well,took my kids to the V.L..and BTb and Licks tour. what they say???
NOT THE SAME AGAIN-old-ones
i am wih the Stones since Aftermath

You're making so much sense.
Teach your kids a lesson: Tie them to Keith's loudspeaker tower on the stage and let him rattle their bones for you.

JumpingKentFlash

You know, to be honest: The 8th, 9th or 10th European Licks show that I saw also bored me a bit (although I ENJOYED them all) - especially when I have been listening to boots of the US tour for already half a year. Vredenburg then really was another world. WOW.

I would love a Stones show every three months. Club shows prefered. That would never get boring. But 10 shows in two months and then three years nothing is not the best rhythm... Satisfaction never lasts long and if you overdo it...well I know, tours work like that.

They are too old now, they should quit?

" They are too old now, they should quit?"

No but they DO need to shake things up a bit.

They aren't hungry anymore, no need to prove themselves to anyone. A hit album, don't bet on it. It was all downhill after Tattoo You.

In '89 they re-invented their "live" shows and have used the same formula ever since. Michael Cohl deserves a lot of credit.

In my opinion, when Ian Stuart passed away, a big part of the Stones passed away too.

Never, never, never, never be.......no way...they are still the champs! Let's be grateful we still have them. I'm a huge Beatles fan. I don't have an upcoming album or tour to debate.

Why oh why are some of you so anxious to write off the Stones? Are you feeling your own mortality, or what? I frankly do not get this sense of fatalism that has infected some of you. With a new album in the works, you people should be in a celebratory mood, not acting as if you're attending a wake.

YOU ARE NEVER TOO OLD TO ROCK'N'ROLL

They are not too old, but two of them have taking too much drugs and alcohol, and both have lost it.

Mathijs

I have never understood people who say "They should quit, they're too old..."
There's always people who don't like them (the Stones) who says things like that.
Like if they don't want to listen to them, nobody other should either.
When it's just as easy as it's themselves that just have to avoid listening to the Stones.
Right?

I think people who desperately love the Stones don't was to see them tarnish their reputation.I don't think it makes them any less Stones fans. When i look at the legacy of great music they have left i hate the idea of them trickling to an end as they get more and more incapable of reaching those incredible standards set in their prime. Their music is primarily raw rock 'n' roll which requires a great deal of energy and they like everyone else is aging. It makes perfect sense to me to rather see them retire gracefully than become a complete embarrasment.

I agree with Tomstones: a club gig every three months. And although I don't think so, I'd really like the stones to make a hit record

1963 - 1982
Rolling Stones, greatest r'n'r band in the world

1982 - 2004
Mick's songs with Stones arrangement
and Keith's boring ballads

1962 - 1967: British blues at it's best + Experiments.
1968 - 1978: The Greatest Rock 'n Roll Band In The World.
1979 - 1983: Still The Greatest Rock 'n Roll Band In The World, but the watering hole for that type of music dried out in these years.
1984 - 1988: Mid-life crisis.
1989 - 1993: The Greatest Rock 'n Roll Comeback In The World and solo efforts.
1994 - 1999: Proving why they still are The Greatest Rock 'n Roll Band In The World.
2000 - 2003: Solo effort by Mick and a great tour, which revived many great tracks in awesome ways. Still a very little bit sell-outish to do a greatest hits tour.
2004 - 2006: Album and tour that will prove why they still are The Greatest Rock 'n Roll Band In The World, since people seems to need to be reminded of it.

JumpingKentFlash

Ballads?
Flip The Switch?
Out Of Control?
Are we talking about the same band?

PS. Why on earth would you take your kids to a Stones show? I mean one time is ok, to show them why you spend all that time on a legendary band. But again and again? Would you go to a rap show with your kids, again and again, or to a boyband show, again and again, and say this is getting better and better?

Bjornulf

Yeah too old yeah yeah.

When it comes to Stones, everybody is talking about their age. Why?? When the press or non Stones fans are talking about other artists with the same age like for example Aerosmith, you don't hear them say" there're a buch of old people desperitly trying to be young"...What is it with the Stones and age. If you see them on stage everybody is saying "I wich I had the condition of Mick Jagger"... Do you understand that???? I don't



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-03-27 20:14 by bartman.

they have been too old since 81, so whats your point

LIke the old bluesmen they play to end. stones are not only the greatest rock'n'roll band in the world, but also the most honest.

All the other bands are getting older and so are the fans.

"They are not too old, but two of them have taking too much drugs and alcohol, and both have lost it." (Mathijs above)

Hey; what have Keith lost? Did he miss the last rap wave; didnt shout that many "yo!" like his frontman during licks tour?

...And what have RW lost, then?

This "too old"-debate os the saddest among all the cheap tryings to put RS down. I´m depressed to admit that its a fellow-citizen to me that made one of the most pathetic remarks here in this thread.

Take a 62-64 year old in your surroundings; compare him or her with this bunch. And... ?

i never said that the Stones are too old. Thats what my children (22 and 19) said ,after they saw the Stones "Licks" concert in Oberhausen.They know most of the records from the Stones. what they said??--"its boring to hear the the same Hits on every tour. they prefer songs like "Dead Flowers" or "torn and frayed".
Sure they like the band, but even they say: "Their need new Songs if they really tour the world 05/06!!

And I didnt oppose to Havo the thread starter, but to johang.
Of course revitalization is needed. And it´s gonna be there; all signs are there...

Very well put Bro. This will be very interesting indeed.

all this speculating is a waste of time ---the stones are gonna roll no matter what anyone thinks, one more time, and the world be damned---RIGHT ON MAN!!!!

STONES JAM!! MICKEYS RULES!!! (burp) NADER IN 2016!!!!! GO GIANTS!!

Lets face it they been too old for a while (25+ years) now and for real true stones fans this next project will be dissapointing, just as Forty licks was.

no--johang--If their will be a new Stones-Album---I am sure it will be a great one. They know what to do and what all their Fans are waiting for.

Fourty Licks was no Dissapointment

Keith has been bunkered down writing songs and concentrating on the new album....that alone is all we need to know.

ROCKMAN

My absolutely last contribution to this low-watermark discussion.
If you believe that the Stones are ab age 25-30, young and angry anarchist punk hippy goddamit rockers and wait for a new LIB, SF or Exile, well; you´ll get disappointed & that´s what you deserve to be.
...What you got is Stones born in 1941, 1943, 1943 and 1948, respecitively if we speak about the nucleus. The only other mammoths of that age are dead, demented, brain damaged, or not worth to speak about. Keef has used up his nine cat lives; and seems to have been distributed 9*9 new ones (since the 1970´s?). Woody is close behind. Mick is - aside from my "yo!"-drift above - quite youthful in his 60´s, isnt he? Keef look like he´s 400 years old, but speaks like a J.Rotten/Oscar Wilde-mix and plays like a Thunders in his mid-20´s.
...The period that I understand the Stones was far out and closest to cease seems to be between circa 1985 and 1989. Since 1994 I can see no decrease. Another thing is that this band never has made a sublime or perfect album (LIB, Exile and GHS is damn close to); in that I may have a different opinion from most other users here. But rock 'n' roll isnt about perfection either.
... Hey, man, johan; come on: How old is Chuck Berry?
... And there are qualities in the older Stones that in many ways exceed the young issue: matureness, coolness, the heavy sound, the trade mark that any w-a-nker band whatsoever in Nowhereland fail to mock... And they still know how to rock our brain cells into porridge...
- They will kick all our asses, new album, new tour. Basta.