Quote
Nate

Quote
Turning To Gold
I think they just get BORED on a long tour, and I think that getting bored musically often has the OPPOSITE effect on the music then what people think it should be - instead of wanting to play more and different songs, once they get jaded and bored then the band just want to get in, play what's comfortable, easy and safe, run the show on autopilot, and then get out of there.

I know in '81 and '82 some songs like "Tops" were dropped, because they just weren't working out right.

If you compare it to a job site, when you are bored or tired at work you don't do an elaborate, amazing job on things....you just do the bare minimum work possible, and then get yourself out of there.

Also in the beginning of a tour they have more to prove, to themselves, to the fans, to the press etc. At the end of the tour, the hype factor is over and they are just getting the repetitive paycheck after paycheck after paycheck.

It would be interesting to chart WHEN in each tour the set list starts shortening. For all we know, it could even be happening based upon the break even point of the tour. After a certain number of early concerts, which are needed to pay for the total stage, lights, crew, trucks, etc., everything else is profit from that point forward.

What a complete load of horse****...do you honestly believe that they are touring to make money,they love what they do and that's why they do it.

Nate

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Their setlists are really not THAT lame. It is just that dreaded second half. Pafter introductions.Even the band themselves must somehow switch on to some xsort of autopilot, come song 12. like someone said: CD 2 from late era shows are mostly not worth listening to.
When I am looking at setlists post '89 I find myself automatically zooming in on Song 4-6. that is where the suprises happen.

Quote
Stoneage
Sometimes you wonder on which data Sir Michael makes his set list decisions. He seems to think that the average Stones fan likes to hear the same songs
performed in the same manner over and over again. Like schooled monkeys...

Quote
buffalo7478
I think the band's setlist is designed to appeal to the least common denominator at each show: the casual or new fan that wants the to play the hits. Maybe they are sensitive to watching the real cash-cow fans paying the highest prices get bored or lose energy when they play something that is/was less popular or unknown to the average investment banker?

But it does really go back (for me at least) when I heard the play Tops in 1982 and I loved it, but probably 70,000 out of the 80,000 in attendance had no reaction...and that is before the Vegas era.

I think they want to put on a spectacle that gets the vast majority of the crowd enjoying the hits, positive energy in the room, and don't want to take risks. And especially now, in old age, with diminished skills, introducing new songs in a live setting is risky. The band that was once wild and edgy is now like a comfortable old sweater....but a lot of us aren't ready to sit in the rocking chair, content wearing an old sweater.

Quote
vertigojoe

Quote
buffalo7478
I think the band's setlist is designed to appeal to the least common denominator at each show: the casual or new fan that wants the to play the hits. Maybe they are sensitive to watching the real cash-cow fans paying the highest prices get bored or lose energy when they play something that is/was less popular or unknown to the average investment banker?

But it does really go back (for me at least) when I heard the play Tops in 1982 and I loved it, but probably 70,000 out of the 80,000 in attendance had no reaction...and that is before the Vegas era.

I think they want to put on a spectacle that gets the vast majority of the crowd enjoying the hits, positive energy in the room, and don't want to take risks. And especially now, in old age, with diminished skills, introducing new songs in a live setting is risky. The band that was once wild and edgy is now like a comfortable old sweater....but a lot of us aren't ready to sit in the rocking chair, content wearing an old sweater.

There's an analogy with modern football here.[soccer]
Manchester Utd used to fill their stadium every game with working class people from the local area. They would faithfully attend every game, paying for their tickets but probably very rarely purchasing anything in the club store, and maybe buying a cup of Bovril at Half Time.
So this had to change. They priced out the local fan, replacing him with "Customers" who would attend one game per season, spend a fortune in the MegaStore, and buy the overpriced burgers etc from the catering concessions.
However new fan didn't know the words to the songs the fans sang, and didn't know the people sitting around him. The result? A totally sterile atmosphere. But big bucks in the clubs coffers.
Maybe not the perfect analogy, but definitely some similarities to RS Inc.

Quote
Aquamarine

Quote
DiamondDog7

The 'warhorses' are easy for them and those songs are major crowdpleasers. Especially for the 'new' fans and festival lovers. This tour isn't really for the real die hard fans over here. Quite honestly, this whole tour isn't about pleasing the real fans, but pleasing the big crowd!(

Please define "real fans."

Quote
Aquamarine
OK, I don't know everything about the Stones, so I'm turning in my "real fan" badge.

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Aquamarine
OK, I don't know everything about the Stones, so I'm turning in my "real fan" badge.

Well you sure know more than me Aqua, so I'm out too. Better yet, since this is turning into high school, let's just start our own club and call ourselves The Rolling Stones level two fans. Level one can be DDog, level three can be the poor slobs who only go to hear the hits and think they are fans, but aren't really...

Grrrrr.............

Quote
Aquamarine

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Aquamarine
OK, I don't know everything about the Stones, so I'm turning in my "real fan" badge.

Well you sure know more than me Aqua, so I'm out too. Better yet, since this is turning into high school, let's just start our own club and call ourselves The Rolling Stones level two fans. Level one can be DDog, level three can be the poor slobs who only go to hear the hits and think they are fans, but aren't really...

Grrrrr.............

It would be rather scary to know everything about them, though--so I think we're better off in level two.

Quote
Long John Stoner
When I used to communicate regularly with Chuck Leavell, their ages and ability to give what they felt was a quality performance through the length of the show was always in the front of their minds. Saying they're bored is just silly. Jagger does think they need to play to the fan who might not have ever seen them before, so long time fans are going to have to hear some songs over and over. But as far as the duration of the show and number of songs, if their thinking is what it was before, it has everything to do with how long they feel they can stay on stage without having the performance suffer. In other words, it's a concession to age, nothing more, nothing less.

Quote
hirschjaeger

Quote
Long John Stoner
When I used to communicate regularly with Chuck Leavell, their ages and ability to give what they felt was a quality performance through the length of the show was always in the front of their minds. Saying they're bored is just silly. Jagger does think they need to play to the fan who might not have ever seen them before, so long time fans are going to have to hear some songs over and over. But as far as the duration of the show and number of songs, if their thinking is what it was before, it has everything to do with how long they feel they can stay on stage without having the performance suffer. In other words, it's a concession to age, nothing more, nothing less.

you forgot something maybe
die hard fans like us want surprises
and have for example also many bootlegs too

Quote
Nate

Quote
Turning To Gold
I think they just get BORED on a long tour, and I think that getting bored musically often has the OPPOSITE effect on the music then what people think it should be - instead of wanting to play more and different songs, once they get jaded and bored then the band just want to get in, play what's comfortable, easy and safe, run the show on autopilot, and then get out of there.

I know in '81 and '82 some songs like "Tops" were dropped, because they just weren't working out right.

If you compare it to a job site, when you are bored or tired at work you don't do an elaborate, amazing job on things....you just do the bare minimum work possible, and then get yourself out of there.

Also in the beginning of a tour they have more to prove, to themselves, to the fans, to the press etc. At the end of the tour, the hype factor is over and they are just getting the repetitive paycheck after paycheck after paycheck.

It would be interesting to chart WHEN in each tour the set list starts shortening. For all we know, it could even be happening based upon the break even point of the tour. After a certain number of early concerts, which are needed to pay for the total stage, lights, crew, trucks, etc., everything else is profit from that point forward.

What a complete load of horse****...do you honestly believe that they are touring to make money,they love what they do and that's why they do it.

Nate

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Stoneage
Sometimes you wonder on which data Sir Michael makes his set list decisions. He seems to think that the average Stones fan likes to hear the same songs
performed in the same manner over and over again. Like schooled monkeys...

The average Stones fan probably does. If you think a few hundred people posting on IORR represent average stones fans, I think perhaps you may be mistaken.

Quote
saltoftheearth

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Stoneage
Sometimes you wonder on which data Sir Michael makes his set list decisions. He seems to think that the average Stones fan likes to hear the same songs
performed in the same manner over and over again. Like schooled monkeys...

The average Stones fan probably does. If you think a few hundred people posting on IORR represent average stones fans, I think perhaps you may be mistaken.

That's the point! Like it or not but most of the concert-goers are guys who have the greatest-hits-albums at home, and they expect a greatest-hits-concert with a spectacular light-show. They would not mind if the hits were played note by note like the originals, perhaps with a longer guitar solo.
This is what the Rolling Stones are basically doing today, and therefore they are still so successful. Thias is what happens with other bands from the 1960s as well, think only of Santana.

Quote
Pecman
I think you are correct...and 100% percent on the money.

But at this point...I'll take a 2 hour show at the beginning of the tour and be
satisfied with 1 hr and 45 min at the end of the tour.

P.S. Don't Tell Mick!

Pecman

Quote
BluzDude

Quote
Pecman
I think you are correct...and 100% percent on the money.

But at this point...I'll take a 2 hour show at the beginning of the tour and be
satisfied with 1 hr and 45 min at the end of the tour.

P.S. Don't Tell Mick!

Pecman

Kind of funny when you think about it....for most bands, the shows gets l-o-n-g-e-r as the tour progresses.

Quote
vertigojoe

Quote
buffalo7478
I think the band's setlist is designed to appeal to the least common denominator at each show: the casual or new fan that wants the to play the hits. Maybe they are sensitive to watching the real cash-cow fans paying the highest prices get bored or lose energy when they play something that is/was less popular or unknown to the average investment banker?

But it does really go back (for me at least) when I heard the play Tops in 1982 and I loved it, but probably 70,000 out of the 80,000 in attendance had no reaction...and that is before the Vegas era.

I think they want to put on a spectacle that gets the vast majority of the crowd enjoying the hits, positive energy in the room, and don't want to take risks. And especially now, in old age, with diminished skills, introducing new songs in a live setting is risky. The band that was once wild and edgy is now like a comfortable old sweater....but a lot of us aren't ready to sit in the rocking chair, content wearing an old sweater.

There's an analogy with modern football here.[soccer]
Manchester Utd used to fill their stadium every game with working class people from the local area. They would faithfully attend every game, paying for their tickets but probably very rarely purchasing anything in the club store, and maybe buying a cup of Bovril at Half Time.
So this had to change. They priced out the local fan, replacing him with "Customers" who would attend one game per season, spend a fortune in the MegaStore, and buy the overpriced burgers etc from the catering concessions.
However new fan didn't know the words to the songs the fans sang, and didn't know the people sitting around him. The result? A totally sterile atmosphere. But big bucks in the clubs coffers.
Maybe not the perfect analogy, but definitely some similarities to RS Inc.

Quote
bonddm
Re: the reduction in set lists from 23/24 to 19,why not just have an intermission like on the Licks tour if a continuous 2 and a 1/2 hour set is too much for Charlie and/or another member?
It's obviously not practical for the festival dates,but is for the arena shows, considering they don't have support acts and usually finish early.