STOP CALLING THEM WARHORSES NONE OF YOU ASSES USED THAT TERM UNTIL THE RUMOURED TITLE OF 40 Licks was that. HTW, BS, JJF are among the greatest rock songs written. If you don't want to hear them and prefer In Anorther Land followed by Turd on the Run you just want your own little secret concert where no one but you and 1% of the audiance knows the songs.

lol I think there's a big difference between wanting to hear Cant You Hear Me Knocking and In Another Land, but decent point nontheless.

We're pissing and moaning because Brown Sugar, Start Me Up, JJFlash, YCAGWYW, and all the other hits just keep getting reused every tour. They've got a MASSIVE catalogue of songs, why not dig deep this time...?

drake Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> lol I think there's a big difference between
> wanting to hear Cant You Hear Me Knocking and In
> Another Land, but decent point nontheless.
>
> We're pissing and moaning because Brown Sugar,
> Start Me Up, JJFlash, YCAGWYW, and all the other
> hits just keep getting reused every tour. They've
> got a MASSIVE catalogue of songs, why not dig deep
> this time...?

Totaly agree, man...and the second point is, that they do not change the performance of the warehorses anymore..
the last 4 tours I know exactly how they play HTW,BS,SMU, and so on..
the same kind of horns, the same kind of backing refrains, the same kind of never find an ending.
If the play them...I would prefer that the Stones would play them kind of different from tour to tour.
The can do it.
For example: satisfaction: long version in 94/95 with horns, but a short and rough version in 97/98 as an opener.
The same with: Street fighting man, 1994 compared to 2002.

See you on the tour.
salar

I agree w/ Keefsarse....what EXACTLY is going to get 60,000 people jumping in their seats??

Cherry Oh Baby?

I think not.....if you don't want to hear the WARHORSES, don't go to a Stadium....take your chances w/ the clubs (if they do any)....

otherwise, deal w/ it....sing your lungs out on YCAGWYW.....do the "WOOO's" on Brown Sugar (and the OOO-OOOs on Sympathy)....scream "YOU GOT TO RO-OH-OLL ME!" on TD....and again for the "I CAN'T GET NO...." on Satisfaction...

go and have a good time and be glad this didn't end 30 years ago....

otherwise...stay home, make a mixed tape of all obscure songs, and listen to it w/ your friends and pretend you are at the show...

I'd rather hear more variety as well....but, a LOT of fans ONLY know the WARHORSES...and only go to hear them....are we "better" or "more important" than them just b/c we listen to the Stones more frequently?

quit bitching and be HAPPY!!!

But It's Boring to hear the same stuff since 30 Years.Collecting Boots is no fun anymore if they will end shows : BS JJF SMU ,SAtisfaction. I alway like shows with suprises like : out of tears or even monkey man

I agree with salar - the "warhorses" sound exactly the same every show. Plus Keith does not play guitar like he used to so Start Me Up, JJF, Brown Sugar etc.. sound like shit! Gone are the explosive chords...These days they are opening chords sounds thin and are often plagued with errors!!

At least "newer" songs have a bit of life....

Esky

Esky...how dare you contradict me...you used to be COOL, man!!!



Anyway....Look...I'm not saying that some of it has gotten "repetitive"...b/c it has....but, unless you see the Stones A LOT over A LOT of years (which most people do NOT do), you don't know that....and replacing WARHORSES w/ obscure songs that very few people know is NOT what the Stones are about....

that's a Grateful Dead/Phish "gimmick" (for lack of a better term)

I would agree that more "newer" songs might be better...I'd definitely like to hear "Saint of Me" and some others from "Bridges"...but, maybe that's only b/c I was unable to attend a show on that tour, and didn't hear them multiple times live....

I wouldn't mind hearing "Sad, Sad, Sad" or "Rock and a Hard Place" either....

but, I won't complain as long as I get my 2 hour fill of music....

Mixed emotions

Not the song but the feeling as im sure some people want to hear the favourites i know i would but i wished they would scale some down as stated often egnouth on here they have got a huge selection to choose from as i know when they played salt of the earth at twickenham there was a few startled faces and it took me a few seconds to remember what it was.

We all know its a 'rolling stones cash machine. now and they imho have to relate to the corporate type who are paying big bucks and who i would say are past their teenager days and they can go back to their gin & tonic friends and say oooooooooh we heard bs htw etc.

It was frustrating at manchester as nobody would get up and in the end i said to my missus f*** this i cant believe im at a stones concert and everybody is sitting down apologised to the people at the back of me and got up moving & A GROOVING and it would have been the same at twickenham until a mix up over seats and it worked out good for us in the end.

Stones fans have used the term warhorses for at least the last 10 years, probably longer.

You seem to think 'warhorse' as a pejorative term but I've seen the band many times over the last 25 years and I, and many others on this board, wouldn't mind seeing them pull more songs from their large canon rather than play songs I've heard them do every tour since 1981. What's wrong with that then, ey? By the way, why do you call yourself keitharse anyway, just curious.

Ok, they can play SMU, BS, SFTD, YCAGWYW, but I ask two or three "obscure" songs per concert. Am I ask so much??

there are several angles to the warhorse problem....

the first is that many of them are delivered in a completely un-inspired fashion. the stones play them because they think they "have to", just like the fans who think they "have to", and the performances sound just like that; obligatory, "let's get this over with". they've just coasted thru them since 1989; me and my friends call it "trash time", the inspiration and climax of the show is over, now let's run thru IORR, HTW, ICGNSatisfaction, JJF and get out of here. i will always vividly remember Philly NS tour when, for the first time in 11 years, i got to see a show that didn't have a 10 minute version of miss you. that's what people don't like about the warhorses; they take up a ton of set time and aren't inspiring.

the second problem with the warhorses (and the shows in general) is the sound of keef's amps and the mix. keef hasn't had any kind of decent distortion on his guitar for over 15 years until the press conference. this makes for very tepid rockers.

IMHO, TD, GS, SMU and BS are fine, and might even be better this tour than in years past if keef actually is going to use that overdiven amp sound. However, SFM, IORR, MY (admittedly not a recent warhorse, but still played at every friggin' show from '78-'98), JJF, HTW, and Satisfaction suffer from plinkiness and uninspired delivery. sure, JJF and Satis aren't 10 minute versions anymore, but SFM and IORR are pretty horrible. really, outside of bono/chicago/aragorn gig, when was the last time you heard a version of IORR that was different or inspired?

they could EASILY replace them with new warhorses, not rarities, that everybody still knows, songs that get played alot but haven't been in every show: BOB, MR, GOMC, Monkey Man, OOC, YCAGWYW, PIB, 2000 lt yrs, NFA, Star Star, Bitch, etc. Like i said, i can still deal with TD, GS, SMU and BS, but the rationale that there's not another 10 songs to form the core because the general public wouldn't know them is silly. as silly as it is that 45 minutes of every show has to be wasted with the band on auto-pilot playing these overdone, undistorted, uninspired versions of true classics that pale to the studio versions and the older live versions. we need new warhorses that everybody knows and that the band could freshly deliver.

i think you're premise is off, Winter. You not really represent the average show-goer. Many/most of them couldn't name but 10-15 Stones songs. That's why the Stones will do ALL of the warhorses...every show. And, they know the business they're in better than any of us do, frankly. That's why they are mega-millionaires.

They've got to do three things:

1. Promote the new CD
2. Play some songs for the thousands of people in the audience who have never owned a Stones album, or, if they did, it was HOT ROCKS
3. Amuse and delight those of us who want to hear them to play the B-sides of their 60s hits!

I would have no problem with warhorses if they would play songs like Jumpin' Jack Flash or Brown Sugar in short, rough 3 minute-versions like in the days till 89 and not 10 minutes with horns, backup vocals and a incredible lack of guitars (esp.Miss You).
They could even play a much longer setlist if they would not strech every song so long.
Every song sounded better in the 70s.
Just compare Hand Of Fate from Paris 76 with Hand Of Fate from Paris 03.
It seems to be a joke. Although they have modern sound systems, the guitars are incredibly thin and weak.
If they'd have played Moonlight Mile or Some Girls in the 70s, I'm sure that it would have sounded much better than in 99.
I can live without songs, you need professional backing vocals for.
They should only play songs on which Mick sings alone, perhaps sometimes backed up by Chuck, Keith, Ronnie and Darryl.
I think not a single fan wants to hear all these horns and singers.

Jagger's too smart to play obscure tunes to a stadium crowd. You'll have to wait for your private show for the non-warhorses. Again, what's wrong with playing their hits. Dance with the one who brought ya!