He's afraid that his audience will walk out? Well that's what you get for conditioning your audience for more than 25 years with greatest hits tour after greatest hits tour. When you don't play anything that's not a top 10 hit--this is what happens. Mick is right but he shouldn't blame his audience for this "problem" when he's at the root of it.

Lou Reed had a pretty decent solution in 1992 - he played Magic and Loss in it's entirety and then for the second half of the show played the hits - albeit they were rearranged a bit, they were still recognisable.............great shows they were...

For me this story is getting far too silly. Some time ago I realized they are not going to give me what I want, not entirely anyway. No Mick Taylor and no complete Sticky Fingers (or any other) album. Maybe Mick really is concerned about the legacy and maybe he's even right about not playing rarities and/or pleasing the fan base. Anyhow, it will be nice to see them back on the road and we get some nice things on the SF re-issue. In the end can't please everybody, that's for sure.

Never ever will the Stones play the whole Sticky Fingers album in a stadium show.

Quote
syrel
BV, can you tell us anything about a potential date on the 27th? There were 3 cities under consideration - are they now all off the table or are there still negotiations ongoing? I realise nothing can be confirmed, but it would be helpful to know if there at least MIGHT still be a show on that date - because spending $1000 on flights is hard to justify for one show...

syrel

If you want to save on Airfare, fly Spirit Airlines! Look them up!

Quote
latvianinexile
Never ever will the Stones play the whole Sticky Fingers album in a stadium show.

Never never ever

Quote
latvianinexile

Never ever will the Stones play the whole Sticky Fingers album in a stadium show.

After 'You Gotta Move' - instead of doing so, the audience falls asleep ....

Quote
latvianinexile
Never ever will the Stones play the whole Sticky Fingers album in a stadium show.

Agree. But, they could certainly have a couple of spots in the setlist for rotating rarities to give each city something unique without causing most of the audience to lose interest.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-01 21:06 by tonyc.

Quote
georgeV

Quote
bv
They have said quite clearly this tour is 15 stadium shows in 15 cities. The extra days in the schedule are probably in there for resting and breaks, they need those breaks.

So the rumor on the San Diego thread that a 2nd San Diego show could be added is false? That is good to know as I would hate to book a return flight on the 25th and then find out a 2nd show is added for the 26th or 27th. You are 100% sure no show between May 24 and May 30???

Do you trust a rumor, or BV - who was 100% correct when everyone else at other ridiculous web sites was talking about Santa Clara and Massey Hall and god knows what else?

I imagine that after SD they will be back in L.A. working on the footage from the club show(s), doing a lot of post-production and overdubs. Once they head to Columbus, they won't have time to focus on this for an extended period. And then once the tour is over they need to scatter to the four winds to recover.

Quote
Justin
He's afraid that his audience will walk out? Well that's what you get for conditioning your audience for more than 25 years with greatest hits tour after greatest hits tour. When you don't play anything that's not a top 10 hit--this is what happens. Mick is right but he shouldn't blame his audience for this "problem" when he's at the root of it.

If Brian Wilson, with all his issues, could pull off a relatively flawless Pet Sounds at the Beacon last year, Mick and the Stones should have no problem doing the same with Sticky Fingers. But he does have a point, the stadium spectacle setting might not be the best one for recreating some of the more subtle moments of SF.

Quote
bleedingman

Quote
Justin
He's afraid that his audience will walk out? Well that's what you get for conditioning your audience for more than 25 years with greatest hits tour after greatest hits tour. When you don't play anything that's not a top 10 hit--this is what happens. Mick is right but he shouldn't blame his audience for this "problem" when he's at the root of it.

If Brian Wilson, with all his issues, could pull off a relatively flawless Pet Sounds at the Beacon last year, Mick and the Stones should have no problem doing the same with Sticky Fingers. But he does have a point, the stadium spectacle setting might not be the best one for recreating some of the more subtle moments of SF.

Were you at those shows? I caught the performance when they were out west. Great evening. Yes Brian was able to pull it off but with the cooperation and appreciation of his adoring audience. His fan base has been treated with several tours where Brian has played full albums in the past: Pet Sounds (early 2000's), Smile (2004), That Lucky Old Sun (2008) so there is some kind of past relationship there of full albums in concert with that group.

The biggest difference between the two artists (besides their music, obviously) is that Brian is genuinely proud of his work. He and his band will play a variety of songs from different eras and they know that the audience will appreciate it--and we do. Mick, on the other hand, has zero trust in his audience and will instead play it very safe as to not to offend his audience that doesn't know anything that's not off Hot Rocks. The respect that Brian has for his own compositions--I don't particularly see in Mick with his own works.

Quote
daspyknows

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
Stoneage
Recieved a mail from Rolling Stones and Polydor Records yesterday. It says "New Music & Tour News from The Rolling Stones". Now that's not really true, is it? At least not the first part..

It's "new" music to many, surely? Not EVERYONE is into bootlegs. My brother in law, a keen Stones fan, has none. He's pretty excited having now heard/seen the acoustic Wild Horses video to be getting some "new" Stones music.

WTF? Bootleg recordings? A bootleg recording is a live concert recording that is sold without the bands permission, a roio recording is a live recording NOT sold without bands permission and what they are selling are live soundboard recordings which have been remastered and are being sold by the band.

get your terminology straight

Bootlegs are not always live concert recordings, some are sound checks, rehearsals, studio outtakes or private recordings. In addition roio means "recording of indeterminate origin" and includes bootlegs. Soundboard recordings are generally NOT of indeterminate origin and, especially these days, recorded live shows are not the house soundboard recordings. They split the signals to a separate mixing board which mixes the signals to get good hot signals from every channel so they can be mixed for a stereo or multi-channel master at a later date. Soundboard (FOH) mixes are not always ideal since they are mixing for the best "house" sound, not necessarily getting every signal at it's optimum recording level.

Best not to criticize someone on terminology when you don't have yours straight, especially when the intention of his post was pretty clear, regardless of the terminology.

peace

Quote
EddieByword
Lou Reed had a pretty decent solution in 1992 - he played Magic and Loss in it's entirety and then for the second half of the show played the hits - albeit they were rearranged a bit, they were still recognisable.............great shows they were...

Rush did the same thing about 3 years ago.
Wicked first set, brief break and the did Moving Pictures in it's entirety.
Very tasty show

Mike

Quote
frankotero
For me this story is getting far too silly. Some time ago I realized they are not going to give me what I want, not entirely anyway. No Mick Taylor and no complete Sticky Fingers (or any other) album. Maybe Mick really is concerned about the legacy and maybe he's even right about not playing rarities and/or pleasing the fan base. Anyhow, it will be nice to see them back on the road and we get some nice things on the SF re-issue. In the end can't please everybody, that's for sure.

I think the compromise solution here is to only please me.

That way no one gets offended.

Quote
Justin

Quote
bleedingman

Quote
Justin
He's afraid that his audience will walk out? Well that's what you get for conditioning your audience for more than 25 years with greatest hits tour after greatest hits tour. When you don't play anything that's not a top 10 hit--this is what happens. Mick is right but he shouldn't blame his audience for this "problem" when he's at the root of it.

If Brian Wilson, with all his issues, could pull off a relatively flawless Pet Sounds at the Beacon last year, Mick and the Stones should have no problem doing the same with Sticky Fingers. But he does have a point, the stadium spectacle setting might not be the best one for recreating some of the more subtle moments of SF.

Were you at those shows? I caught the performance when they were out west. Great evening. Yes Brian was able to pull it off but with the cooperation and appreciation of his adoring audience. His fan base has been treated with several tours where Brian has played full albums in the past: Pet Sounds (early 2000's), Smile (2004), That Lucky Old Sun (2008) so there is some kind of past relationship there of full albums in concert with that group.

The biggest difference between the two artists (besides their music, obviously) is that Brian is genuinely proud of his work. He and his band will play a variety of songs from different eras and they know that the audience will appreciate it--and we do. Mick, on the other hand, has zero trust in his audience and will instead play it very safe as to not to offend his audience that doesn't know anything that's not off Hot Rocks. The respect that Brian has for his own compositions--I don't particularly see in Mick with his own works.

Yes, Justin, I was at that show. I agree, the audience was thrilled when they unexpectedly announced Pet Sounds would be played in its entirety. But the band was also stellar and supported Brian superbly. So it was a combo of audience support and enthusiastic, talented musicians. There is no question in my mind that if the Stones wanted to, they could pull off something similar, but they would have to seriously re-evaluate their comfort zone. Maybe the Sticky Fingers shows that bv has mentioned will give us a taste.

Dean I love when you bring much needed sanity to these boards!

Does anyone know what the Pandora presale is and how do you get it? Sorry if asked already.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-01 22:28 by JohnnyBGoode.

a few questions...

do we assume the lineup is as follows:
Jagger, Richards, Watts, Wood, Daryl Jones, Chuck Leavell, Lisa Fischer, Karl Denson, Bernard Fowler, Tim Ries, and Matt Clifford?

will they have opening acts?

will they do the choirs for YCAGWYW?

Quote
mnewman505
a few questions...

will they do the choirs for YCAGWYW?

Yep, I guess so:

"The choir on YCAGWYA will be maintained for this tour, according to this post.

"After finishing an excellent concert yesterday, we're excited to announce that Ohio University Singers will be singing on stage with the Rolling Stones this summer! How cool is that? More details to come".

[www.iorr.org]

Quote
Justin
He's afraid that his audience will walk out? Well that's what you get for conditioning your audience for more than 25 years with greatest hits tour after greatest hits tour. When you don't play anything that's not a top 10 hit--this is what happens. Mick is right but he shouldn't blame his audience for this "problem" when he's at the root of it.

The Stones are not the only ones who have this concern. All legacy bands have the same challenge in that 95%+ of their audience are casual fans who want to hear the hits.

I doubt fans would walk out but I can assure you a lot of the audience would walk out disappointed at the end of the show if they did not get to hear the old war horse hits.

Quote
oldschool

Quote
Justin
He's afraid that his audience will walk out? Well that's what you get for conditioning your audience for more than 25 years with greatest hits tour after greatest hits tour. When you don't play anything that's not a top 10 hit--this is what happens. Mick is right but he shouldn't blame his audience for this "problem" when he's at the root of it.

The Stones are not the only ones who have this concern. All legacy bands have the same challenge in that 95%+ of their audience are casual fans who want to hear the hits.

I doubt fans would walk out but I can assure you a lot of the audience would walk out disappointed at the end of the show if they did not get to hear the old war horse hits.

I don't care about the sets, I like all the songs, especially the real old ones. I just want them to play what they feel they can perform best. I'd rather have a tight TD than a screwed up LJ.

Quote
bleedingman
Yes, Justin, I was at that show. I agree, the audience was thrilled when they unexpectedly announced Pet Sounds would be played in its entirety. But the band was also stellar and supported Brian superbly. So it was a combo of audience support and enthusiastic, talented musicians. There is no question in my mind that if the Stones wanted to, they could pull off something similar, but they would have to seriously re-evaluate their comfort zone. Maybe the Sticky Fingers shows that bv has mentioned will give us a taste.

Definitely.

Quote
oldschool
The Stones are not the only ones who have this concern. All legacy bands have the same challenge in that 95%+ of their audience are casual fans who want to hear the hits.

I doubt fans would walk out but I can assure you a lot of the audience would walk out disappointed at the end of the show if they did not get to hear the old war horse hits.

Not sure about disappointed. We're talking about a little less than an hour of the show for the entire album and that includes 4 songs that most casual Stones fan would recognize: "Brown Sugar", "Can't You hear Me Knocking", "Wild Horses" and "Bitch." The final hour of the show can be wall-to-wall warhorses which can send off the crowd on that warhorse high everyone apparently craves.

Obviously the likelihood of this happening is very slim but that's only because Mick (and other legacy artists) have put themselves in this situation of going the easy route and dumbing down their audiences over the decades. The Who had the balls to play Quadrophenia a couple years ago in its entirety with the greatest hits tagged at the end. Audiences knew what they were getting into and still left pleased because they were able to hear "Won't Get Fooled Again" and whatever other big songs. It helped that the tour was clearly labeled as the Quadrophhenia tour so people knew what to expect.

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
oldschool

Quote
Justin
He's afraid that his audience will walk out? Well that's what you get for conditioning your audience for more than 25 years with greatest hits tour after greatest hits tour. When you don't play anything that's not a top 10 hit--this is what happens. Mick is right but he shouldn't blame his audience for this "problem" when he's at the root of it.

The Stones are not the only ones who have this concern. All legacy bands have the same challenge in that 95%+ of their audience are casual fans who want to hear the hits.

I doubt fans would walk out but I can assure you a lot of the audience would walk out disappointed at the end of the show if they did not get to hear the old war horse hits.

I don't care about the sets, I like all the songs, especially the real old ones. I just want them to play what they feel they can perform best. I'd rather have a tight TD than a screwed up LJ.

Almost all songs on Brussels Affair bootleg are warhorses now, but that bootleg will never ever tire! Same goes for YaYa's, Leeds and L&G, to name a few.

It's not the 'warhorses', it's the way the music is played. In the Taylor era we got so many versions of for instance Brown Sugar. Compare the 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 Sugars with each other and you'll understand what I mean. The same goes for Midnight Rambler. Street Fighting Man, JJF and others. Remember the way MR was played in Shanghai, that was something totally new and great, MR being a warhorse though.

To compare with classical music: one can attend the same masterpieces by the great masters endlessly. But one thing is essential: they have to be played greatly. And that's what should bother the Stones: to play greatly.

Quote
mnewman505
a few questions...

do we assume the lineup is as follows:
Jagger, Richards, Watts, Wood, Daryl Jones, Chuck Leavell, Lisa Fischer, Karl Denson, Bernard Fowler, Tim Ries, and Matt Clifford?

will they have opening acts?

will they do the choirs for YCAGWYW?

On the official RS.com site, only Lisa and Chuck are shown as "Collaborators"; no sign of Bernard at all. Also no mention of Darryl and Karl, although both will be there. They have always had support acts for the stadium shows, but who knows at this point? From what I have heard they will be using local choirs for YCAGWYW.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
oldschool

Quote
Justin
He's afraid that his audience will walk out? Well that's what you get for conditioning your audience for more than 25 years with greatest hits tour after greatest hits tour. When you don't play anything that's not a top 10 hit--this is what happens. Mick is right but he shouldn't blame his audience for this "problem" when he's at the root of it.

The Stones are not the only ones who have this concern. All legacy bands have the same challenge in that 95%+ of their audience are casual fans who want to hear the hits.

I doubt fans would walk out but I can assure you a lot of the audience would walk out disappointed at the end of the show if they did not get to hear the old war horse hits.

I don't care about the sets, I like all the songs, especially the real old ones. I just want them to play what they feel they can perform best. I'd rather have a tight TD than a screwed up LJ.

Almost all songs on Brussels Affair bootleg are warhorses now, but that bootleg will never ever tire! Same goes for YaYa's, Leeds and L&G, to name a few.

It's not the 'warhorses', it's the way the music is played. In the Taylor era we got so many versions of for instance Brown Sugar. Compare the 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 Sugars with each other and you'll understand what I mean. The same goes for Midnight Rambler. Street Fighting Man, JJF and others. Remember the way MR was played in Shanghai, that was something totally new and great, MR being a warhorse though.

To compare with classical music: one can attend the same masterpieces by the great masters endlessly. But one thing is essential: they have to be played greatly. And that's what should bother the Stones: to play greatly.

Well they do play great...considering. Sometimes they even tease us with flashes of brilliance. 2006 was the nadir, anyways, since 2012 it's been coming up roses by comparison.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-01 23:43 by andrewt.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
oldschool

Quote
Justin
He's afraid that his audience will walk out? Well that's what you get for conditioning your audience for more than 25 years with greatest hits tour after greatest hits tour. When you don't play anything that's not a top 10 hit--this is what happens. Mick is right but he shouldn't blame his audience for this "problem" when he's at the root of it.

The Stones are not the only ones who have this concern. All legacy bands have the same challenge in that 95%+ of their audience are casual fans who want to hear the hits.

I doubt fans would walk out but I can assure you a lot of the audience would walk out disappointed at the end of the show if they did not get to hear the old war horse hits.

I don't care about the sets, I like all the songs, especially the real old ones. I just want them to play what they feel they can perform best. I'd rather have a tight TD than a screwed up LJ.

Almost all songs on Brussels Affair bootleg are warhorses now, but that bootleg will never ever tire! Same goes for YaYa's, Leeds and L&G, to name a few.

It's not the 'warhorses', it's the way the music is played. In the Taylor era we got so many versions of for instance Brown Sugar. Compare the 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 Sugars with each other and you'll understand what I mean. The same goes for Midnight Rambler. Street Fighting Man, JJF and others. Remember the way MR was played in Shanghai, that was something totally new and great, MR being a warhorse though.

To compare with classical music: one can attend the same masterpieces by the great masters endlessly. But one thing is essential: they have to be played greatly. And that's what should bother the Stones: to play greatly.

The anniversary had a certain vibe of necessity much of it was miraculous. They pulled off something impossible, once Keith and Wood had done their thing there was MT. For every show there was the anticipation that tonight they'd let Taylor loose and that very tension added to the energy. For 2015 I would never count them out of somehow raising their bar but to do that they have to reinvent their approach and play as an ensemble.

Quote
Justin

Quote
bleedingman
Yes, Justin, I was at that show. I agree, the audience was thrilled when they unexpectedly announced Pet Sounds would be played in its entirety. But the band was also stellar and supported Brian superbly. So it was a combo of audience support and enthusiastic, talented musicians. There is no question in my mind that if the Stones wanted to, they could pull off something similar, but they would have to seriously re-evaluate their comfort zone. Maybe the Sticky Fingers shows that bv has mentioned will give us a taste.

Definitely.

Quote
oldschool
The Stones are not the only ones who have this concern. All legacy bands have the same challenge in that 95%+ of their audience are casual fans who want to hear the hits.

I doubt fans would walk out but I can assure you a lot of the audience would walk out disappointed at the end of the show if they did not get to hear the old war horse hits.

Not sure about disappointed. We're talking about a little less than an hour of the show for the entire album and that includes 4 songs that most casual Stones fan would recognize: "Brown Sugar", "Can't You hear Me Knocking", "Wild Horses" and "Bitch." The final hour of the show can be wall-to-wall warhorses which can send off the crowd on that warhorse high everyone apparently craves.

Obviously the likelihood of this happening is very slim but that's only because Mick (and other legacy artists) have put themselves in this situation of going the easy route and dumbing down their audiences over the decades. The Who had the balls to play Quadrophenia a couple years ago in its entirety with the greatest hits tagged at the end. Audiences knew what they were getting into and still left pleased because they were able to hear "Won't Get Fooled Again" and whatever other big songs. It helped that the tour was clearly labeled as the Quadrophhenia tour so people knew what to expect.

I see your point Justin and you make a good one but from what I read Mick is notoriously worried about playing it safe. Unless I am remembering wrong Keef and Ronnie would love to stretch out the setlist but Mick does not want to take the chance.

I like many here would love to see more of the obscure songs played but doubt Mick would take the chance especially for a Stadium show which always seems to have the most vanilla set lists due to the size of the crowds.

Quote
kleermaker
It's not the 'warhorses', it's the way the music is played. In the Taylor era we got so many versions of for instance Brown Sugar. Compare the 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973 Sugars with each other and you'll understand what I mean. The same goes for Midnight Rambler. Street Fighting Man, JJF and others. Remember the way MR was played in Shanghai, that was something totally new and great, MR being a warhorse though.

"So many versions" of Brown Sugar? The song is played exactly the same way in each of those years. Taylor adding a slide in 73 to do his fills doesn't exactly constitute for a major shift in the song.

It's natural for a new song to grow and shift when played over time--Taylor's presence was not the driving force. Songs like "Beast of Burden" and "When The Whip Comes Down" already went through a metamorphosis from 78 to 81 and beyond. These shifts happen organically because of what the entire band feels not because of one person dictating how the song should go.

And what exactly was "totally new and great" about MR from Shanghai? You're talking about the wild bends and feedback effects Taylor was doing in the middle section? Besides that the rest of the song was performed exactly the way it's always been played and isn't that different from the awesome versions with Ronnie from 2006, 2002, 1999, 1994 or 1989.

This is a great discussion and hopefully the band will do the same.(discuss) Honestly I'd rather hear a great obscure song other than Sway, Sister Morphine or even Moonlight Mile and I would think the stadium type audience on the whole would feel the same way and get off on it. Mick's correct, Sticky Fingers although great can be a little deliberate and maybe a momentum killer. I'm a hopeless romantic when it comes to the songs I'd like to hear as opposed to what will be played….