Quote
Olly
A song not performed onstage for eighteen years.

A highlight of the Tour.

The crowd loved it and I'm not surprised. Great riff.

When you are the Stones, the crowd loves everything - Mick's shoes, Keith's jacket, Ronnie's haircut, Charlie's smile, the fireworks - the list goes on and on.

Musically speaking, the many times I saw Anybody Seen My Baby live it never really took off, no matter how hard Mick always tried - and one could see and feel that he usually was the only one on stage who tried while the others were more or less indifferent, not really "into it". And that's a pity, because I really like the song, the studio version is certainly one of their better "modern era"-songs.

While the US or European crowd only looks interested in the "warhorses" the South American public seems to like whichever song they play. To be fair, The Rolling Stones is a sixties and seventies bluesrock band
whose reportoire since the eighties is pretty redundant. ASMB is not by any standard a good song. Only a fanboy would state such a thing.

Quote
Stoneage
To be fair, The Rolling Stones is a sixties and seventies bluesrock band

'Blues-rock'? I sincerely hope not. The band I like have dipped their toes in many different musical genres; from rhythm-and-blues and rock n' roll; to pop, reggae, country and world-music. They'll never be a cameleon Bowie-like performing-set, but, definitely, the Rolling Stones are too adventurous and magnificent to be labelled 'blues-rock' By your logic, add a pinch of boogie, and you may as well call them Status Quo!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-02-14 15:27 by Big Al.

Okey then, labeling is always a difficult thing to do. A blues-based rock and roll band then? Or do you mean they are so diverse they can't be labeled at all?

Quote
Stoneage
Okey then, labeling is always a difficult thing to do. A blues-based rock and roll band then? Or do you mean they are so diverse they can't be labeled at all?

I was messing a little, Stoneage. I do believe that the Stones are not what one would label as 'blues-rock', though. To me, anyway, that conjures images of the likes of Free and Humble Pie. I think the Stones are far too colourful to be labelled as such, that's all. I do, however, agree that to pigeon-hole, or 'label', is a difficult thing to do. Truthfully, I haven't ever given much thought to how to categorise the Stones. It'd be too general a point to mark them out as being one thing. They started out as a rhythm-and-blues act, before morphing into pop, psychedelia, roots-based country and rock, punk, etc. How about 'jack-of-all-trades'? A bit of everything. That's a fair compromise, I think.