When was the last time that the Stones really brought something new on the record or in the show?

The record: Steel Wheels
The tour: Steel Wheels / Urban Jungle

I think that after that they have been just repeating the same all over again,
especially live.

They have not been bad, they are very good at repeating the same routine.

But the song arrangements are always the same, the surprising factor is totally missing, and this is just sad, I don't know why (especially Jagger) they do everything (especially live) in such a over controlled way.

I can understand that they play the warhorses but why won't they bring new arrangements or new riffs/solos or new singing styles or something new to them, they just repeat exactly the same routine...

This thing just came so obvious to me as I listened to this video:

Quote
rollingon

When was the last time that the Stones really brought something new on the record or in the show?

Would say at the Bridges-to-Babylon-Tour: the B-Stage .....

Quote
rollingon
When was the last time that the Stones really brought something new on the record or in the show?

The record: Steel Wheels
The tour: Steel Wheels / Urban Jungle

I think that after that they have been just repeating the same all over again,
especially live.

They have not been bad, they are very good at repeating the same routine.

But the song arrangements are always the same, the surprising factor is totally missing, and this is just sad, I don't know why (especially Jagger) they do everything (especially live) in such a over controlled way.

I can understand that they play the warhorses but why won't they bring new arrangements or new riffs/solos or new singing styles or something new to them, they just repeat exactly the same routine...

This thing just came so obvious to me as I listened to this video:

Both JJF (horns) and Satisfaction ("can you hit me one time..." ) are played differently today than in 1989/90.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-08 13:00 by DandelionPowderman.

The surprising factor was buried as the last gig was done in Leeds 1982. In my opinion the genuine Rolling Stones has ended then. On the tour 81/82 they played always different every gig the last time. After that Keith and Ronnie were either buried in the mix (89/90) or they minimalized the factor of improvisation more and more. Compare e.g. GS 72/73 or 75/76 to the rendition in Hyde Park (although this rendition was the best for years or decades). Never I thought that a song like GS could be boring but they managed it ...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-08 12:42 by RobertJohnson.

Steel Wheels was released at a point in their lives when they were still--just barely--not too old to have hit records and could still viably compete for the status of being the number 1 rock band, there was still a sense of the current moment just as much as there was of the classic epoch. After this they became legends and set about to do as Pete Townshend implored them to in his Rock n Roll Hall of Fame induction speech: to not grow old gracefully. Suddenly, once they returned in the 90s, the hit singles stopped ascending, their albums seemed to mean less in terms of statements that might define the decade or even the year in which they were released--their album titles became something to name their megatours, which in themselves were still a viable medium around which to celebrate the storied history of rock n roll.

In 1983, David Gilmour was asked in a magazine interview (Guitar Heroes #9, May 1983) what he thought about a recent statement Peter Green had made about Jagger and Richards:

Interviewer: Peter Green said in a recent interview (Guitar Heroes, April 1983): " I think rock'n'roll is a joke invented by Mick Jagger and Keith Richards." What do you think of rock'n'roll?

David Gilmour: Well...(pause) it's a very very big subject. What I call rock'n'roll is any popular music or anything that we would call the music business over the past 20 years. It itself is not a joke, but an awful lot of it is a joke. You can see what he means about Mick Jagger and Keith Richards. That seems quite self-parody. But even he comes out with moments of brilliance once in a while.

Moments of brilliance.... that remains the surprise. If you want for The Stones to surprise you once again, think back to that time around 1989 and 1990 when they pleased you with Steel Wheels and satisfied or exceeded your expectations in performance on that tour, think back to your state of mind then....now from your 1990 mind set look ahead to the impossibly far-off year of 2013, if you can, a year, a decade you never even dreamed of contemplating back then because it seemed so distant, so sci-fi a concept that surely by then automobiles would look like flying saucers and everyday life would in fact resemble a Jetsons cartoon come to life....then imagine that someone just walks in from 2013 to tell you that The Stones would in fact still be performing, with one less member perhaps, but their original drummer could still bash out a credible rhythm for All Down The Line and Mick Jagger would still have a 28-inch waist and that Mick Taylor would rejoin them for occasionally brilliant renditions of Can't You Hear Me Knocking....

....Well, 1990 man, would you not be surprised?.... I know, you don't have to tell me, I can see the jaw of your mullet-framed face beginning to drop.... you would be speechless....

Moments of brilliance, like the man said, continue to surprise, and even amaze, from time to time.

Quote
RobertJohnson
The surprising factor was buried as the last gig was done in Leeds 1982. In my opinion the genuine Rolling Stones has ended then. On the tour 81/82 they played always different every gig the last time. After that Keith and Ronnie were either buried in the mix (89/90) or they minimalized the factor of improvisation more and more. Compare e.g. GS 72/73 or 75/76 to the rendition in Hyde Park (although this rendition was the best for years or decades). Never I thought that a song like GS could be boring but they managed it ...

I've been listening to an enormous amount of bootlegs from this tour, and I don't think this is correct. After the first gigs, they pretty much found their template - even though some of the jam numbers could vary in time (Imagination, for instance).

Quote
RobertJohnson
The surprising factor was buried as the last gig was done in Leeds 1982. In my opinion the genuine Rolling Stones ended then. On the tour 81/82 they played always different every gig the last time. After that Keith and Ronnie were either buried in the mix (89/90) or they minimalized the factor of improvisation more and more. Compare e.g. GS 72/73 or 75/76 to the rendition in Hyde Park (although this rendition was the best for years or decades). Never I thought that a song like GS could be boring but they managed it ...

...that final statement concerning GS is way too harsh, imo; same goes for that "best for years or decades" qualification - I don't agree with these two AT ALL.

But I kinda share your observation on the "Leeds '82" -momentum; all in all, there's a lot of truth in your post.

<Moments of brilliance>

Bringing Mick Taylor and Bill Wyman back on stage in 2012, even for just a few songs, was surprising and great.
Rock and roll,
Mops

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
RobertJohnson
The surprising factor was buried as the last gig was done in Leeds 1982. In my opinion the genuine Rolling Stones has ended then. On the tour 81/82 they played always different every gig the last time. After that Keith and Ronnie were either buried in the mix (89/90) or they minimalized the factor of improvisation more and more. Compare e.g. GS 72/73 or 75/76 to the rendition in Hyde Park (although this rendition was the best for years or decades). Never I thought that a song like GS could be boring but they managed it ...

I've been listening to an enormous amount of bootlegs from this tour, and I don't think this is correct. After the first gigs, they pretty much found their template - even though some of the jam numbers could vary in time (Imagination, for instance).

The truth is that almost every song was a jam number on this tour ...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-08 13:11 by RobertJohnson.

Quote
rollingon
When was the last time that the Stones really brought something new on the record or in the show?

"Small" in the Small, Medium and Large Tour was not bad at all.

I don't know. I was pretty surprised at how good A Bigger Bang was. I geuninely feel that way. I was also surprised at the 50 and Counting show I saw that the Stones were still better than most of the other younger guys on the scene these days.

Real classic surprise? That hasn't really happened since Some Girls IMO. Or the last surprising factor was how big of a hit Start Me Up was. After that, it was all variations of the same.

Imo, some wonderful surprises at the 2012/2013 tour:

- Mick Taylor for a couple of songs
- Great variation of songs such as 2000LYFH, Emotional rescue, and some excellent and surprising guests (though not all guests were good and added something)
- In their 70s, and they still are the best live band and blow all the youngsters off the stage
- Doom and gloom (yes, I think this is a good song, also when played live)
- the stage and the drummers' intros
- the somehow stripped down approach (fewer horns, fewer background vocals...), more rock and guitars
- the playing live of Keith and Ronnie (e.g. You got the silver)
- the singing and playing at the same time (Keith on BTMMR)
- Mick's singing still on top, including all ranges of his voice
- Charlie's drumming is amazing (listen to the Hyde Park concerts published recently)

- and, still, after all those years, their songs are milestones in R'n R history these songs do not age (which is also somehow a surprise, since these songs attract new generations of audience - consider at all those younger people at their concerts!)

- What is not surprising is that - in 2013 - you do not get the Stones of 1978 or 1973 or 1982, but this is Stones 2013 ... with all good (and probably not so good) things.

Well they've certainly surprised a few people around here in recent months.

[Folks currently busy eating some of their words... or choking on their hats ;^) ]

Quote
MGetzner
Imo, some wonderful surprises at the 2012/2013 tour:

- Mick Taylor for a couple of songs
- Great variation of songs such as 2000LYFH, Emotional rescue, and some excellent and surprising guests (though not all guests were good and added something)
- In their 70s, and they still are the best live band and blow all the youngsters off the stage
- Doom and gloom (yes, I think this is a good song, also when played live)
- the stage and the drummers' intros
- the somehow stripped down approach (fewer horns, fewer background vocals...), more rock and guitars
- the playing live of Keith and Ronnie (e.g. You got the silver)
- the singing and playing at the same time (Keith on BTMMR)
- Mick's singing still on top, including all ranges of his voice
- Charlie's drumming is amazing (listen to the Hyde Park concerts published recently)

- and, still, after all those years, their songs are milestones in R'n R history these songs do not age (which is also somehow a surprise, since these songs attract new generations of audience - consider at all those younger people at their concerts!)

- What is not surprising is that - in 2013 - you do not get the Stones of 1978 or 1973 or 1982, but this is Stones 2013 ... with all good (and probably not so good) things.

I'd agree with all this, and add to the thread as a whole, "whaddaya want, blood?" Sometimes great is all you need, surprising isn't necessary. Those old blues singers, you don't expect them to surprise you by suddenly doing a reggae version of Mannish Boy or whatever.

Quote
stonehearted
Steel Wheels was released at a point in their lives when they were still--just barely--not too old to have hit records and could still viably compete for the status of being the number 1 rock band, there was still a sense of the current moment just as much as there was of the classic epoch. After this they became legends and set about to do as Pete Townshend implored them to in his Rock n Roll Hall of Fame induction speech: to not grow old gracefully. Suddenly, once they returned in the 90s, the hit singles stopped ascending, their albums seemed to mean less in terms of statements that might define the decade or even the year in which they were released--their album titles became something to name their megatours, which in themselves were still a viable medium around which to celebrate the storied history of rock n roll.

In 1983, David Gilmour was asked in a magazine interview (Guitar Heroes #9, May 1983) what he thought about a recent statement Peter Green had made about Jagger and Richards:

Interviewer: Peter Green said in a recent interview (Guitar Heroes, April 1983): " I think rock'n'roll is a joke invented by Mick Jagger and Keith Richards." What do you think of rock'n'roll?

David Gilmour: Well...(pause) it's a very very big subject. What I call rock'n'roll is any popular music or anything that we would call the music business over the past 20 years. It itself is not a joke, but an awful lot of it is a joke. You can see what he means about Mick Jagger and Keith Richards. That seems quite self-parody. But even he comes out with moments of brilliance once in a while.

Moments of brilliance.... that remains the surprise. If you want for The Stones to surprise you once again, think back to that time around 1989 and 1990 when they pleased you with Steel Wheels and satisfied or exceeded your expectations in performance on that tour, think back to your state of mind then....now from your 1990 mind set look ahead to the impossibly far-off year of 2013, if you can, a year, a decade you never even dreamed of contemplating back then because it seemed so distant, so sci-fi a concept that surely by then automobiles would look like flying saucers and everyday life would in fact resemble a Jetsons cartoon come to life....then imagine that someone just walks in from 2013 to tell you that The Stones would in fact still be performing, with one less member perhaps, but their original drummer could still bash out a credible rhythm for All Down The Line and Mick Jagger would still have a 28-inch waist and that Mick Taylor would rejoin them for occasionally brilliant renditions of Can't You Hear Me Knocking....

....Well, 1990 man, would you not be surprised?.... I know, you don't have to tell me, I can see the jaw of your mullet-framed face beginning to drop.... you would be speechless....

Moments of brilliance, like the man said, continue to surprise, and even amaze, from time to time.

Yes, I agree that there are still amazing and interesting moments but I'd like them to try sometimes different arrangements on the whole songs especially on warhorses section, a little more improvisation and spontaneous attitude, I hope that if there will be a new tour they will somehow reform the songs, at least some of those songs. I hope that Chuck is not the obstacle here! And Jagger should'n try to control everything too much. Rock'n Roll is more interesting if there is not too much control I think. As for GS I'd like Jagger to sing the melody like he did in '69 Youtube studio video, he singed it differently back then, it' s such a great performance! And I don't like at all the current JJF background singing arrangement on the chorus, I think it's really dull.

Quote
RobertJohnson

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
RobertJohnson
The surprising factor was buried as the last gig was done in Leeds 1982. In my opinion the genuine Rolling Stones has ended then. On the tour 81/82 they played always different every gig the last time. After that Keith and Ronnie were either buried in the mix (89/90) or they minimalized the factor of improvisation more and more. Compare e.g. GS 72/73 or 75/76 to the rendition in Hyde Park (although this rendition was the best for years or decades). Never I thought that a song like GS could be boring but they managed it ...

I've been listening to an enormous amount of bootlegs from this tour, and I don't think this is correct. After the first gigs, they pretty much found their template - even though some of the jam numbers could vary in time (Imagination, for instance).

The truth is that almost every song was a jam number on this tour ...

I just love that jam feeling for example in the Live at Leeds '82, I have listened it so many times but I just can't get bored with it, I don't even understand myself how can I listen to it over and over again.

Quote
rollingon

Quote
RobertJohnson

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
RobertJohnson
The surprising factor was buried as the last gig was done in Leeds 1982. In my opinion the genuine Rolling Stones has ended then. On the tour 81/82 they played always different every gig the last time. After that Keith and Ronnie were either buried in the mix (89/90) or they minimalized the factor of improvisation more and more. Compare e.g. GS 72/73 or 75/76 to the rendition in Hyde Park (although this rendition was the best for years or decades). Never I thought that a song like GS could be boring but they managed it ...

I've been listening to an enormous amount of bootlegs from this tour, and I don't think this is correct. After the first gigs, they pretty much found their template - even though some of the jam numbers could vary in time (Imagination, for instance).

The truth is that almost every song was a jam number on this tour ...

I just love that jam feeling for example in the Live at Leeds '82, I have listened it so many times but I just can't get bored with it, I don't even understand myself how can I listen to it over and over again.

The same goes for me. The speed-up-tempo and the marvellous guitar work are great. There were five guys which are pleased to make some incredible noise, blues, rock and testosterone. This was the last time with the guitar-right-in-your-face-factor that I miss now very much.

These guitars are in your face, too. Even Mick Taylor's acoustic

I saw the Rolling Stones for the first time in 1975.
I was nearly 18 years old at the time.
The concert was terrific.

I saw the Rolling Stones most recently in 2013.
I am nearly 56 years old.
The concert was terrific.

THIS IS ALL VERY SURPRISING.
And that the Rolling Stones are still amazing - that's extraordinary!

Quote
HopeYouGuessMyName
I saw the Rolling Stones for the first time in 1975.
I was nearly 18 years old at the time.
The concert was terrific.

I saw the Rolling Stones most recently in 2013.
I am nearly 56 years old.
The concert was terrific.

THIS IS ALL VERY SURPRISING.
And that the Rolling Stones are still amazing - that's extraordinary!

But surprising? No

The last time they did something new was the 1997-1999 tour. They promoted a new album and the b-stage worked well.

Quote
windmelody
The last time they did something new was the 1997-1999 tour. They promoted a new album and the b-stage worked well.

Yeah, that's pretty much it, although I was bored by the BTB concert I saw in '97, but the '99 NS concert in Anaheim is my all time favorite. Licks was a little lackluster in comparison, a greatest hits tour, which was okay in '75, because they had a backlog of two albums they hadn't played in America, GHS and IORR. A Bigger Bang tour was more pyrotechnics and awe than music. That tour was Mick and a brilliant display of special effects. And the 50 & Counting Tour is for the sentimental, who just want to see them and hear a facsimile of what they were. The magic has been drained away.

All you need to know about the current tour is that the highlights were one, Bill Wyman even showing up, and whatever they would let Mick Taylor do. They're too old to bother to change things and do different tempos and stretch themselves out. For god's sake Keith is just trying to remember what Keith used to be able to play. The sound that rocked the world has been tamed. It's only natural. Now their audience is kids who've never seen them, and old people who want to weep and Remember When?

Licks 3 different shows in major cities, including a club show with rarities, didn't qualify as new???

Quote
24FPS

All you need to know about the current tour is that the highlights were one, Bill Wyman even showing up, and whatever they would let Mick Taylor do. They're too old to bother to change things and do different tempos and stretch themselves out. For god's sake Keith is just trying to remember what Keith used to be able to play. The sound that rocked the world has been tamed. It's only natural. Now their audience is kids who've never seen them, and old people who want to weep and Remember When?

Just speaking personally, while I was happy Bill played, that was hardly one of the highlights for me, and I was too busy dancing to be indulging in nostalgia. I can't help feeling that people expect the impossible from them, when they've already given the very best, and continue to maintain an unprecendented standard.

I'd say that surprising new Start Me Up intro

Just ask the non-Stones fans that attended Glastonbury what they think. It's you who is tired of the Stones, 24FPS, it happens to all fans. It will wear off

The surprise being that it's traditionally JJF or BS that get that treatment

JJF?

Quote
DandelionPowderman
JJF?

Jumpin' Scarf Flash?