For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
HMS
They can stick their Cuba-DVD up the... Who needs another GH-DVD with the same old songs they play over and over again?
The Fonda-Gig would sell more items than a DVD that is in fact very similar to Hyde-Park. The only difference between Hyde-Park and Cuba-show is the location and who cares for the location, it´s about the music and not about a 15-minute-mini-documentary with Havana-footage that accompanies an otherwise totally uninteresting concert. Not even the cubans would buy it, they can´t afford it anyway. So leave this in the can for future FTV-release and give us Sticky Fingers instead.
Quote
HonkeyTonkFlashQuote
HMS
They can stick their Cuba-DVD up the... Who needs another GH-DVD with the same old songs they play over and over again?
The Fonda-Gig would sell more items than a DVD that is in fact very similar to Hyde-Park. The only difference between Hyde-Park and Cuba-show is the location and who cares for the location, it´s about the music and not about a 15-minute-mini-documentary with Havana-footage that accompanies an otherwise totally uninteresting concert. Not even the cubans would buy it, they can´t afford it anyway. So leave this in the can for future FTV-release and give us Sticky Fingers instead.
Really - what would be the point of another huge open-air greatest hits concert? It would be so similar to Hyde Park. Give us the Fonda show for a different atmosphere and some different songs!!
Quote
TheGreek
Will Eagle Rock give this a proper release on CD/DVD ?
that stinks because the one album that you would want start to finish live recording of would be Sticky Fingers with Mick Taylor of course and to make it even more fun have Woody also so they can trade licks with Keith , then you can have real guiatr pyroQuote
alimenteQuote
TheGreek
Will Eagle Rock give this a proper release on CD/DVD ?
It's slowly getting too old for a current release, and it's too young for "From The Vault" treatment. Same problem as with Glastonbury. But never say never, maybe in 15 or 20 years the time will be right to let it out!
No, honestly, I don't hear that anybody (either Eagle or Universal) has any plans with it currently.
Quote
HMS
Even in the seventies it would have been impressive. One of their best live albums and yet it is not available physically. Very confusing.
They play the songs so wonderful that it is very easy to forget that there ever was a Mick Taylor with the band. Like I always say, they dont need him. The SF-songs work very fine without him. Cheers to Ronnie and of course Mick whose vocals are amazing.
Quote
HMS
Even in the seventies it would have been impressive. One of their best live albums and yet it is not available physically. Very confusing.
They play the songs so wonderful that it is very easy to forget that there ever was a Mick Taylor with the band. Like I always say, they dont need him. The SF-songs work very fine without him. Cheers to Ronnie and of course Mick whose vocals are amazing.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
It's a very nice live album. Mick sings better than in 71-73 and some songs (BS, IGTB and SM) are on par with the magical studio versions.
It's great to have an excellent live version of Moonlight Mile, my favourite Stones tune. Finally
Quote
TravelinManQuote
DandelionPowderman
It's a very nice live album. Mick sings better than in 71-73 and some songs (BS, IGTB and SM) are on par with the magical studio versions.
It's great to have an excellent live version of Moonlight Mile, my favourite Stones tune. Finally
I'm not trying to be rude, but no way are those songs on par with the Stones in their prime. They ARE excellent for 70 something year old rockers though!
Quote
DandelionPowderman
It's a very nice live album. Mick sings better than in 71-73 and some songs (BS, IGTB and SM) are on par with the magical studio versions.
Quote
TravelinManQuote
HMS
Even in the seventies it would have been impressive. One of their best live albums and yet it is not available physically. Very confusing.
They play the songs so wonderful that it is very easy to forget that there ever was a Mick Taylor with the band. Like I always say, they dont need him. The SF-songs work very fine without him. Cheers to Ronnie and of course Mick whose vocals are amazing.
They don't need anybody except Jagger, Richards, and to a lesser extent Charlie. I think that's the only thing that has been proven. Why are you obsessed with Mick Taylor?
I would love to hear what Taylor would play on Moonlight Mile and Wild Horses. At least there is a slim chance a performance exists with Taylor playing Wild Horses from the early 70's.
Quote
ouroux58Quote
TravelinManQuote
HMS
Even in the seventies it would have been impressive. One of their best live albums and yet it is not available physically. Very confusing.
They play the songs so wonderful that it is very easy to forget that there ever was a Mick Taylor with the band. Like I always say, they dont need him. The SF-songs work very fine without him. Cheers to Ronnie and of course Mick whose vocals are amazing.
They don't need anybody except Jagger, Richards, and to a lesser extent Charlie. I think that's the only thing that has been proven. Why are you obsessed with Mick Taylor?
I would love to hear what Taylor would play on Moonlight Mile and Wild Horses. At least there is a slim chance a performance exists with Taylor playing Wild Horses from the early 70's.
They need everybody to be the Rolling Stones, and at first with Bill Wyman! Mick and Keith only are not the Rolling Stones.
The Sandy Relief concert on 2012-12-12 in NYC was a Keith and Mick participation, they were not introduced as the rolling stones.
Quote
ouroux58Quote
DandelionPowderman
It's a very nice live album. Mick sings better than in 71-73 and some songs (BS, IGTB and SM) are on par with the magical studio versions.
It's better to be blind than reading this bullshit.
Better than in 71-73... and better that Get yer...
OK I think the Stones started in 2002 for you!
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
ouroux58Quote
DandelionPowderman
It's a very nice live album. Mick sings better than in 71-73 and some songs (BS, IGTB and SM) are on par with the magical studio versions.
It's better to be blind than reading this bullshit.
Better than in 71-73... and better that Get yer...
OK I think the Stones started in 2002 for you!
Who are you?
Quote
DonParkerQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
ouroux58Quote
DandelionPowderman
It's a very nice live album. Mick sings better than in 71-73 and some songs (BS, IGTB and SM) are on par with the magical studio versions.
It's better to be blind than reading this bullshit.
Better than in 71-73... and better that Get yer...
OK I think the Stones started in 2002 for you!
Who are you?
It's not me.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
ouroux58Quote
DandelionPowderman
It's a very nice live album. Mick sings better than in 71-73 and some songs (BS, IGTB and SM) are on par with the magical studio versions.
It's better to be blind than reading this bullshit.
Better than in 71-73... and better that Get yer...
OK I think the Stones started in 2002 for you!
Who are you?
Quote
HMS
It´s absolutely on par with the Stones "in their prime" (whenever that was). There´s zero to complain about it, as a live album - although quite short - it even tops marvelous Shine A Light. No need to mention that I think it is way better than YaYa´s (most every other live-album is, imo).
I just cant get over the fact that they didnt release the whole show months ago.