...recently delivered this on stage.

Come on I mean "Worried About You" was played a lot on the Licks tour....Risks would be "Winter" or "Slave" at this point...

-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-14 17:25 by DandelionPowderman.

I will never get used to this unmanly falsetto...

Good point, Dandelion.

That is great, Dandelion. The best parts of the shows are songs 5-8 (and 2). There they do take risks. However, I wish they would dare to take some "risks" in the war horse overhung second part of the setlist also.
That would make it less boring and predictable.

Risks means the entire career of the Rolling Stones from the beginning until now--and counting.
They have always taken risks. I think if one has been there for most of the last 50 years, one has witnessed it firsthand.

Ronnie plays a decent solo, some nice licks in there, but overall it's way below what they did 10 years ago in terms of the movement of the song, the energy and performance. Wow, what a difference.

Quote
ThatsWhatISay
I will never get used to this unmanly falsetto...

yet, the studio version is much better imo
I don't really like when Mick shouts out loud in this song

Talking about falsettos, I think Emotional Rescue was a bigger risk taken, and with better practical results, in my opinion.

OK, they take a few very moderate risks, and it was good they did this tune.

Glad they played it, but how can something be a 'risk' for any act when theyve rehearsed it several times before the tour started and know several hours in advance that theyre going to play it?

What risk is being taken here? The song was rehearsed and went over well enough and so it was played on stage. A reak risk would involve spontaneously breaking the song out, unrehearsed. That's risk.

Everything is relative. What is a perfect normal thing for Bruce Springsteen or Dylan to do is a huge risk when we are talking about The Rolling Stones. Seemingly...

Who's the second keyboard player next to Chuck seen on 3:12 ?

I get what you are trying to say here DP, but there's no point in aiming such things at the people I assume you are aiming it at.

Better to just highlight it for what it is on it's own terms, that being Jagger losing himself within a great performance!



Funny, late last night a certain member here who is named after an Ampeg amp posted a nice rant, mentioned he was leaving(again!), then deleted it.

A two chord song is twice as risky as a one chord song.

Fair dos.

Quote
bigbitch
Come on I mean "Worried About You" was played a lot on the Licks tour....Risks would be "Winter" or "Slave" at this point...

the "risk bar" gets lowered with each passing tour.

Quote
ThatsWhatISay
I will never get used to this unmanly falsetto...

you close your eyes and pretend jagger is one of those hot chicks and it's not so bad...

I'm not saying that playing WAY is taking a big risk. I'm just putting things in perspective.

After all, this is a Vegas band without guitar players - that never could be able to play together again.

I think this song symbolises that lots of things that the band is being criticised for is unfair, though. Here we have a deep cut, performed excellently - by everyone. And a singer who puts his heart on the line performing it.

We won't get 22 songs like this one every night, but we should indeed cherish these precious moments, imo.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
We won't get 22 songs like this one every night, but we should indeed cherish these precious moments, imo.

cherish isn't the word i use to describe

i doubt this means taking a risk but i think it is a great rendition
way better than 2002/2003 at least the one i know better of: the four flicks opera version. check and compare both mick falsetto and ronnie's solo..
and keith clapping in the end tells the story

Quote
GravityBoy
A two chord song is twice as risky as a one chord song.

Fair dos.

- Right. The least risky songs are those from Some Girls.

Then we can rule out Winter and TWFNO, since they have few chords?

It's not working that way

Isn't touring at all them taking a risk? How many of us have ever got up in front of 20,000 people and played, much less at 70 years old with everyone expecting you to sound like you did when you were 20?

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Then we can rule out Winter and TWFNO, since they have few chords?

They do have a few solos as well ...

Not Winter

Quote
sonomastone
Isn't touring at all them taking a risk? How many of us have ever got up in front of 20,000 people and played, much less at 70 years old with everyone expecting you to sound like you did when you were 20?

at 70 it's a risk getting up out of bed in the morning. they seem to be doing that as well as they did in their 20's....

Quote
ThatsWhatISay
I will never get used to this unmanly falsetto...

So...you hate the Stones, the Beatles, and the Beach Boys? That's a hat trick of falsettos right there.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
...recently delivered this on stage.

Well, I don't know what kind of discussion you want or call for here, Dandelion? However, it seems that to a discussion you did not wish to continue in a particular thread, you all the same feel the urge to make a point addressed to some of the participants.

Very well, when I for one as a minor poster, have written about the period after 1989, I am not at all over-critical. I don't like to be over-critical to my favourite band, in fact. On the other hand, not to discern between good and not so good, and maybe how and why, would be without special acknowledgement of what deserves extra praise.

I am one of those who in my rather few posts have made opposition to the "Las Vegas" concept. It has more or less been a central part of my agenda. However, neither am I completely without points of view.

In that context, I have tried to draw a distinction between taking risks and doing things in a controlled and premeditated way.The latter does not necessarily preclude the former. I have aimed at giving reasons for the latter in ambivalent support. Besides,I have tried to argue that risks since 1989 have or may have at times also been taken in the context of the latter (doing things in a controlled and premeditated way), mainly with the view to recreate studio originals. I have also argued that the blame for setlists, crammed with major songs used as warhorses, primarily lies with the customers, not the band. But then, I have said that the live recreation of the studio originals, combined with warhorse laden setlists, although performed with taste, and evoking a good and sometimes deep feeling, gradually goes through a difficult transition. From daring recreation to a fixed pattern, then from pattern to a routine. At that stage, the recreation of originals, probably as to the warhorses especially, runs the risk not to be able to penetrate into the songs, but more or less remain at the surface of them. That danger is not helped by the fact that songs which once were associated with some measure of danger, hardly longer are. At the same time, the band finds it impossible to play newer songs that maybe not are dangerous, but have it in them that they could be challenging to some, because the audiences demand the warhorses. (And in the mentionned thread, I have suggested that an increased participation of a certain guitarist with an improvising way of playing, might to some extent give some new life to the old songs, some passion and penetration, but that discussion might be taken in the other thread perhaps. I also believe he could inspire a recording of a possible studio album and make a buzz among record buyers that might lead to a recent album feature in setlists of ensuing concerts.).

I am not against falsetto singing, even if the pseudo-falsetto singing on "Hang Fire" on that studio album was misplaced with its text, I think. This song, however, still has got a freshness. That vocal done live has a daring to it, I agree. However, that judgement is no dilemma to my understanding.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-15 00:01 by Witness.