Tell Me :
Talk
This time I was comparing a 2012 ADTL to a 2015 ADTL, which I think is a fair comparison, don't you?
This was directed at Longbeach
I am not fond of using emoticons, but this deserves one:
I really like what I've seen and heard from this tour, even though I have only YouTube
clips to go by. I can not think of anything that I don't like in those clips.
Just like it always was (well, the clips from the Bigger Bang tour didn't move me much,
but let's just say that smart phone camera's have improved a lot).
Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away
I like that one!
Says it all.
On songs like MMile or SGirls? Probably. On MM the band and Jagger sound much more exciting than in 99.
Moonlight Mile is played better than in 1999, Some Girls, I don't know really, it was a bit rough with Mick starting off key this time. All other songs, JFF, HTW, BS SMU, and so on were better in 1999.
However I could agree on that the past 2 or 3 shows were better than SOME shows on the Bigger-bang tour.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-12 21:15 by yeababyyea.
Personally, I liked the primitive stage set up back in the day. Am glad they have dispensed with the cheesy inflatable props, and returned to a more primitive atmosphere. The focus is once again on the band. Rolling Stones don't need gimmicks.
You don't get it.
It is perfectly acceptable to proclaim a show the best ever, or to make any other positive comment, after seeing only YouTube videos.
It is not acceptable to make any criticism based on watching videos.
Obviously not serious. Actually you do get it, and you can add Dandy's #3 to the list. OF course they are not going to play in their 70s anywhere near like they did in their 20s and 30s.
naturalust has it right. They are doing great at what they do now, but to compare these shows to when Keith could light it up, particularly when he had taylor beside him, is silly. It's not a knock on what they do now. They do a great job and why retire? But come on.
That is EXACTLY what I'm doing and it is horribly unfair to The Stones.
But I do it because THEY have not evolved. We're stuck with no new music, a calcified approach to the catalog, and the sad fact that the original ONLY BAND THAT MATTERS (apologies to The Clash) hasn't really mattered in decades.
It's a bit macabre, isn't it? Why should 70-year-olds even TRY to do what they did in their 20's? But they soldier on, led by their skeletal marionette and we all marvel at how good they are for their age.
I would even go further and stipulate that on many nights The Stones DO sound better than they ever have. But the reason they MATTERED in those days was because of the cultural and social position their menace and their talent had carved out for them.
I've also lately come to wonder whether they REALLY could have done anything else, given the temperaments of the band members. There are no real role models for aging gracefully and in an artistically meaningful way in pop music. It is perhaps unfair of me to expect them to have remained vital, shedding their skins every so often to emerge as something new, as a band with something new to say about the world we live in.
It is, indeed, only rock'n'roll ... but, once upon a time, it seemed as if it could be so much more.
What would they need to do to matter once again in your opinion? Write better songs? Churn out more albums? Lead the charts?
I believe they choose to only matter where the money is these days. You can ask any concert promoter and he'll tell you they matter.
It's a good question, and I'm not sure what the answer is. Obviously, it must start with the music. One record in 18 years is ridiculous. But the position of music in society has changed. Music is not nearly as important in defining an era as it once was. No one has really bucked this trend in many years.
I guess my gut tells me that The Stones should have BELIEVED in themselves more. I'd be going to see them if they played amphitheaters instead of stadia and played music they believed in, rather than the globe-trotting victory lap they've been on forever. It's not hard to understand why they made the choices they did. I just wish they'd not have given a @#$%& about the size of their audience and tried to take their nasty post-apocalyptic blues to the next level, whatever that would have been.
I would have loved more albums too. But I believe if they released more, they still wouldn't matter in youth culture any more than they do. It's usually the very young fans dying to see warhorses and those third generation fans in a way are oddities to their peers, who don't even know the warhorses. I don't claim to understand youth culture these days, but it's obvious that authenticity is down the drain. In sleepy 2015 there's no place for streetfighting men (or kids).
I am fairly certain of another thing: We will live to see them tour small venues in the future. It will be Micks call, when he isn't up for running anymore. Can't say anything about the setlist or ticket prices then, but I'm confident that it will turn out that way.
Intimidated by their own body of work. Now that nails it.
that's a consequence also of being around for so long..
but it apparently hasn't stopped them from trying..they just have so many considerations regarding artistic output
i'd imagine its frustrating especially for Jagger, who really wants to go forward with other projects, and when he does (Superheavy) he comes in for lots of comparisons to previous work..i guess that's fair..?
I understand completely, but as you say there is no mold for what these guys are doing. The music business has been totally shaken up in the last 20 years with the business of touring emerging as the top income stream by a long shot. I get the feeling if new record sales were still the best business bet for rock bands, Mick and Co. would have found a way to continue making and selling new music. Blame Napster.
It's all about the business of the Stones. The touring and the marketing of the brand. It's a testament to how good those original records were that they are still able to successfully capitalize on them and continue on this decades old victory lap as you describe it. The Stones are masters of promising a little more and then basically selling us the same product they've been hawking for 40 years.
Yes, music is somewhat less important, with all the media entertainment and other stuff available and highly marketed to people it's easy to see how is has been diluted from the singularly awesome experience it was years ago. Combine that with the way it is delivered these days, single songs, streamed for pennies (or free) and any individual artist only gets a short time to make a impact. Even if they have a new record, it's unlikely anybody's going to hear the whole thing in the running order it was created.
In the end the Stones have grown and evolved in a business sense, but not a musical sense. It shows us that they are businessmen first, and musicians and musical innovators second. It's pretty clear that's the path they have chosen and all their energy goes into putting on a great show, selling lots of tickets and trying to convince us that the 40 year old tunes are as fresh as the day they were hatched. The nostalgia is not just for the Stones music but for the importance and impact all music once had, imo.
I really don't think it has much to do with their believing in themselves as much as the knowledge and wisdom of what it takes to succeed in the music business in the 21st century. No one can deny their success. That's their goal, not fresh new nasty post-apocalyptic blues.
peace
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-12 19:37 by Naturalust.
It's the youth culture thing they should have ditched, in my opinion. That's an impossible mark to hit for very long. Too fickle, too faddish. But there's got to be something more than nostalgia, no?
Someone above in this thread mentioned fans who are "caught in a time warp" regarding their preference for an earlier version of the band. I just wish the band itself hadn't been caught in that same time warp and that they had kept on movin,' and redefined what it meant to be a rock musician.
I don't want The Stones I fell in love with in '69 ... that would be creepy. Jackson Pollock, Stravinsky, James Joyce, among countless others, were not the same artists in middle- or even old-age that they were in their youths ... and we are the richer for having seen and listened to and read what they produced as they aged.
Mick Jagger had it right long ago: he should never have been singing "Satisfaction" at 30. But he never reckoned on two things, I suppose:
1) how much $$$ there was to be made to singing "Satisfaction" well into his 70's, and
2) how difficult it would prove to write songs that would make people forget about "Satisfaction"
Maybe not in Mick and Keith's case but there are plenty of examples where just such friction creates a competitive environment which leads to some amazing music.
I also don't thinks it's fair or accurate to say they don't believe in their music. Mick is apparently still writing prolifically and Keith has a new record in the can. I think they just believe that new music isn't going to promote their business interests in any significant way and the business of the Stones has become so huge and profitable that it trumps their artistic considerations.
peace
Well in that case what IS the exact word to define the 2015 shows ?
SFTD versions for example ???
***
I'm just a Bad Boy Boogie
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
TheBlockbuster
()
Date: June 12, 2015 09:34
Quote
DandelionPowderman
And 3. You are perhaps comparing men in their 70s to who they were in their 20s?
This time I was comparing a 2012 ADTL to a 2015 ADTL, which I think is a fair comparison, don't you?
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
lem motlow
()
Date: June 12, 2015 09:36
those 72-73 shows are waaay overrated anyway-
if you're under some sort of delusion that a sound system from 43 years ago is better than one from 2015 o.k.,otherwise it makes perfect sense that they would have a better live sound now.if you went that far back from 72 you'd be in 1929.
the staging looked really primitive and they were playing to crowds about 1/3 the size of the ones today so the entire show was a bit dated.
to hear the revisionist history you would think keith never missed a note,the guitars never went out of tune,you never heard those awful mic squeals that you seem to never hear now, and mick taylor wasnt endlessly soloing on every song for no apparent reason.
they are just simple rock songs, not the london philharmonic.it's the band and the fans in the crowd that elevate the entire experience to something else.
it's barely changed since 1962,anyone who thinks there was a huge leap or dropoff in the stones musical ability is probably just feeling their own age more than anything.
if you're under some sort of delusion that a sound system from 43 years ago is better than one from 2015 o.k.,otherwise it makes perfect sense that they would have a better live sound now.if you went that far back from 72 you'd be in 1929.
the staging looked really primitive and they were playing to crowds about 1/3 the size of the ones today so the entire show was a bit dated.
to hear the revisionist history you would think keith never missed a note,the guitars never went out of tune,you never heard those awful mic squeals that you seem to never hear now, and mick taylor wasnt endlessly soloing on every song for no apparent reason.
they are just simple rock songs, not the london philharmonic.it's the band and the fans in the crowd that elevate the entire experience to something else.
it's barely changed since 1962,anyone who thinks there was a huge leap or dropoff in the stones musical ability is probably just feeling their own age more than anything.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: June 12, 2015 09:46
Quote
TheBlockbusterQuote
DandelionPowderman
And 3. You are perhaps comparing men in their 70s to who they were in their 20s?
This time I was comparing a 2012 ADTL to a 2015 ADTL, which I think is a fair comparison, don't you?
This was directed at Longbeach
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
marcovandereijk
()
Date: June 12, 2015 10:38
Quote
lem motlow
it's barely changed since 1962,anyone who thinks there was a huge leap or dropoff in the stones musical ability is probably just feeling their own age more than anything.
I am not fond of using emoticons, but this deserves one:
I really like what I've seen and heard from this tour, even though I have only YouTube
clips to go by. I can not think of anything that I don't like in those clips.
Just like it always was (well, the clips from the Bigger Bang tour didn't move me much,
but let's just say that smart phone camera's have improved a lot).
Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
Dreamer
()
Date: June 12, 2015 11:13
Quote
lem motlow
those 72-73 shows are waaay overrated anyway-
if you're under some sort of delusion that a sound system from 43 years ago is better than one from 2015 o.k.,otherwise it makes perfect sense that they would have a better live sound now.if you went that far back from 72 you'd be in 1929.
the staging looked really primitive and they were playing to crowds about 1/3 the size of the ones today so the entire show was a bit dated.
to hear the revisionist history you would think keith never missed a note,the guitars never went out of tune,you never heard those awful mic squeals that you seem to never hear now, and mick taylor wasnt endlessly soloing on every song for no apparent reason.
they are just simple rock songs, not the london philharmonic.it's the band and the fans in the crowd that elevate the entire experience to something else.
it's barely changed since 1962,anyone who thinks there was a huge leap or dropoff in the stones musical ability is probably just feeling their own age more than anything.
I like that one!
Says it all.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: June 12, 2015 11:38
Quote
longhorn14
Can we shorten the timeframe here? Can we say these past 2 or 3 shows were better than antying since 1999?
On songs like MMile or SGirls? Probably. On MM the band and Jagger sound much more exciting than in 99.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
yeababyyea
()
Date: June 12, 2015 12:01
Quote
dcbaQuote
longhorn14
Can we shorten the timeframe here? Can we say these past 2 or 3 shows were better than antying since 1999?
On songs like MMile or SGirls? Probably. On MM the band and Jagger sound much more exciting than in 99.
Moonlight Mile is played better than in 1999, Some Girls, I don't know really, it was a bit rough with Mick starting off key this time. All other songs, JFF, HTW, BS SMU, and so on were better in 1999.
However I could agree on that the past 2 or 3 shows were better than SOME shows on the Bigger-bang tour.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-12 21:15 by yeababyyea.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
Jesse1960
()
Date: June 12, 2015 14:38
Quote
lem motlow
those 72-73 shows are waaay overrated anyway-
if you're under some sort of delusion that a sound system from 43 years ago is better than one from 2015 o.k.,otherwise it makes perfect sense that they would have a better live sound now.if you went that far back from 72 you'd be in 1929.
the staging looked really primitive and they were playing to crowds about 1/3 the size of the ones today so the entire show was a bit dated.
to hear the revisionist history you would think keith never missed a note,the guitars never went out of tune,you never heard those awful mic squeals that you seem to never hear now, and mick taylor wasnt endlessly soloing on every song for no apparent reason.
they are just simple rock songs, not the london philharmonic.it's the band and the fans in the crowd that elevate the entire experience to something else.
it's barely changed since 1962,anyone who thinks there was a huge leap or dropoff in the stones musical ability is probably just feeling their own age more than anything.
Personally, I liked the primitive stage set up back in the day. Am glad they have dispensed with the cheesy inflatable props, and returned to a more primitive atmosphere. The focus is once again on the band. Rolling Stones don't need gimmicks.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
angee
()
Date: June 12, 2015 14:40
MSMOONLIGHT,
Welcome to IORR. I'm happy for you that ATL was your first show! Rock on in Nashville.
~"Love is Strong"~
Welcome to IORR. I'm happy for you that ATL was your first show! Rock on in Nashville.
~"Love is Strong"~
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
MSMOONLIGHT
()
Date: June 12, 2015 14:59
Thanks Angee. I plan to rock my face off!
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: June 12, 2015 15:00
Welcome MSMOONLIGHT! A Mick baptism on your very first show, way to go! Hardly gets any better than that.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
Rokyfan
()
Date: June 12, 2015 15:17
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
RokyfanQuote
TheBlockbusterQuote
caschimann
Poor video whiner just move your fan heart into a live show.
Leave the dagerous drug of "Judging by Video".
It disturbs your fan heart.
WE NEED YOU here as a healthy, positive, real rocking and rolling fan.
Make a U-turn and come back.
Take it easy.
I saw them perform All Down The Line LIVE in concert in Stockholm 2014, with the same slow tempo as in Atlanta, and it was very weak. All I could think of was ''PLAY FASTER, PLAY FASTER goddammit''.
I feel no need to stay healthy or positive when there's nothing to be positive about.
With that said, I still think they're playing most of their songs better now in 2015 than they did in 2012.
you are not supposed to have any discretion, you are supposed to love everything. Anything less is a whine. it's the new rules.
Since I do not go to Stones concerts anymore, I try to refrain from commenting on the live show threads. I do glance at them from time to time and have been amazed at the fervent they-can-do-no-wrong attitude that seems characteristic of this tour. But, to each his own, and I'm glad people are still able to dig the band.
But, since others have commented using nothing other than digital video, and since there have been posters here suggesting that this Atlanta show belongs in the pantheon of great historical performances, I cannot resist two remarks, based on my listening to CYHMK and Some Girls:
1) we are truly down the rabbit hole, and
2) the Emperor, indeed, has no clothes!
You don't get it.
It is perfectly acceptable to proclaim a show the best ever, or to make any other positive comment, after seeing only YouTube videos.
It is not acceptable to make any criticism based on watching videos.
Obviously not serious. Actually you do get it, and you can add Dandy's #3 to the list. OF course they are not going to play in their 70s anywhere near like they did in their 20s and 30s.
naturalust has it right. They are doing great at what they do now, but to compare these shows to when Keith could light it up, particularly when he had taylor beside him, is silly. It's not a knock on what they do now. They do a great job and why retire? But come on.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
breakingglass
()
Date: June 12, 2015 16:45
A great review of this show, with a linked spotify playlist of the songs from the show are here:
[www.perfectplaylist.net]
bg
[www.perfectplaylist.net]
bg
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
LongBeachArena72
()
Date: June 12, 2015 17:58
Quote
DandelionPowderman
And 3. You are perhaps comparing men in their 70s to who they were in their 20s?
That is EXACTLY what I'm doing and it is horribly unfair to The Stones.
But I do it because THEY have not evolved. We're stuck with no new music, a calcified approach to the catalog, and the sad fact that the original ONLY BAND THAT MATTERS (apologies to The Clash) hasn't really mattered in decades.
It's a bit macabre, isn't it? Why should 70-year-olds even TRY to do what they did in their 20's? But they soldier on, led by their skeletal marionette and we all marvel at how good they are for their age.
I would even go further and stipulate that on many nights The Stones DO sound better than they ever have. But the reason they MATTERED in those days was because of the cultural and social position their menace and their talent had carved out for them.
I've also lately come to wonder whether they REALLY could have done anything else, given the temperaments of the band members. There are no real role models for aging gracefully and in an artistically meaningful way in pop music. It is perhaps unfair of me to expect them to have remained vital, shedding their skins every so often to emerge as something new, as a band with something new to say about the world we live in.
It is, indeed, only rock'n'roll ... but, once upon a time, it seemed as if it could be so much more.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: June 12, 2015 18:11
Quote
LongBeachArena72
But I do it because THEY have not evolved. We're stuck with no new music, a calcified approach to the catalog, and the sad fact that the original ONLY BAND THAT MATTERS (apologies to The Clash) hasn't really mattered in decades.
What would they need to do to matter once again in your opinion? Write better songs? Churn out more albums? Lead the charts?
I believe they choose to only matter where the money is these days. You can ask any concert promoter and he'll tell you they matter.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
LongBeachArena72
()
Date: June 12, 2015 18:21
Quote
NikkeiQuote
LongBeachArena72
But I do it because THEY have not evolved. We're stuck with no new music, a calcified approach to the catalog, and the sad fact that the original ONLY BAND THAT MATTERS (apologies to The Clash) hasn't really mattered in decades.
What would they need to do to matter once again in your opinion? Write better songs? Churn out more albums? Lead the charts?
I believe they choose to only matter where the money is these days. You can ask any concert promoter and he'll tell you they matter.
It's a good question, and I'm not sure what the answer is. Obviously, it must start with the music. One record in 18 years is ridiculous. But the position of music in society has changed. Music is not nearly as important in defining an era as it once was. No one has really bucked this trend in many years.
I guess my gut tells me that The Stones should have BELIEVED in themselves more. I'd be going to see them if they played amphitheaters instead of stadia and played music they believed in, rather than the globe-trotting victory lap they've been on forever. It's not hard to understand why they made the choices they did. I just wish they'd not have given a @#$%& about the size of their audience and tried to take their nasty post-apocalyptic blues to the next level, whatever that would have been.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
stonesfrkk
()
Date: June 12, 2015 18:24
Quote
lem motlow
those 72-73 shows are waaay overrated anyway-
if you're under some sort of delusion that a sound system from 43 years ago is better than one from 2015 o.k.,otherwise it makes perfect sense that they would have a better live sound now.if you went that far back from 72 you'd be in 1929.
the staging looked really primitive and they were playing to crowds about 1/3 the size of the ones today so the entire show was a bit dated.
to hear the revisionist history you would think keith never missed a note,the guitars never went out of tune,you never heard those awful mic squeals that you seem to never hear now, and mick taylor wasnt endlessly soloing on every song for no apparent reason.Nice lem motlow! This is one of the best post I've seen here in a long time! You nailed it! It just goes to show you like I've said before on this site a lot of the people that complain about now and way back in 72, is that those people seem like there stuck in a time warp or they took to much acid back then and never came out of there tunnel vision.
they are just simple rock songs, not the london philharmonic.it's the band and the fans in the crowd that elevate the entire experience to something else.
it's barely changed since 1962,anyone who thinks there was a huge leap or dropoff in the stones musical ability is probably just feeling their own age more than anything.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
duke richardson
()
Date: June 12, 2015 18:31
they still go out and play, as a band. its still a thing they do, different every time, they are in the moment. I haven't seen anything other than YT clips either, but its clear they just go for it live.
new stuff is harder to come by, for them, because imo their history has made for such a high bar that its intimidating, even for them.
but you know they are still writing. and probably considering recording for a new Stones album..
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-12 18:33 by duke richardson.
new stuff is harder to come by, for them, because imo their history has made for such a high bar that its intimidating, even for them.
but you know they are still writing. and probably considering recording for a new Stones album..
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-12 18:33 by duke richardson.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
stonesfrkk
()
Date: June 12, 2015 18:33
Wow sorry lem motlow, I don'tknow how that happended, Anyway I was just saying this is the best post I've seen In awhile. You nailed like I said in my post I've stated this numerous times on this site how some of these people seem to be caught in a time warp or plain burned out on to much acid they took back then and are stuck in there tunnel vision.I agree with you about 72-73 being way overrated and way to long soloing in some songs which actually ruin the song completely a lot of it is nice but a lot of it is to over the top too!
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: June 12, 2015 18:35
Quote
LongBeachArena72
It's a good question, and I'm not sure what the answer is. Obviously, it must start with the music. One record in 18 years is ridiculous. But the position of music in society has changed. Music is not nearly as important in defining an era as it once was. No one has really bucked this trend in many years.
I guess my gut tells me that The Stones should have BELIEVED in themselves more. I'd be going to see them if they played amphitheaters instead of stadia and played music they believed in, rather than the globe-trotting victory lap they've been on forever. It's not hard to understand why they made the choices they did. I just wish they'd not have given a @#$%& about the size of their audience and tried to take their nasty post-apocalyptic blues to the next level, whatever that would have been.
I would have loved more albums too. But I believe if they released more, they still wouldn't matter in youth culture any more than they do. It's usually the very young fans dying to see warhorses and those third generation fans in a way are oddities to their peers, who don't even know the warhorses. I don't claim to understand youth culture these days, but it's obvious that authenticity is down the drain. In sleepy 2015 there's no place for streetfighting men (or kids).
I am fairly certain of another thing: We will live to see them tour small venues in the future. It will be Micks call, when he isn't up for running anymore. Can't say anything about the setlist or ticket prices then, but I'm confident that it will turn out that way.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: June 12, 2015 18:38
Quote
duke richardson
new stuff is harder to come by, for them, because imo their history has made for such a high bar that its intimidating, even for them.
Intimidated by their own body of work. Now that nails it.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
duke richardson
()
Date: June 12, 2015 18:51
Quote
NikkeiQuote
duke richardson
new stuff is harder to come by, for them, because imo their history has made for such a high bar that its intimidating, even for them.
Intimidated by their own body of work. Now that nails it.
that's a consequence also of being around for so long..
but it apparently hasn't stopped them from trying..they just have so many considerations regarding artistic output
i'd imagine its frustrating especially for Jagger, who really wants to go forward with other projects, and when he does (Superheavy) he comes in for lots of comparisons to previous work..i guess that's fair..?
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: June 12, 2015 19:16
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
NikkeiQuote
LongBeachArena72
But I do it because THEY have not evolved. We're stuck with no new music, a calcified approach to the catalog, and the sad fact that the original ONLY BAND THAT MATTERS (apologies to The Clash) hasn't really mattered in decades.
What would they need to do to matter once again in your opinion? Write better songs? Churn out more albums? Lead the charts?
I believe they choose to only matter where the money is these days. You can ask any concert promoter and he'll tell you they matter.
It's a good question, and I'm not sure what the answer is. Obviously, it must start with the music. One record in 18 years is ridiculous. But the position of music in society has changed. Music is not nearly as important in defining an era as it once was. No one has really bucked this trend in many years.
I guess my gut tells me that The Stones should have BELIEVED in themselves more. I'd be going to see them if they played amphitheaters instead of stadia and played music they believed in, rather than the globe-trotting victory lap they've been on forever. It's not hard to understand why they made the choices they did. I just wish they'd not have given a @#$%& about the size of their audience and tried to take their nasty post-apocalyptic blues to the next level, whatever that would have been.
I understand completely, but as you say there is no mold for what these guys are doing. The music business has been totally shaken up in the last 20 years with the business of touring emerging as the top income stream by a long shot. I get the feeling if new record sales were still the best business bet for rock bands, Mick and Co. would have found a way to continue making and selling new music. Blame Napster.
It's all about the business of the Stones. The touring and the marketing of the brand. It's a testament to how good those original records were that they are still able to successfully capitalize on them and continue on this decades old victory lap as you describe it. The Stones are masters of promising a little more and then basically selling us the same product they've been hawking for 40 years.
Yes, music is somewhat less important, with all the media entertainment and other stuff available and highly marketed to people it's easy to see how is has been diluted from the singularly awesome experience it was years ago. Combine that with the way it is delivered these days, single songs, streamed for pennies (or free) and any individual artist only gets a short time to make a impact. Even if they have a new record, it's unlikely anybody's going to hear the whole thing in the running order it was created.
In the end the Stones have grown and evolved in a business sense, but not a musical sense. It shows us that they are businessmen first, and musicians and musical innovators second. It's pretty clear that's the path they have chosen and all their energy goes into putting on a great show, selling lots of tickets and trying to convince us that the 40 year old tunes are as fresh as the day they were hatched. The nostalgia is not just for the Stones music but for the importance and impact all music once had, imo.
I really don't think it has much to do with their believing in themselves as much as the knowledge and wisdom of what it takes to succeed in the music business in the 21st century. No one can deny their success. That's their goal, not fresh new nasty post-apocalyptic blues.
peace
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-12 19:37 by Naturalust.
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
LongBeachArena72
()
Date: June 12, 2015 19:20
Quote
NikkeiQuote
LongBeachArena72
It's a good question, and I'm not sure what the answer is. Obviously, it must start with the music. One record in 18 years is ridiculous. But the position of music in society has changed. Music is not nearly as important in defining an era as it once was. No one has really bucked this trend in many years.
I guess my gut tells me that The Stones should have BELIEVED in themselves more. I'd be going to see them if they played amphitheaters instead of stadia and played music they believed in, rather than the globe-trotting victory lap they've been on forever. It's not hard to understand why they made the choices they did. I just wish they'd not have given a @#$%& about the size of their audience and tried to take their nasty post-apocalyptic blues to the next level, whatever that would have been.
I would have loved more albums too. But I believe if they released more, they still wouldn't matter in youth culture any more than they do. It's usually the very young fans dying to see warhorses and those third generation fans in a way are oddities to their peers, who don't even know the warhorses. I don't claim to understand youth culture these days, but it's obvious that authenticity is down the drain. In sleepy 2015 there's no place for streetfighting men (or kids).
I am fairly certain of another thing: We will live to see them tour small venues in the future. It will be Micks call, when he isn't up for running anymore. Can't say anything about the setlist or ticket prices then, but I'm confident that it will turn out that way.
It's the youth culture thing they should have ditched, in my opinion. That's an impossible mark to hit for very long. Too fickle, too faddish. But there's got to be something more than nostalgia, no?
Someone above in this thread mentioned fans who are "caught in a time warp" regarding their preference for an earlier version of the band. I just wish the band itself hadn't been caught in that same time warp and that they had kept on movin,' and redefined what it meant to be a rock musician.
I don't want The Stones I fell in love with in '69 ... that would be creepy. Jackson Pollock, Stravinsky, James Joyce, among countless others, were not the same artists in middle- or even old-age that they were in their youths ... and we are the richer for having seen and listened to and read what they produced as they aged.
Mick Jagger had it right long ago: he should never have been singing "Satisfaction" at 30. But he never reckoned on two things, I suppose:
1) how much $$$ there was to be made to singing "Satisfaction" well into his 70's, and
2) how difficult it would prove to write songs that would make people forget about "Satisfaction"
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
Rokyfan
()
Date: June 12, 2015 19:41
They could do what Springsteen does -- a tour around his new music with setlists 2/3 different and 1/3 warhorses, each night. But they are not a creative entity. They can't do more. When they created their masterpieces, they were a unit -- the Rolling Stones, the Glimmer Twins. They were a creative unit and had something to say. But their efforts and new music failed all these years because they didn't believe in it and neither did the fans. It was forced. Now they are professional musicians who get together for nostalgia tours. They do it well ... the best by far, but it is not like they were an actual current working band. (And to be fair, Bruce does not have a partner to deal with, he has a band that plays what he gives them. When the Glimmer Twins became mere business partners decades ago, that determined everything after. Two guys that cannot deal with each other except from a distance does not translate into memorable art.)
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
deeppurple
()
Date: June 12, 2015 21:00
Here is my video of "You Gotta Move." Hope you enjoy.
[www.youtube.com]
[www.youtube.com]
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: June 12, 2015 21:01
Awesome!
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: June 12, 2015 21:09
Quote
Rokyfan
Two guys that cannot deal with each other except from a distance does not translate into memorable art.)
Maybe not in Mick and Keith's case but there are plenty of examples where just such friction creates a competitive environment which leads to some amazing music.
I also don't thinks it's fair or accurate to say they don't believe in their music. Mick is apparently still writing prolifically and Keith has a new record in the can. I think they just believe that new music isn't going to promote their business interests in any significant way and the business of the Stones has become so huge and profitable that it trumps their artistic considerations.
peace
Re: Atlanta GA USA 9-June-2015 Rolling Stones live show updates
Posted by:
powerage78
()
Date: June 12, 2015 21:56
Quote
lem motlow
those 72-73 shows are waaay overrated anyway
Well in that case what IS the exact word to define the 2015 shows ?
SFTD versions for example ???
***
I'm just a Bad Boy Boogie
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.