The Rolling Stones
United Center
Chicago, IL, USA
Tuesday May 28, 2013

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Get Off Of My Cloud
It's Only Rock'n Roll
Paint It Black
Gimme Shelter
Wild Horses
Rocks Off
Emotional Rescue
Six Days On The Road (with Taj Mahal)
Doom And Gloom
One More Shot
Honky Tonk Women
--- Band presentation
You Got The Silver (Keith)
Before They Make Me Run (Keith)
Midnight Rambler (with Mick Taylor)
Miss You
Start Me Up
Tumbling Dice
Brown Sugar
Sympathy For The Devil
--- Band off stage
You Can't Always Get What You Want
Jumping Jack Flash
Satisfaction (with Mick Taylor)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Rolling Stones
Ohio Stadium
Columbus, OH, USA
Saturday, May 30, 2015
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Jumping Jack Flash
It's Only Rock'n Roll
Let's Spend The Night Together
Tumbling Dice
Doom & Gloom
Bitch
Wild Horses
--- Hang On Sloopy (bit with crowd sing-a-long)
Paint It Black (by request)
Honky Tonk Women
--- Band introductions
Before They Make Me Run (Keith)
Happy (Keith)
Midnight Rambler
Miss You
Gimme Shelter
Start Me Up
Sympathy For The Devil
Brown Sugar
--- Band off stage
You Can't Always Get What You Want (with choir)
Satisfaction

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I have just re-posted the set list from the United Center, Chicago Show that attended in 2013. I have also just re-posted the set list from the OHIO STADIUM, Columbus show that I attended this past weekend.

Let it be said that I am a long-time fan of The Rolling Stones. Let it be said that there is nothing that they can play that will NOT be immensely enjoyable. Let it also be said that it would be MORE REWARDING if the set lists were just a little bit more mixed up. If I compare these two shows, I heard these songs at both shows: It’s Only Rock ’n Roll, Paint it Black, Gimme Shelter, Wild Horses, Doom and Gloom, Honky Tonk Women, Before They Make Me Run, Midnight Rambler, Miss You, Start Me Up, Tumbling Dice, Brown Sugar, Sympathy for the Devil, You Can’t Always Get What you Want, Jumping Jack Flash, and of course, SATISFACTION. 16 SONGS APPEARING AT TWO SHOWS, SEPARATED BY TWO YEARS AND 300 MILES.

The two people that I 'dragged' along with me to Ohio Stadium saw the best show that they have ever seen, and the best show that they will likely ever see! So, who am I to complain about a setlist? I had the opportunity to briefly meet Chuck Leavell at the hotel where the band was likely staying in Columbus. I asked him if it was true that setlist selection was his job. He confirmed that it is. I used to 'blame' him for uninspiring setlists. This guy, Chuck Leavell, was absolutely the nicest guy you can imagine. He happily agreed to pose for a photo with me. The smile on his face is bigger than the smile on my face! (What's he so happy about? Meeting me? I kinda doubt it!) I will always have a warm spot for this guy now. I am forbidden from ever complaining about a Rolling Stones setlist again!


[2.bp.blogspot.com]



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-03 05:17 by HopeYouGuessMyName.

It doesn't matter if Leavell does the setlist selection (which I'm not so sure about). In the end it's Sir Michael's responsibility anyway. We can't blame this one on Chuck!

Nice post. You seem like an honest guy with a sense of humor, and I'm a long-time Chuck basher also, but I'm sure if I met him I would like him. He does seem like a nice guy. Why not smile . . . he's on tour with the Rolling Stones! That's enough for a shit eating grin, even without being able to tell everyone how he's in charge.

Hope, you're Wilco Johnson, right?

Fair enough and i agree its a nice sentiment. Its cool that he's a nice guy, which he's always seemed like, and I don't genuinely blame him. And listen, we've all said it a ton of times: the current setlist does exactly what it should in whipping a casual audience into a frenzy. That is the Stones job. No one is denying that.

Here's my small little addition: While I've always agreed with the former, I've always thought they can throw in other songs we've long clamored for and get the same reaction. Sure, the people you "dragged" might not to up and dancing to every single song, but they'll love most of it and I don't think its gonna hamper their experience. This would just be a way of pleasing and throwing a bone to everyone. Why should be enjoyment be second to some floozy who knows nothing about the Stones? Why should that person be pleased more than me who's supported the band for decades?

There's no answer. What I'm basically saying is you're right to a point, but I don't think its unreasonable we complain. I'm sure Chuck is the nicest guy in the world. It isn't gonna change my opinion that his job isn't being done to the best of his abilities. All I can say is if they continue the way they do, thats fine. They'll get a great response and it'll end their career on a high note. I for one have seen the show and don't feel the need to participate again. Someone else that just learned who the Stones were and wants to hear these 15 songs for the umpteenth time can take my place.

So, what happens if you do complain again?

My restriction on complaining is self-imposed. Hey, I'm human - of course I am going to complain when I see them again in Indianapolis on the 4th of July! Please, Mr. Leavell, Mr. Jagger - DO THROW ME A BONE - play SOMETHING I have not heard before! One thing. I ask so little! (I guess my initial comment should have been it appears pointless to complain) Our favorite band appears to be selling their shows quite well doing exactly what they are doing. They are operating under the idea that 'If it ain't broke - don't fix it.'

thank you!!!! i sometimes think people get so caught up in that carrying on that they dont realize how many songs the the stones DO actually play.

if you take the stadium years [81 -present]and write down a list of every song they've played live you'd be shocked.

i've also softened my stance on chuck.i mean lets face it,after having nicky and stu for so many years we'd trash the hell out of anyone they put up there.

and can you imagine being a go-between for the diva twins,the guy has gotta have some sort of zen-like quality about him.
99% of the people on the planet would jump off of a building after the first day.

Seems a bit strange that Chuck would take credit for the setlist selection. Yes he has his book and notes and arrangements and such but I find it hard to believe he actually is responsible for the actual setlist choices.

More likely he suggests possible new additions, helps the band through trial runs of songs they haven't played in a long while and when Mick, Keith, Charlie and Ronnie say "OK let's do that one" he writes it down and compiles the list. He may be responsible for making the setlist but I think we all know it is much more likely Mick and the rest of the core group have the final say in what gets played.

Chuck would probably be the first to admit this if questioned in more detail about it. It just seems rather apathetic to me if the Stones actually let a sideman pick the songs. "We just play what Chuck tells us to play man, don't blame us".

peace

Quote
HopeYouGuessMyName
My restriction on complaining is self-imposed. Hey, I'm human - of course I am going to complain when I see them again in Indianapolis on the 4th of July! Please, Mr. Leavell, Mr. Jagger - DO THROW ME A BONE - play SOMETHING I have not heard before! One thing. I ask so little! (I guess my initial comment should have been it appears pointless to complain) Our favorite band appears to be selling their shows quite well doing exactly what they are doing. They are operating under the idea that 'If it ain't broke - don't fix it.'

Based on the Columbus show you're guaranteed to hear "Back Home Again in Indiana". Congratulations and your welcome.

If I was the singer of the band no one has to tell me what to sing or not..............they may suggest but I decide...........

__________________________

Quote
Naturalust
Seems a bit strange that Chuck would take credit for the setlist selection. Yes he has his book and notes and arrangements and such but I find it hard to believe he actually is responsible for the actual setlist choices.

More likely he suggests possible new additions, helps the band through trial runs of songs they haven't played in a long while and when Mick, Keith, Charlie and Ronnie say "OK let's do that one" he writes it down and compiles the list. He may be responsible for making the setlist but I think we all know it is much more likely Mick and the rest of the core group have the final say in what gets played.

Chuck would probably be the first to admit this if questioned in more detail about it. It just seems rather apathetic to me if the Stones actually let a sideman pick the songs. "We just play what Chuck tells us to play man, don't blame us".

peace

It's not really strange that he takes credit for it because they let him and I'm sure he does the kind of things you say.

But obviously, the final word on everything is up to Mick and if he told Chuck to STFU and never open his mouth in his presence and that if he wants to stay in the band he has to appear in a spangled jock strap, he would do so.

What we are both saying is that he has whatever power Mick lets him have, which probably makes him not all that different from everyone else involved.

i think the usual way is mick and chuck go through the list of songs and then send it to keith to sign off on or see if he wants to change anything.

i dont think anyone else has a say,despite what many believe mick and keith are the co-leaders of the band -chuck is a referee.

with the big shows it's tough to change too much because of the lighting and timing of everything so you get maybe a song or two different but thats about it.it's not like chuck is sitting there telling the band what to play.

Quote
lem motlow
i think the usual way is mick and chuck go through the list of songs and then send it to keith to sign off on or see if he wants to change anything.

i dont think anyone else has a say,despite what many believe mick and keith are the co-leaders of the band -chuck is a referee.

with the big shows it's tough to change too much because of the lighting and timing of everything so you get maybe a song or two different but thats about it.it's not like chuck is sitting there telling the band what to play.

Really good point about lighting and other show aspects but I also believe that if Ronnie or Charlie did or didn't want to do a song that Mick (and Chuck) would take it pretty seriously. It would be pretty cool and revealing if we could get each of them to pick their perfect set list.

But as you suggest, Mick and Keith's would probably be just what we are getting, Ronnie's would probably include more post 1975 stuff and I imagine Charlie "I never listen to Stones music" would have the hardest time of all. He would get about two or three songs into the list and then say "This is bloody stupid, I just play whatever Mick and Keith want me to play really".

peace

if they did bother to ask ronnie would probably say "hey how about..." and have a couple of songs ready

charlie would say."hmm,i dont really know" and walk away.

Not that I'm going to any of these shows. As noted in another post, stadium gigs are not my thing unless the band wants to put me in a chair on the stage. But regarding this comparison between now and then, much as I love the Stones music, the last verse of their own song may apply here.

Everywhere you want I always go
I always give in because, babe, you know
You just say so 'cause you give me
That feeling inside that I know I must be right
It's the singer not the song

It's not the way you give in willingly
Others do it without thrilling me giving me
That same old feeling inside that I know I must be right
It's the singer not the song

The same old places and the same old songs
We've been going there for much too long
There's something wrong and it gives me that
Feeling inside that I know I must be right
It's the singer not the song

It's the singer not the song
It's the singer not the song

IMHO. the Stones need to shake it all up for their own fluckin' good as artists and a band. I've heard most of the songs in the setlist one too many times for them to really matter anymore.

Please allow me to explain how my brief conversation with Chuck Leavell went. I have always found it ridiculous to believe that this guy was responsible for the set-lists. This is precisely why I asked him this question. He confirmed that it was he and Mick Jagger who did this. He made a point of indicating that Keith 'rubber-stamped' the choices. I can presume that Keith is FAR MORE responsible for selecting his two songs. I don't think that Chuck can just decide, for example, tonight we open with 'We Love You'. But if he thought it was a good idea - perhaps he would present it to Jagger. I am pretty sure that Chuck Leavell has far more leverage in set list selection than us fans - all we do is what we have always done...buy the LP's, buy the CD's, but the DVD's, buy the Re-Issues, but the special editions, buy the tickets, but the LP's (again). We have to accept that the set lists (especially for a stadium show) are tailored to those who might consider buying Hot Rocks or GRRR! (Wow...do I hate that title and the moronic cover!) BUT I DO LOVE THEM ROLLING STONES!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-02 22:52 by HopeYouGuessMyName.

Quote
Rokyfan
Nice post. You seem like an honest guy with a sense of humor, and I'm a long-time Chuck basher also, but I'm sure if I met him I would like him. He does seem like a nice guy. Why not smile . . . he's on tour with the Rolling Stones! That's enough for a shit eating grin, even without being able to tell everyone how he's in charge.

well put. unfortunately, being nice has nothing to do with being qualified to be on stage with the rolling stones.

Quote
Turner68

Quote
Rokyfan
Nice post. You seem like an honest guy with a sense of humor, and I'm a long-time Chuck basher also, but I'm sure if I met him I would like him. He does seem like a nice guy. Why not smile . . . he's on tour with the Rolling Stones! That's enough for a shit eating grin, even without being able to tell everyone how he's in charge.

well put. unfortunately, being nice has nothing to do with being qualified to be on stage with the rolling stones.

obviously he's qualified for 33 years...

I remember a Chuck story/interview where he talks about his work, set lists,etc.
He mentioned that he would like to throw in other/ more rare stuff. But in the end could not push his ideas.
Will be true more or less. He's a real musician after all . .

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
Turner68

Quote
Rokyfan
Nice post. You seem like an honest guy with a sense of humor, and I'm a long-time Chuck basher also, but I'm sure if I met him I would like him. He does seem like a nice guy. Why not smile . . . he's on tour with the Rolling Stones! That's enough for a shit eating grin, even without being able to tell everyone how he's in charge.

well put. unfortunately, being nice has nothing to do with being qualified to be on stage with the rolling stones.

obviously he's qualified for 33 years...

i'm ok with him being on stage, as long as we can't hear his piano playing. i haven't listened to SFTD at columbus but it was particularly painful in San Diego due to the piano.

If Mr Chuck does in fact have pull with the setlist, then he should be hearing loud and clear to go back to what was played in San Diego instead of the horrid setlist dished out at Columbus.

Come on Chuck, throw us some bones!

Quote
dmay
Everywhere you want I always go
I always give in because, babe, you know
You just say so 'cause you give me
That feeling inside that I know I must be right
It's the singer not the song

It's not the way you give in willingly
Others do it without thrilling me giving me
That same old feeling inside that I know I must be right
It's the singer not the song

The same old places and the same old songs
We've been going there for much too long
There's something wrong and it gives me that
Feeling inside that I know I must be right
It's the singer not the song

It's the singer not the song
It's the singer not the song

The Stones should do this one at their next show to mix it up and not go to the same old places and the... well you know...

Quote
Turner68

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
Turner68

Quote
Rokyfan
Nice post. You seem like an honest guy with a sense of humor, and I'm a long-time Chuck basher also, but I'm sure if I met him I would like him. He does seem like a nice guy. Why not smile . . . he's on tour with the Rolling Stones! That's enough for a shit eating grin, even without being able to tell everyone how he's in charge.

well put. unfortunately, being nice has nothinto do with being qualified to be on stage
with the rolling stones.

obviously he's qualified for 33 years...

i'm ok with him being on stage, as long as we can't hear his piano playing. i haven't listened to SFTD at columbus but it was particularly painful in San Diego due to the piano.

even matt clifford is re-qualified.I will never forget his horrible synth edits in '89/'90.
so don't touch the chuck.

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
Turner68

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
Turner68

Quote
Rokyfan
Nice post. You seem like an honest guy with a sense of humor, and I'm a long-time Chuck basher also, but I'm sure if I met him I would like him. He does seem like a nice guy. Why not smile . . . he's on tour with the Rolling Stones! That's enough for a shit eating grin, even without being able to tell everyone how he's in charge.

well put. unfortunately, being nice has nothinto do with being qualified to be on stage
with the rolling stones.

obviously he's qualified for 33 years...

i'm ok with him being on stage, as long as we can't hear his piano playing. i haven't listened to SFTD at columbus but it was particularly painful in San Diego due to the piano.

even matt clifford is re-qualified.I will never forget his horrible synth edits in '89/'90.
so don't touch the chuck.

i need to write them both a memo reminding them that the stones are a guitar band.