Quote
1967fan
? I presume a lot and perhaps more than he would have otherwise sharing revenue. Just curious.

Not enough or the Stones would have ceased to exist around the time of Primitive Cool.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
BluzDude

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
BluzDude

...as for the rest of his band...union scale (not as wild of a guess)

No way. At least double scale plus bonuses, probably even more. peace

Oh, you're right, I was thinking of Bowie.

I recall reading about that in the day, SRV wasn't it, before the Let's Dance tour?

Here's an article about Stevie's reasons for pulling out of Bowie's tour. $300 per concert was indeed quite an insult.

[news.google.com]

peace

but I hear the food was free.

Don't think Bowie or Stevie were eating much (food) at the time... peace

The 300 dollars a concert is true but SRV ultimately left the Bowie camp because Stevie had a crazy girlfriend who'd disrupt rehearsals and keep him away from his responsibilities to the tour. It was said to be a really impossible situation even for rock stars, Stevie eventually escaped all that only to die in that terrible crash. Friends that knew him say he was a terrific, fun guy either partying or sober. He collected 45's and jukeboxes to play them.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-19 05:44 by DoomandGloom.

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
BluzDude

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
BluzDude

...as for the rest of his band...union scale (not as wild of a guess)

No way. At least double scale plus bonuses, probably even more. peace

Oh, you're right, I was thinking of Bowie.

I recall reading about that in the day, SRV wasn't it, before the Let's Dance tour?

Here's an article about Stevie's reasons for pulling out of Bowie's tour. $300 per concert was indeed quite an insult.

[news.google.com]

peace

but I hear the food was free.

Don't think Bowie or Stevie were eating much (food) at the time... peace

The 300 dollars a concert is true but SRV ultimately left the Bowie camp because Stevie had a crazy girlfriend who'd disrupt rehearsals and keep him away from his responsibilities to the tour. It was said to be a really impossible situation even for rock stars, Stevie eventually escaped all that only to die in that terrible crash. Friends that knew him say he was a terrific, fun guy either partying or sober. He collected 45's and jukeboxes to play them.

First I've heard of that. I can't imagine Stevie couldn't/wouldn't just tell his girlfriend that rehearsals were off limits. When Stevie discussed the situation he always said it was because of the limitations for promoting his own band and the promised warm up band gigs for them. I quote from his Guitar international interview below:

Did you actually do any of the live shows with Bowie?

"Stevie Ray Vaughan: Unh unh. There was a whole different light on the subject almost that had nothing to do with the way he offered the tour. We [Double Trouble] were supposed to open up all the shows and he was supposed to be wanting to have us in that situation to help us out. And as it turned out, I was supposed to quit them [Double Trouble] and not have anything to do with them, not do interviews or anything. And, I’m sorry, I’ve worked for that a long time. Fame and this big tour is really not that important."

peace

I'd say with the small number of shows, he lost money. You gotta pay for the stage and a lot of set up costs. Probably 15 shows in it starts making money at $50 per ticket.

[www.non-filters.com]

Had to be dreadfully unsatisfying for him as an artist, with only 6 solo songs per night.

[www.non-filters.com]

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
BluzDude

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
BluzDude

...as for the rest of his band...union scale (not as wild of a guess)

No way. At least double scale plus bonuses, probably even more. peace

Oh, you're right, I was thinking of Bowie.

I recall reading about that in the day, SRV wasn't it, before the Let's Dance tour?

Here's an article about Stevie's reasons for pulling out of Bowie's tour. $300 per concert was indeed quite an insult.

[news.google.com]

peace

but I hear the food was free.

Don't think Bowie or Stevie were eating much (food) at the time... peace

The 300 dollars a concert is true but SRV ultimately left the Bowie camp because Stevie had a crazy girlfriend who'd disrupt rehearsals and keep him away from his responsibilities to the tour. It was said to be a really impossible situation even for rock stars, Stevie eventually escaped all that only to die in that terrible crash. Friends that knew him say he was a terrific, fun guy either partying or sober. He collected 45's and jukeboxes to play them.

First I've heard of that. I can't imagine Stevie couldn't/wouldn't just tell his girlfriend that rehearsals were off limits. When Stevie discussed the situation he always said it was because of the limitations for promoting his own band and the promised warm up band gigs for them. I quote from his Guitar international interview below:

Did you actually do any of the live shows with Bowie?

"Stevie Ray Vaughan: Unh unh. There was a whole different light on the subject almost that had nothing to do with the way he offered the tour. We [Double Trouble] were supposed to open up all the shows and he was supposed to be wanting to have us in that situation to help us out. And as it turned out, I was supposed to quit them [Double Trouble] and not have anything to do with them, not do interviews or anything. And, I’m sorry, I’ve worked for that a long time. Fame and this big tour is really not that important."

peace

All pertinent but the real reason is what I wrote.

Quote
nonfilter
Had to be dreadfully unsatisfying for him as an artist, with only 6 solo songs per night.

[www.non-filters.com]

well wouldn't that have been his choice though? no one told him he HAD to play stones songs on his solo tour. certainly Keith didn't.

he probably felt the audience would want that and ultimately he wanted the tour to be successful.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
nonfilter
Had to be dreadfully unsatisfying for him as an artist, with only 6 solo songs per night.

[www.non-filters.com]

well wouldn't that have been his choice though? no one told him he HAD to play stones songs on his solo tour. certainly Keith didn't.

he probably felt the audience would want that and ultimately he wanted the tour to be successful.

It's not like he was playing cover tunes. He wrote a lot of those Stones tunes, they were still his tunes. Playing them with a new band was probably refreshing, possibly even more satisfying than playing them with the Stones because he had more control. I think Mick likes control. peace

Mick wanted to bring that show and those musicians to the U.S. in '89 but no promoter was interested so he had to go back to the Stones instead, look how closely the '89 Stones setlist looked to his '88 shows, just added some Steel Wheels songs and voila, he had a Stones tour!

A dollar fifty.

Quote
Mr.D
Mick wanted to bring that show and those musicians to the U.S. in '89 but no promoter was interested so he had to go back to the Stones instead, look how closely the '89 Stones setlist looked to his '88 shows, just added some Steel Wheels songs and voila, he had a Stones tour!

Spot on. And now I wonder how Keith felt about that.

Quote
Mr.D
Mick wanted to bring that show and those musicians to the U.S. in '89 but no promoter was interested so he had to go back to the Stones instead, look how closely the '89 Stones setlist looked to his '88 shows, just added some Steel Wheels songs and voila, he had a Stones tour!

This is inaccurate at best

Firstly, I've never heard of any solo touring plans for 1989? Secondly, the setlist weren't particularly similiar.

A random setlist from Japan:

Honky Tonk Women
Throwaway
Bitch
Let's Spend the Night Together
Lonely at the Top
Beast of Burden
Tumbling Dice
Miss You
Ruby Tuesday
Just Another Night
War Baby
Harlem Shuffle
Lucky in Love
Say You Will
Party Doll
You Can't Always Get What You Want
Radio Control
Shoot Off Your Mouth
Gimme Shelter
Start Me Up
Brown Sugar
It's Only Rock 'n' Roll (But I Like It)
Jumpin' Jack Flash
(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction


The opening night SW setlist:

"Start Me Up"
"Bitch"
"Shattered"
"Sad Sad Sad"
"Undercover of the Night"
"Harlem Shuffle"
"Tumbling Dice"
"Miss You"
"Ruby Tuesday"
"Play With Fire"
"Dead Flowers"
"One Hit (to the Body)"
"Mixed Emotions"
"Honky Tonk Women"
"Rock and a Hard Place"
"Midnight Rambler"
"You Can't Always Get What You Want"
"Little Red Rooster"
"Before They Make Me Run"
"Happy"
"Paint It Black"
"2000 Light Years from Home"
"Sympathy for the Devil"
"Gimme Shelter"
"It's Only Rock 'n Roll (But I Like It)"
"Brown Sugar"
"(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction"
"Jumpin' Jack Flash"

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mr.D
Mick wanted to bring that show and those musicians to the U.S. in '89 but no promoter was interested so he had to go back to the Stones instead, look how closely the '89 Stones setlist looked to his '88 shows, just added some Steel Wheels songs and voila, he had a Stones tour!

This is inaccurate at best

Firstly, I've never heard of any solo touring plans for 1989? Secondly, the setlist weren't particularly similiar.

A random setlist from Japan:

Honky Tonk Women
Throwaway
Bitch
Let's Spend the Night Together
Lonely at the Top
Beast of Burden
Tumbling Dice
Miss You
Ruby Tuesday
Just Another Night
War Baby
Harlem Shuffle
Lucky in Love
Say You Will
Party Doll
You Can't Always Get What You Want
Radio Control
Shoot Off Your Mouth
Gimme Shelter
Start Me Up
Brown Sugar
It's Only Rock 'n' Roll (But I Like It)
Jumpin' Jack Flash
(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction


The opening night SW setlist:

"Start Me Up"
"Bitch"
"Shattered"
"Sad Sad Sad"
"Undercover of the Night"
"Harlem Shuffle"
"Tumbling Dice"
"Miss You"
"Ruby Tuesday"
"Play With Fire"
"Dead Flowers"
"One Hit (to the Body)"
"Mixed Emotions"
"Honky Tonk Women"
"Rock and a Hard Place"
"Midnight Rambler"
"You Can't Always Get What You Want"
"Little Red Rooster"
"Before They Make Me Run"
"Happy"
"Paint It Black"
"2000 Light Years from Home"
"Sympathy for the Devil"
"Gimme Shelter"
"It's Only Rock 'n Roll (But I Like It)"
"Brown Sugar"
"(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction"
"Jumpin' Jack Flash"

you have to be joking...10 songs solo, the rest Rolling Stones and in the setlist you happen to pick at 'random' 11 songs are the same Rolling Stones cuts.

I'm not saying anything about a solo N.A. tour, I have no idea about that but the setlist you presented looks pretty similar, save the solo cuts.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mr.D
Mick wanted to bring that show and those musicians to the U.S. in '89 but no promoter was interested so he had to go back to the Stones instead, look how closely the '89 Stones setlist looked to his '88 shows, just added some Steel Wheels songs and voila, he had a Stones tour!

This is inaccurate at best

Firstly, I've never heard of any solo touring plans for 1989? Secondly, the setlist weren't particularly similiar.

A random setlist from Japan:

Honky Tonk Women
Throwaway
Bitch
Let's Spend the Night Together
Lonely at the Top
Beast of Burden
Tumbling Dice
Miss You
Ruby Tuesday
Just Another Night
War Baby
Harlem Shuffle
Lucky in Love
Say You Will
Party Doll
You Can't Always Get What You Want
Radio Control
Shoot Off Your Mouth
Gimme Shelter
Start Me Up
Brown Sugar
It's Only Rock 'n' Roll (But I Like It)
Jumpin' Jack Flash
(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction


The opening night SW setlist:

"Start Me Up"
"Bitch"
"Shattered"
"Sad Sad Sad"
"Undercover of the Night"
"Harlem Shuffle"
"Tumbling Dice"
"Miss You"
"Ruby Tuesday"
"Play With Fire"
"Dead Flowers"
"One Hit (to the Body)"
"Mixed Emotions"
"Honky Tonk Women"
"Rock and a Hard Place"
"Midnight Rambler"
"You Can't Always Get What You Want"
"Little Red Rooster"
"Before They Make Me Run"
"Happy"
"Paint It Black"
"2000 Light Years from Home"
"Sympathy for the Devil"
"Gimme Shelter"
"It's Only Rock 'n Roll (But I Like It)"
"Brown Sugar"
"(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction"
"Jumpin' Jack Flash"

you have to be joking...10 songs solo, the rest Rolling Stones and in the setlist you happen to pick at 'random' 11 songs are the same Rolling Stones cuts.

I'm not saying anything about a solo N.A. tour, I have no idea about that but the setlist you presented looks pretty similar, save the solo cuts.

If they are so similar, why aren't they dominated by your bolding?

And you forgot Honky Tonk Women...

Because it should look like this:

Honky Tonk Women
Throwaway
Bitch
Let's Spend the Night Together
Lonely at the Top
Beast of Burden
Tumbling Dice
Miss You
Ruby Tuesday
Just Another Night
War Baby
Harlem Shuffle
Lucky in Love
Say You Will
Party Doll
You Can't Always Get What You Want
Radio Control
Shoot Off Your Mouth
Gimme Shelter
Start Me Up
Brown Sugar
It's Only Rock 'n' Roll (But I Like It)
Jumpin' Jack Flash
(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction

The opening night SW setlist:

"Start Me Up"
"Bitch"
"Shattered"
"Sad Sad Sad"
"Undercover of the Night"
"Harlem Shuffle"
"Tumbling Dice"
"Miss You"
"Ruby Tuesday"
"Play With Fire"
"Dead Flowers"
"One Hit (to the Body)"
"Mixed Emotions"
"Honky Tonk Women"
"Rock and a Hard Place"
"Midnight Rambler"
"You Can't Always Get What You Want"
"Little Red Rooster"
"Before They Make Me Run"
"Happy"
"Paint It Black"
"2000 Light Years from Home"
"Sympathy for the Devil"
"Gimme Shelter"
"It's Only Rock 'n Roll (But I Like It)"
"Brown Sugar"
"(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction"
"Jumpin' Jack Flash"

13 songs. That's a lot. And what it isn't is a solo tour as much as a Rolling Stones tribute band with the singer of The Rolling Stones... It stands: SOLO Mick couldn't BE solo Mick by PLAYING solo songs on HIS tours. He had to play Stones songs because his solo songs stink for the most part. And if he wanted to do that, well, he already had The Rolling Stones.

It reads to me 9 songs from just 2 solo albums...how many else did u want him to play?
As mentioned earlier the Stones (mick) hadnt been to OZ since 73...nor japan!
Of course he would sing stones numbers...why not!

Nine solo songs was actually more than I thought. The set was I think rather nicely constructed. Of course, he was using the legacy of the Stones for his own benefit, but at the same time he sounds determinated in updating Stones music to fit to recent currents. The 'modern' Stones is not actually not far from the concept he created there.

Anyway, it is nice to hear Jagger doing a Jimi Hendrix cover, and without having that sort of band full of hot guns, this type of "hard rock" is something we would never hear from him. It is very far from the Stones stuff:





- Doxa

Quote
Doxa
Nine solo songs was actually more than I thought. The set was I think rather nicely constructed. Of course, he was using the legacy of the Stones for his own benefit, but at the same time he sounds determinated in updating Stones music to fit to recent currents. The 'modern' Stones is not actually not far from the concept he created there.

Anyway, it is nice to hear Jagger doing a Jimi Hendrix cover, and without having that sort of band full of hot guns, this type of "hard rock" is something we would never hear from him. It is very far from the Stones stuff:
- Doxa

Indeed.
Simon Phillips flesh-and-blood drum playing got me a deep impression.
He combined different seasoning.

I went to Osaka Castle Arena by bullet train from Tokyo.
The 1st and the 2nd shows were really great because Mick's voice condition was good.
As a matter of fact, the songs I remember most are Throw Away and Shoot Off Your Mouth.
However, people would have been furious if he had not played Stones songs.

I remember there were two shows announced for Paris Bercy.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mr.D
Mick wanted to bring that show and those musicians to the U.S. in '89 but no promoter was interested so he had to go back to the Stones instead, look how closely the '89 Stones setlist looked to his '88 shows, just added some Steel Wheels songs and voila, he had a Stones tour!

This is inaccurate at best

I think you're wrong :
the feel of the music played on the 89 tour (somewhat cold and robotic) the super-modern re-arrangement of the songs, the addition of keyboards and female backing singers, all of this shows the 88 solo tour was the blueprint for the SW tour.
By 1994 and the BL tour Keef would have regained some power in the band but the SW tour is Jagger's

Quote
dcba

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mr.D
Mick wanted to bring that show and those musicians to the U.S. in '89 but no promoter was interested so he had to go back to the Stones instead, look how closely the '89 Stones setlist looked to his '88 shows, just added some Steel Wheels songs and voila, he had a Stones tour!

This is inaccurate at best

I think you're wrong :
the feel of the music played on the 89 tour (somewhat cold and robotic) the super-modern re-arrangement of the songs, the addition of keyboards and female backing singers, all of this shows the 88 solo tour was the blueprint for the SW tour.
By 1994 and the BL tour Keef would have regained some power in the band but the SW tour is Jagger's

I never said it wasn't a blueprint, it was.

But the speculation about Mick's supposed planned solo tour in 89, and the similar setlists is the inaccurate part.

Yes, there are many similar songs, but it's not like you would complain about similar setlists if you attended Mick solo one day and the SW tour the next day.

Those shows give the audience totally different experiences as well, simply because the musicians are so different.

i have to be honest-at the time i remember being livid at jagger for being onstage anywhere,doing any songs without the stones and i wasnt the only one.
the feeling among fans at the time was wtf is he doing? and keith did have a point- if you're leaving to go on your own,do your own songs.

now we've learned alot more since but these conversations still get a little lopsided so i end up being the "jagger defender" just in the name of fairness i suppose.the truth is they both did and said some really stupid shit. i was a huge fan during ww3 and had already seen 3 tours + the barbarians so its pretty vivid almost 30 years later.

one thing though that puzzles me-and i'm not being sarcastic or insincere-some of you guys have mentioned no promotors wanting to touch a mick solo tour in 88 in the states..that still seems crazy to me but truthfully, it was a lifetime ago. can somebody source that?
if indeed he couldnt get anyone to back or promote his tour that really does change alot of things as far as the history of the band goes.
-

Quote
Eleanor Rigby
It reads to me 9 songs from just 2 solo albums...how many else did u want him to play?
As mentioned earlier the Stones (mick) hadnt been to OZ since 73...nor japan!
Of course he would sing stones numbers...why not!

All of them. Otherwise why bother? "Oh I'll just do the Stones' HOT ROCKS" he thinks to himself while having just finished an interview that dealt with "I don' wanna tok about the fahcking Stoooonnnnes, man".

I wonder how much Keith sabotaged Jagger's solo tour with his statements at the time? In retrospect they did make an impression on me, and as a big Keith fan I tended to take his side in the matter. If Keith would have been supportive and positive about Mick's attempts, I think a lot of Stones fans would have been a lot more open minded about the tour. Comparing it to the other music happening in 1988, Mick was pretty good.

At least I give Mick some credit for taking the high road and not publicly dissing Keith's solo work. peace

Quote
lem motlow


one thing though that puzzles me-and i'm not being sarcastic or insincere-some of you guys have mentioned no promotors wanting to touch a mick solo tour in 88 in the states..that still seems crazy to me but truthfully, it was a lifetime ago. can somebody source that?
if indeed he couldnt get anyone to back or promote his tour that really does change alot of things as far as the history of the band goes.
-

This is an interesting issue indeed. I do remember, based on some literature, that there was some plans for Jagger to tour the States (and probably Europe), but due to the lack of demand or something, the idea was cancelled. And I seriously mean the 'idea' since I don't believe that any actual dates were settled and then cancelled due to the poor selling or something. Never heard of any tickets would put on sale or something.

So if it holds any truth, the reason why the tour plans were withdrown, it needs to be something to do with the promoters. They, if any, have some sort of idea what will sell and for what price. It's their business concern. However, it was in this thread I for the very first time have heard anyone directly given that explanation. And I don't find that an odd explanation at all. Quite the opposite.

Of course, it is not the issue that Jagger wouldn't have had any promoters, but more that of: for what kind of deal. As this thread have revealed, Jagger made a helluva money from his tours in Japan and Australia. Probably he had just over-priced himself? Things like that happen (and as some reports claim , this exactly what happened to Rolling Stones European Arena Tour in late 2013).

Another, but connected, question is when Michael Cohl was involved and started to make offers with incredible amount of $$$ for a possible Stones tour? Could Jagger possibly have negotiated with him first for a solo solo tour, but then, after being convinced where the actual big money is, changed the plans?

Open questions. Those were interesting times.

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-22 01:07 by Doxa.

If you were a promoter which act would you rather bet on, Mick Jagger solo or the Rolling Stones? It's a no-brainer. To quote Mick from Rolling Stone: "I'm afraid life isn't quite that simple," he says. "I wanted to take the Stones on the road this year. Keith was too busy, and we talked about doing it next year. That's sort of up in the air at the moment." So it seemed the Stones were always in Mick's touring plans.

But, I don't think it was the risk of a unsuccessful NA tour or lack of promoters willing to book him that pushed Mick so quickly back to the Stones as much as disappointing NA record sales and the lack of stellar "Mick's a solo superstar" reviews. peace

Naturalust, that's the picture I have had (and still have, even though I am open for challenging views): that of Jagger basically chickening out - due to the bad press, bad sells of PRIMITIVE COOL - and then, to secure his status as a superstar, take the safe bet and put the Stones back rolling in.

But the thing is: he made a helluva success in Japan/Australia by his own. And which also made Keith damn angry. Let's say, I'm not totally convinced that Jagger was all the time thinking the next possible Stones tour. I think something concrete happened to make him suddenly wish to tour with the Stones. I think Michael Cohl has something to do with it. And a certain amount of dollars.

It's true that Jagger wanted to tour earlier, but the angry Keith had already made his own plans (record, tour) which postponed Jagger's plans.

- Doxa

Doxa, you're probably right about the Cohl thing, plans for the SW tour were probably made very shortly after he finished the OZ leg of his solo tour. And I also agree that BIG guaranteed money was a factor.

Pissing Keith off by such indirect means was probably somewhat satisfying for him after the public dissing by Keith that he endured. But, imo, success in Japan and Australia was guaranteed and not such a big risk. Both were starved for anything associated with the Stones. Keith and the X-pensive Winos would have done equally as well. peace

According to Tokyo Dome promoter, when they visited Brockum in February, 1988,
Michael Cohl said he(BCL) held stones world tour in bulk buying.
He guaranteed $ 70 million for the tour. (They added $ 30 million for 10 Tokyo Dome shows finally.)

If this explanation is true, Steel Wheels tour was designed before Jagger's solo tour took place.
(his tour started in March 1988 with Bill Graham presents)

supplement report:
"Mick was saying that this tour is not for me. I'm rich enough. Tour of 1989 is for other stones members."
according to Bill Graham's book.
Bill is also saying,
"Mick and Keith put their personal feelings aside when they knew the huge success of The Who's reunion tour.
Then they decided to go on the road."

I think this is Bill's misunderstanding because The Who's tour started in June, 1989.

Quote
Toru A

Bill is also saying,
"Mick and Keith put their personal feelings aside when they knew the huge success of The Who's reunion tour.
Then they decided to go on the road."

I think this is Bill's misunderstanding because The Who's tour started in June, 1989.

Yes but maybe he was measuring success by the amount guaranteed to The Who prior to the tour starting. That could have been promised way before the tour started.

Mick was already seeing the future of the music business in 1988...little money in record sales, huge money in touring. peace