Tell Me :
Talk
....... To get all the whoo whoos out of the way........
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-02 18:54 by EddieByword.
Respectable from the 1978 and 1981 tours would work, if it is played like the last bunch of years it is dead. Keith couldn't keep up. Then they start that cheezy picking and noodling. It can work only if it is played fast, hard and loud just like in the video I posted at the beginning.
Every warhorse should be scaled down to three and a half minutes. They waste so much time at the end of the show with extended versions of all the warhorses. It's a great way to fill up time and not have to learn more songs at the top of the show so I get why they do it. But I've had enough of the 6 minute JJFs.....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-02 21:45 by Justin.
AGREED
Allo schillid honey
><
OK it would be cool if they tried another version of SFTD. Change it.
The right way is slow and hard-rocking, not fast. Try the album and Altamont.
Play it twice…..haha. HTW is always a good opener
Hmm, of course the studio version is great. But I'm a younger fan and not the biggest fan of Stones live 1969-73, I prefer the latter-day era. The Twickenham 2003 version of Brown Sugar was pretty fast and a prefect opener. Slow live versions is also good, atleast in club settings.
Here's the last time they played Brown Sugar as the opening song, faster than the studio album and rocking:
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-03 23:21 by EasterMan.
Actually I've had more than enough of the 3 minute version too.
peace
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: April 2, 2015 17:15
Quote
EddieByword
Sympathy
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
drbryant
()
Date: April 2, 2015 18:07
Nine times out of ten, Respectable is a bit of a mess live. Not sure why. I think it lacks a killer opening riff.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
EddieByword
()
Date: April 2, 2015 18:52
Quote
RedhotcarpetQuote
EddieByword
Sympathy
....... To get all the whoo whoos out of the way........Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-02 18:54 by EddieByword.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
alhavu1
()
Date: April 2, 2015 19:20
No, they should def open with Gomper followed by Please Go Home
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
The Sicilian
()
Date: April 2, 2015 20:48
Quote
drbryant
Nine times out of ten, Respectable is a bit of a mess live. Not sure why. I think it lacks a killer opening riff.
Respectable from the 1978 and 1981 tours would work, if it is played like the last bunch of years it is dead. Keith couldn't keep up. Then they start that cheezy picking and noodling. It can work only if it is played fast, hard and loud just like in the video I posted at the beginning.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
MileHigh
()
Date: April 2, 2015 20:59
They should open with Brown Sugar, but it has to be a tight 3 1/2 minute version of the song.
To freak people out, throw a curve ball, how about opening up with a rocking version of 2000 Man? lol You never know, it might actually work.
"I am having an affair with another Facebook user."
To freak people out, throw a curve ball, how about opening up with a rocking version of 2000 Man? lol You never know, it might actually work.
"I am having an affair with another Facebook user."
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
scottkeef
()
Date: April 2, 2015 21:39
Actually that's not a bad idea,MileHigh...Opening with JJF went over big on the No Security tour. NO Horns and no extended outro..it was a pleasant surprise compared to how it had been a closer previously. Another song that I think has been hurt by extending it with a piano solo is Honky Ton Women. That ruins it for me, it should remain as a 3 minute funk deluxe...
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
sway76
()
Date: April 2, 2015 21:41
since its the=sticky fingers tour=brown sugar
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
Justin
()
Date: April 2, 2015 21:45
Quote
MileHigh
They should open with Brown Sugar, but it has to be a tight 3 1/2 minute version of the song."
Every warhorse should be scaled down to three and a half minutes. They waste so much time at the end of the show with extended versions of all the warhorses. It's a great way to fill up time and not have to learn more songs at the top of the show so I get why they do it. But I've had enough of the 6 minute JJFs.....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-02 21:45 by Justin.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
alhavu1
()
Date: April 2, 2015 22:06
Quote
JustinQuote
MileHigh
They should open with Brown Sugar, but it has to be a tight 3 1/2 minute version of the song."
Every warhorse should be scaled down to three and a half minutes. They waste so much time at the end of the show with extended versions of all the warhorses. It's a great way to fill up time and not have to learn more songs at the top of the show so I get why they do it. But I've had enough of the 6 minute JJFs.....
AGREED
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
with sssoul
()
Date: April 3, 2015 00:14
Quote
schillid
Hi sssoul
Allo schillid honey
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
Shawn20
()
Date: April 3, 2015 01:11
Brown Sugar - followed by Bitch! A double shot of Sticky Fingers.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
MisterO
()
Date: April 3, 2015 01:19
I wouldn't mind Sympathy, but I would prefer "Time is on my side".
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
EasterMan
()
Date: April 3, 2015 01:35
They have to open with something fast and rocking, with a great guitar riff as intro.
If they open with Brown Sugar (First time since Columbus 2005?) they have to play a fast, rocking version. Not anything like the slow, lazy-ass Brown Sugar which they've plagued us with since 2012.
Also, the loud and infuriating fills by Lisa is a no-no for an opening version of Brown Sugar. No ''Wooo's'' after the chorus please. Mick has to sing this song all by himself if it opens the show.
And if Brown Sugar is played the right way, it is the best opening track they've ever had.
If they open with Brown Sugar (First time since Columbus 2005?) they have to play a fast, rocking version. Not anything like the slow, lazy-ass Brown Sugar which they've plagued us with since 2012.
Also, the loud and infuriating fills by Lisa is a no-no for an opening version of Brown Sugar. No ''Wooo's'' after the chorus please. Mick has to sing this song all by himself if it opens the show.
And if Brown Sugar is played the right way, it is the best opening track they've ever had.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: April 3, 2015 14:14
Quote
EddieBywordQuote
RedhotcarpetQuote
EddieByword
Sympathy
>
<OK it would be cool if they tried another version of SFTD. Change it.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 3, 2015 14:25
Quote
EasterMan
They have to open with something fast and rocking, with a great guitar riff as intro.
If they open with Brown Sugar (First time since Columbus 2005?) they have to play a fast, rocking version. Not anything like the slow, lazy-ass Brown Sugar which they've plagued us with since 2012.
Also, the loud and infuriating fills by Lisa is a no-no for an opening version of Brown Sugar. No ''Wooo's'' after the chorus please. Mick has to sing this song all by himself if it opens the show.
And if Brown Sugar is played the right way, it is the best opening track they've ever had.
The right way is slow and hard-rocking, not fast. Try the album and Altamont.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
drbryant
()
Date: April 3, 2015 17:12
Brown Sugar/Bitch like 72/73 would be awesome, but at this point, I'm afraid the extended "yeah, yeah, whoooo" call and response with the audience is something that the band relies on as a closer or encore number. I suspect they won't want to lose that
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
alhavu1
()
Date: April 3, 2015 18:25
How about "I Am Waiting"?
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
Maindefender
()
Date: April 3, 2015 18:38
Quote
drbryant
Brown Sugar/Bitch like 72/73 would be awesome, but at this point, I'm afraid the extended "yeah, yeah, whoooo" call and response with the audience is something that the band relies on as a closer or encore number. I suspect they won't want to lose that
Play it twice…..haha. HTW is always a good opener
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
donvis
()
Date: April 3, 2015 19:05
I would like to see them open with Route 66 or Carol.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
shortfatfanny
()
Date: April 3, 2015 20:31
You gotta move...not as opener but as an encore.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
RollingFreak
()
Date: April 3, 2015 20:59
Why Don't We Sing This Song Altogether. Open Your Head Let The Pictures Fly...
and then the lights go up and its the late 60s again.
and then the lights go up and its the late 60s again.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
EasterMan
()
Date: April 3, 2015 23:18
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
EasterMan
They have to open with something fast and rocking, with a great guitar riff as intro.
If they open with Brown Sugar (First time since Columbus 2005?) they have to play a fast, rocking version. Not anything like the slow, lazy-ass Brown Sugar which they've plagued us with since 2012.
Also, the loud and infuriating fills by Lisa is a no-no for an opening version of Brown Sugar. No ''Wooo's'' after the chorus please. Mick has to sing this song all by himself if it opens the show.
And if Brown Sugar is played the right way, it is the best opening track they've ever had.
The right way is slow and hard-rocking, not fast. Try the album and Altamont.
Hmm, of course the studio version is great. But I'm a younger fan and not the biggest fan of Stones live 1969-73, I prefer the latter-day era. The Twickenham 2003 version of Brown Sugar was pretty fast and a prefect opener. Slow live versions is also good, atleast in club settings.
Here's the last time they played Brown Sugar as the opening song, faster than the studio album and rocking:
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-03 23:21 by EasterMan.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
Tonstone
()
Date: April 4, 2015 01:56
Only if Keith and Ronnie can play with the same ferrocity and keep the chord sequence intact, otherwise no please don't dilute this song if you can't do it justice. played well yes why not a great opener.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
shadooby
()
Date: April 4, 2015 02:04
How bout this lil number...
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: April 4, 2015 02:05
Quote
alhavu1Quote
JustinQuote
MileHigh
They should open with Brown Sugar, but it has to be a tight 3 1/2 minute version of the song."
Every warhorse should be scaled down to three and a half minutes. They waste so much time at the end of the show with extended versions of all the warhorses. It's a great way to fill up time and not have to learn more songs at the top of the show so I get why they do it. But I've had enough of the 6 minute JJFs.....
AGREED
Actually I've had more than enough of the 3 minute version too.
peace
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
Rip This
()
Date: April 4, 2015 02:15
I'd vote for Slave.
Re: Should the Stones open with Respectable?
Posted by:
NICOS
()
Date: April 4, 2015 02:21
I vote for a surprise or "We Love You"
__________________________
__________________________
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
1963luca0 , agu82 , daspyknows , dishevelmentblues , eduardoacdc , fredricA , Halup , Irix , IsakSun , Kevinstones78 , MadMax , marclaff , MonkeyMan2000 , More Hot Rocks , retired_dog , TumblinDice76
Guests:
1299
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10