stones have “Satisfaction,” “Gimme Shelter,” and “Sympathy for the Devil.”

Those songs, at least as they were delivered during this two hour and 20 minute performance, sounded young and virile, delivered by men who may have weathered but not withered over the years. The band breathed life into songs a half century old and the songs invigorated the huddled masses on hand.

They opened with “Get Off of My Cloud,” laying down an unwavering groove that underscored the entire performance. Watts (drums) and bassist Darryl Jones set the foundation steady and strong and allowed the others to riff away, unfettered by the minutia of time and tempo.

Mick Jagger’s sovereignty remained unimpeachable as he again defied the very laws of nature that suggest a man pushing 70 years old shouldn’t be strutting, rutting, and rocking to the strains of “Its Only Rock’ N’ Roll,” and “Paint It Black.”

The band barreled through “Gimme Shelter” with Lisa Fischer adding background vocals while out-strutting Jagger at the front of the stage.

Jagger pointed out that the band had fond memories of the area, specifically mentioning their rehearsals out at Longview Farms in North Brookfield in 1981 and the time “your mayor, Kevin White, got us out of jail.”

The band brought out Texas blues guitarist Gary Clark, Jr. to sing the blues on “Goin’ Down,” and after a jam on “Beast of Burden,” brought out former Stones guitarist Mick Taylor to play lead guitar on “Sway.”

Jagger showed off his Bruins jersey (#50, his name on the back) before “Emotional Rescue,” and the band dished out two new songs with “Doom and Gloom,” and “One More Shot.”

There was a refreshing rawness to the sound as the band (with a few exceptions) largely stayed away from the arena-concert crutches of loops and sampling, relying instead on the energy and fullness of the two guitars, bass, and drums, and Chuck Leavell’s piano and organ.

After “Honky Tonk Woman,” Jagger introduced the principles before leaving the stage to Richards and Wood for an acoustic run through “You Got the Silver,” and an electric “Before They Make Me Run.”

Despite their royal rock bloodlines, the Stones still emit a street-cred cool that somehow makes them seem dangerous. From the grotesquely handsome Jagger to the pierced and scarred Richards there is still something that suggests you are not getting near them unless you are fully immunized and over-insured.

The highlights came in waves, from “Miss You,” to “Start Me Up,” “Tumbling Dice”, and “Brown Sugar.” The cathartic “Sympathy for the Devil,” was a rock melee, and the encore opening of “You Can’t Always Get What You Want,” featured the Boston University Marsh Chapel Choir.

The Rolling Stones closed out with “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” and “Satisfaction.”

[www.masslive.com]

Quote
DandelionPowderman


There are no "Anti-Taylorites"...

...then how do we call the people that object to the Taylorites - f.i. because they don't want to reduce the most versatile & constantly evolving band in rock'n'roll history to a mere 4 albums & just 1 guitarsound?!

Just a semantic question...

Quote
bye bye johnny
"Boston brings back lots of fun memories. We rehearsed up here in 1981, and mayor Kevin White got us out of jail!"

[twitter.com]

Sounds more 1972

[i.dailymail.co.uk]

Quote
spsimmons
After reading all these negative reviews on last night's Sway I watched it thinking the worst. It wasn't bad. I thought Taylor did fine.

Yes, Taylor was okay, Woody's slide part was quite bad though, he should really rehearse it better, it can't be so difficult to play better.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I've only seen ONE poster who didn't want to have Mick Taylor on this tour.

There are no "Anti-Taylorites"...

You know exactly what I mean. Taylorites like MT's long guitar solos. I'd say "anti-taylorites" don't esp want his long guitar solos. Taylorites would like him to playt on every song; "anti-Taylorites" think 2 or 3 songs or just the right number. It has nothing to do with the man himself, I assume you know that.

If "anti-Taylorites" is the wrong label (notice I even placed a "?" after I used it), tell me what's the correct one. (no foul comments please. )

Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa

Quote
DandelionPowderman


There are no "Anti-Taylorites"...

...then how do we call the people that object to the Taylorites - f.i. because they don't want to reduce the most versatile & constantly evolving band in rock'n'roll history to a mere 4 albums & just 1 guitarsound?!

Just a semantic question...

I'd call them Rolling Stones fans, not just Mick Taylor fans.

Quote
Jesse

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I've only seen ONE poster who didn't want to have Mick Taylor on this tour.

There are no "Anti-Taylorites"...

You know exactly what I mean. Taylorites like MT's long guitar solos. I'd say "anti-taylorites" don't esp want his long guitar solos. Taylorites would like him to playt on every song; "anti-Taylorites" think 2 or 3 songs or just the right number. It has nothing to do with the man himself, I assume you know that.

If "anti-Taylorites" is the wrong label (notice I even placed a "?" after I used it), tell me what's the correct one. (no foul comments please. )

"Anti" is too strong, especially as many who regard the Taylorites and Taylorists too extreme really like Mick Taylor and his playing. You could be "anti" to the decision of having Taylor playing lead guitar throughout 22 songs, but you don't have to be "anti" having him as a guest on 5 or 6 of the numbers where he can contribute with some great guitar playing.

Did I go totally astray here, or are you following me?

Quote
71Tele

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
71Tele

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa
Thank you sabata for "Sway".

Unfortunately it is getting worse - the band has no any feel for this song, and Jagger seemingly doesn't even try to try. Taylor's improvised lyricism is nice to follow, and he won't let us down, even though Jagger rushes up the things once again.

On with the show, but unfortunately this song doesn't work.

- Doxa

Mick Taylor & his Rolling Stones...

There is no lyricism. Taylor is doing his best to plagiarize a solo he doesn't quite remember, and he's doing it ok within these circumstances, imo.

For the first time, the rhythm guitars were tighter, did you notice that?

IMO, you're not gonna get the Stones doing Sway much better than this at this stage...

You have make yourself damn clear that you don't like or appreciate Taylor's improvised way to play, and you come time after time with pejorative terms like "doing his best to plagiarize a solo he doesn't quite remember". He is not really your cup of tea, and I guess never been. Be frank to yourself.

Yeah, probably the rhythm guitarists are a bit tighter than last time, but the whole feel of the performance is so lifeless. To me it sounds like they have left Taylor alone there, and not really backing him up. The band, even that first soloist (what does he even do?), seems like waiting Taylor do his solo, and that's the only point in the whole performance. There is no team effort.

If this is as good as they can do with "Sway", it is to say that the song is not anyway in their reach any longer.

But what does it matter? It is all a big celebration. Funnuly, about the only musical thing people are paying attention during this tour is Taylor's contributions. If, say, Wood sucks, no one bothers even say anything, but whatever Taylor does is in under a microscope. That alone says something of Taylor's musical significance. For different players, we have different expectations and criteria.

- Doxa

I like his improvised way of playing, but here on Sway he's just trying to do his best to remember his solo (trust me!). I didn't say he was doing it badly, did I?

Taylor is NOT the only "musical" thing people are paying attention to during this tour. Have you forgotten about all the fans who travel to see their favourite band? They are having the time of their lives - the reviews and the reports are great!

And all you keep nagging about is how much Taylor get to play, as well as trying to distort my view on him? Life's too short to be doing this my friend - there's a tour going on

THIS is the Taylor I like, with his leads in the right places, adding magic to the song:

Ron Wood has been doing his best to remember Taylor's solos for 35 years (badly, imo) and that doesn't seem to bother the Wood lovers. Yes, I wish Taylor was playing closer to the record here, but he doesn't - or can't - just the way Richards and Wood continually butcher the studio parts, as they have for decades now.

True, to an extent, because it's more like he's doing the recognisable parts (starts and endings) of Taylor's solos - especially his first years in the band, but also on CYHMK, he borrowed Taylor's intro and outro in his solo.

Not quite sure which parts you mean they are butchering (Sway?), but for the first time I heard the chords on Sway played correctly (apart from one Keith-riff in there), and that's a start

Not referring specifically to Sway here. The point is that Wood and Richards have been messing up parts for years (sometimes intentionally, sometimes not), then Taylor is crucified by some for not playing the solos note-for-note like the records.

AMEN!! both of those old drunks have been screwing up their own songs for close to 40 years...as far as Mick Taylor goes...who the hell wants to hear him do a tablature version of a solo he did 43 years ago???...ONE TIME...in the studio...and then moved on to the next one...and hasn't played it the same since??? the only geeks that do crap like that are those losers who buy tablature books and post videos of themselves on YouTube...give me a break...improvisation is the heart of live music...

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Stoneage
About Jagger's voice: It's noticeable that he has put some work to it. Much of the nasality is gone. However it cracks up on the high notes. Maybe his running around has something to do with that. Or age...

On the first take on Sway this tour, he managed most of the high notes. Might be he is getting tired, or that he has a slight cold - could be many reasons. But he had major trouble getting up there on this version.

It was nothing about high notes at all, that is for sure. I was up front watching Mick communicating with Chuck. It was a power or sync thing. Technical issues. May be they were missing so,mebody on their monitors. You could clearly hear it in the pit. It was a lost song out of sync like a loose canon without power until Keith (I think) cranked it up after a while. I am pretty sure they had technical issues in Boston, on several occations. Nothing like a major problem, but you could hear it, and the bacd, especially Mick, reacts immediately of course. He likes it perfect.

Bjornulf

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
sabata
sway

Taylor needs a bit more distortion, and to control the pedals - instead of asking the roadie to turn up his amp?

Yup. You would think they'd have this routine down now, but ... apparently not. Everyone who plays guitar on this board can relate: when your tone is clean and bone-dry, you can't do your "tricks."

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Jesse

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I've only seen ONE poster who didn't want to have Mick Taylor on this tour.

There are no "Anti-Taylorites"...

You know exactly what I mean. Taylorites like MT's long guitar solos. I'd say "anti-taylorites" don't esp want his long guitar solos. Taylorites would like him to playt on every song; "anti-Taylorites" think 2 or 3 songs or just the right number. It has nothing to do with the man himself, I assume you know that.

If "anti-Taylorites" is the wrong label (notice I even placed a "?" after I used it), tell me what's the correct one. (no foul comments please. )

"Anti" is too strong, especially as many who regard the Taylorites and Taylorists too extreme really like Mick Taylor and his playing. You could be "anti" to the decision of having Taylor playing lead guitar throughout 22 songs, but you don't have to be "anti" having him as a guest on 5 or 6 of the numbers where he can contribute with some great guitar playing.

Did I go totally astray here, or are you following me?

That's really all I'm looking for, is 5 or 6, but I'm happy with 2 or 3, just wish they'd vary his spots a little. I understand why it can't happen, but the possibility of MT and Keith playing together is sooo right there, but so far away. Some of my favorite MT spots are songs where the two of them are going full throtle together(ADTL, for example), but now he's simply used for his long soloing. At least if they're resigned to using him that way, let him play Moonlight Mile or Love in Vain again before the tour's over. For those who say Taylor fans only concentrate on him, consider that other than Taylor, what has really changed since Daryl joined? How many times can you say Keith did good/bad, Ron was good/bad, Mick sang well? Personally, this is the first tour in years with a different variable, so why wouldn't alot of people concentrate on what MT could offer?

Quote
Jesse

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I've only seen ONE poster who didn't want to have Mick Taylor on this tour.

There are no "Anti-Taylorites"...

You know exactly what I mean. Taylorites like MT's long guitar solos. I'd say "anti-taylorites" don't esp want his long guitar solos. Taylorites would like him to playt on every song; "anti-Taylorites" think 2 or 3 songs or just the right number. It has nothing to do with the man himself, I assume you know that.

If "anti-Taylorites" is the wrong label (notice I even placed a "?" after I used it), tell me what's the correct one. (no foul comments please. )

It's a big misunderstanding and incorrect to imply that Taylor did long guitar solos. Not on the studio albums nor on stage! That's absolutely NOT true at all. Those who say that don't know anything about that Stones era. Wood has played longer solos than Taylor ever did on stage! Surprised now?

Of course there are a lot of anti-Taylorites, but that has more to do with Wood struggling against the overwhelming Taylor inheritance and his own failure to really become a genuine Stones-guitarist. People love his loyalty, and I can understand that. Even people like Doxa who have nothing against his playing call him a fanboy. But well, I don't want to go into anti-Wood talk. I think he's a nice guy, but in my musical opinion he couldn't satisfyingly replace Taylor.

It seems it was a stronger gig for Keith in Boston or what do you think, especially you who actually were in the show?