Quote
doitywoik
@gotdablouse,
you're lucky, i could retrieve the respective post:

[forums.stevehoffman.tv]

Well done thanks!

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio

I humbly suggest posts on this thread should be limited to news or at least rumors of new album, not debates about old albums.

We will have over 400 pages on release date ;-)

93 pages in and you suggest something drab like that? It's already happened. Talking about old albums is relative - especially the recording, mixing, editing and mastering aspects as a foundation for some to understand some things.

At some point they lost the knack of working in the studio when the technology changed. In the early and Golden Age years they were working with producers and engineers who were the same age and all figuring things out together. Ever since the '80s, the technology changed and they were working with younger men who weren't quite peers.
Charlie has talked about how latter day producers used to build a song up from individual instrumental takes. Different from how they normally do it.
Not sure that Keith has ever adjusted to that. Perhaps explains some of the friction between him and Mick when recording songs.

Quote
wonderboy
At some point they lost the knack of working in the studio when the technology changed. In the early and Golden Age years they were working with producers and engineers who were the same age and all figuring things out together. Ever since the '80s, the technology changed and they were working with younger men who weren't quite peers.
Charlie has talked about how latter day producers used to build a song up from individual instrumental takes. Different from how they normally do it.
Not sure that Keith has ever adjusted to that. Perhaps explains some of the friction between him and Mick when recording songs.

Yes, and somewhere they lost the knack of actually writing together. Combine those elements together, and it's become almost a lost cause. Give or take a few random decent tunes here and there, it's been weird following the Stones throughout these lean years (the last 35 or so). Thankfully they put on some of the greatest tours and shows live (but not always), and looking at their setlists which relies almost entirely on songs from decades ago, you have to wonder if they even like what they've been releasing in these 'modern' times.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

They could do one song from each LP (UK only) and have a 23 song set list (excluding 19th Nervous Breakdown, HYSYMBSITS, We Love You, Dandelion, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women, Don't Stop and Doom And Gloom, of course).

If they do this new album, think they'll ignore it like they did with A BIGGER BANG? It's hilarious that on the tours for STEEL WHEELS, VOODOO LOUNGE and BRIDGES TO BABYLON they (eventually) played 6 or 7 songs from them - yet have essentially ignored them ever since! Yeah yeah, You Got Me Rocking and Out Of Control have been played the most out of the 4 recent albums on the last 6 years of tours.

Mick is so keen on doing new things yet acts like those albums don't exist. A lot of people bought them - they sold well. Shouldn't that be enough reason to do something from them?

One might think so.

Quote
GasLightStreet
They could do one song from each LP (UK only) and have a 23 song set list (excluding 19th Nervous Breakdown, HYSYMBSITS, We Love You, Dandelion, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women, Don't Stop and Doom And Gloom, of course).

If they do this new album, think they'll ignore it like they did with A BIGGER BANG? It's hilarious that on the tours for STEEL WHEELS, VOODOO LOUNGE and BRIDGES TO BABYLON they (eventually) played 6 or 7 songs from them - yet have essentially ignored them ever since! Yeah yeah, You Got Me Rocking and Out Of Control have been played the most out of the 4 recent albums on the last 6 years of tours.

Mick is so keen on doing new things yet acts like those albums don't exist. A lot of people bought them - they sold well. Shouldn't that be enough reason to do something from them?

One might think so.

For me it's hard enough to endure the "survivors" of Steel Wheels, Voodoo Lounge etc. (OOC, SA, YGMR). Please don't suggest them to play more of these weak or boring songs (Mixed Emotions, Sparks Will Fly, Almost Hear You Sigh, Saint Of Me, Thief In The Night). I'm glad they never really came back. Although I must admit, ME '16 was much better than the old live versions. And Can't Be Seen '14 onwards was interesting too (at least better than Happy every night).



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-26 20:39 by Monsoon Ragoon.

Both Mick and Keith seen about town in NYC over the last couple days..

Realize that likely happens all the time and isn't necessarily business related.. but like to think ..maybe.




Keith at the Beacon

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
GasLightStreet
They could do one song from each LP (UK only) and have a 23 song set list (excluding 19th Nervous Breakdown, HYSYMBSITS, We Love You, Dandelion, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women, Don't Stop and Doom And Gloom, of course).

If they do this new album, think they'll ignore it like they did with A BIGGER BANG? It's hilarious that on the tours for STEEL WHEELS, VOODOO LOUNGE and BRIDGES TO BABYLON they (eventually) played 6 or 7 songs from them - yet have essentially ignored them ever since! Yeah yeah, You Got Me Rocking and Out Of Control have been played the most out of the 4 recent albums on the last 6 years of tours.

Mick is so keen on doing new things yet acts like those albums don't exist. A lot of people bought them - they sold well. Shouldn't that be enough reason to do something from them?

One might think so.

For me it's hard enough to endure the "survivors" of Steel Wheels, Voodoo Lounge etc. (OOC, SA, YGMR). Please don't suggest them to play more of these weak or boring songs (Mixed Emotions, Sparks Will Fly, Almost Hear You Sigh, Saint Of Me, Thief In The Night). I'm glad they never really came back. Although I must admit, ME '16 was much better than the old live versions. And Can't Be Seen '14 onwards was interesting too (at least better than Happy every night).

As if they'd read that and say 'Great idea!' Besides, I was thinking of the good songs from those albums.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
GasLightStreet
They could do one song from each LP (UK only) and have a 23 song set list (excluding 19th Nervous Breakdown, HYSYMBSITS, We Love You, Dandelion, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women, Don't Stop and Doom And Gloom, of course).

If they do this new album, think they'll ignore it like they did with A BIGGER BANG? It's hilarious that on the tours for STEEL WHEELS, VOODOO LOUNGE and BRIDGES TO BABYLON they (eventually) played 6 or 7 songs from them - yet have essentially ignored them ever since! Yeah yeah, You Got Me Rocking and Out Of Control have been played the most out of the 4 recent albums on the last 6 years of tours.

Mick is so keen on doing new things yet acts like those albums don't exist. A lot of people bought them - they sold well. Shouldn't that be enough reason to do something from them?

One might think so.

For me it's hard enough to endure the "survivors" of Steel Wheels, Voodoo Lounge etc. (OOC, SA, YGMR). Please don't suggest them to play more of these weak or boring songs (Mixed Emotions, Sparks Will Fly, Almost Hear You Sigh, Saint Of Me, Thief In The Night). I'm glad they never really came back. Although I must admit, ME '16 was much better than the old live versions. And Can't Be Seen '14 onwards was interesting too (at least better than Happy every night).

As if they'd read that and say 'Great idea!' Besides, I was thinking of the good songs from those albums.

______________________________________



The coolest thing I've saw all week here or in my daily living is the fact that a member of this board recorded with The Stones (Teddy on BT. A very interesting album to see them work on as well!


AWESOME Stuff INDEED!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-27 05:29 by IanBillen.

Oops. Sorry if I was unclear. I was just hanging out with the Stones while they were recording BTB. My dad and me and Don Was. There are people who post here who have engineered sessions with the band, and a few other friends and associates. I have to say though that hanging out with them was indeed Awesome.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
GasLightStreet
They could do one song from each LP (UK only) and have a 23 song set list (excluding 19th Nervous Breakdown, HYSYMBSITS, We Love You, Dandelion, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women, Don't Stop and Doom And Gloom, of course).

If they do this new album, think they'll ignore it like they did with A BIGGER BANG? It's hilarious that on the tours for STEEL WHEELS, VOODOO LOUNGE and BRIDGES TO BABYLON they (eventually) played 6 or 7 songs from them - yet have essentially ignored them ever since! Yeah yeah, You Got Me Rocking and Out Of Control have been played the most out of the 4 recent albums on the last 6 years of tours.

Mick is so keen on doing new things yet acts like those albums don't exist. A lot of people bought them - they sold well. Shouldn't that be enough reason to do something from them?

One might think so.

For me it's hard enough to endure the "survivors" of Steel Wheels, Voodoo Lounge etc. (OOC, SA, YGMR). Please don't suggest them to play more of these weak or boring songs (Mixed Emotions, Sparks Will Fly, Almost Hear You Sigh, Saint Of Me, Thief In The Night). I'm glad they never really came back. Although I must admit, ME '16 was much better than the old live versions. And Can't Be Seen '14 onwards was interesting too (at least better than Happy every night).

As if they'd read that and say 'Great idea!' Besides, I was thinking of the good songs from those albums.

The good thing is they don't do what we suggest here ;-) Maybe we should suggest to play 18 minute versions of MY - then they may throw it out of the set.

I had no problems with the good songs from VL to Grrr, but it's even less likely that they play Continental Drift, Rain Fall Down, Jump On Top Of Me, Under The Radar...

I expect no miracles anymore, but they only had to add some freak hit like HYSYMBSITS and one or two rare ballads and the boring "same shit every night"-setlists would appear radically more interesting. Don't think this will happen in Knebworth or in 70.000 stadiums, thought. Knebworth will be a Las Vegas concert unlike 1976.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-27 08:17 by Monsoon Ragoon.

The show is only boring when you're not there

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The show is only boring when you're not there

No. I think it was very sad to watch the No Filter Tour go downhill. From a pretty ambitioned setlist in Hamburg (which didn’t really work for the 82.000 I guess) to an embarrassing autopilot set with minimal changes even in Paris within one or two weeks. That doesn't mean that it isn't enjoyable once you are there.

Look at Springsteen, he's only some years younger than the Stones average and plays a totally different and much longer set every show. Even U2 play much less warhorses although they have nearly as many big hits meanwhile. I don't expect miracles but setlists like 2012/13/15 would be nice.

Hmmm, I see this is the wrong thread actually. Sorry.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-27 10:14 by Monsoon Ragoon.

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The show is only boring when you're not there

No. I think it was very sad to watch the No Filter Tour go downhill. From a pretty ambitioned setlist in Hamburg (which didn’t really work for the 82.000 I guess) to an embarrassing autopilot set with minimal changes even in Paris within one or two weeks. That doesn't mean that it isn't enjoyable once you are there.

Look at Springsteen, he's only some years younger than the Stones average and plays a totally different and much longer set every show. Even U2 play much less warhorses although they have nearly as many big hits meanwhile. I don't expect miracles but setlists like 2012/13/15 would be nice.

Hmmm, I see this is the wrong thread actually. Sorry.

Was the 1972 tour boring, too? It went downhill setlist-wise after Vancouver, when they dropped Ventilator Blues, Loving Cup, Torn And Frayed etc...

A good show doesn't necessarily have anything to do with playing as many different or obscure songs as possible. IMO, many of the Licks club shows were really bad. I had to turn off Dance from Cirkus Krone, for instance.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The show is only boring when you're not there

No. I think it was very sad to watch the No Filter Tour go downhill. From a pretty ambitioned setlist in Hamburg (which didn’t really work for the 82.000 I guess) to an embarrassing autopilot set with minimal changes even in Paris within one or two weeks. That doesn't mean that it isn't enjoyable once you are there.

Look at Springsteen, he's only some years younger than the Stones average and plays a totally different and much longer set every show. Even U2 play much less warhorses although they have nearly as many big hits meanwhile. I don't expect miracles but setlists like 2012/13/15 would be nice.

Hmmm, I see this is the wrong thread actually. Sorry.

Was the 1972 tour boring, too? It went downhill setlist-wise after Vancouver, when they dropped Ventilator Blues, Loving Cup, Torn And Frayed etc...

A good show doesn't necessarily have anything to do with playing as many different or obscure songs as possible. IMO, many of the Licks club shows were really bad. I had to turn off Dance from Cirkus Krone, for instance.

Comparing 2017 with 1972 is too absurd to make a comment. Apart from that I don't believe that every 2017 concert was a great one. (It was great for people aged 70+, that might be true.) People who say that are... don't know (don't wanna get banned).

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The show is only boring when you're not there

No. I think it was very sad to watch the No Filter Tour go downhill. From a pretty ambitioned setlist in Hamburg (which didn’t really work for the 82.000 I guess) to an embarrassing autopilot set with minimal changes even in Paris within one or two weeks. That doesn't mean that it isn't enjoyable once you are there.

Look at Springsteen, he's only some years younger than the Stones average and plays a totally different and much longer set every show. Even U2 play much less warhorses although they have nearly as many big hits meanwhile. I don't expect miracles but setlists like 2012/13/15 would be nice.

Hmmm, I see this is the wrong thread actually. Sorry.

Was the 1972 tour boring, too? It went downhill setlist-wise after Vancouver, when they dropped Ventilator Blues, Loving Cup, Torn And Frayed etc...

A good show doesn't necessarily have anything to do with playing as many different or obscure songs as possible. IMO, many of the Licks club shows were really bad. I had to turn off Dance from Cirkus Krone, for instance.

Comparing 2017 with 1972 is too absurd to make a comment. Apart from that I don't believe that every 2017 concert was a great one. (It was great for people aged 70+, that might be true.) People who say that are... don't know (don't wanna get banned).

Please take us through which gig you attended you found good and vice versa.

The point remains, though: You complain about a show from your armchair. There is no way you'll get the feeling of Shine A Light (Amsterdam), Under My Thumb and Play With Fire (Hamburg) from there.

It's okay to wish for hit or miss-versions of rarities from these 75 year olds, of course, but please don't tell me that the No Filter-tour went downhill. That's not what the people in Amsterdam (or Paris) said. In fact, if you check out the «favourite show-thread», you'll find that the Amsterdam and Paris-shows were among the fan favourites.

You must not get obsessed with words on a paper (aka setlists). It's how they play and the experience you get that counts, imo.

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

No. I think it was very sad to watch the No Filter Tour go downhill.

??????????????????

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon
an embarrassing autopilot set with minimal changes even in Paris

...these gigs SMOKED - from the 2nd week or so on, after Hamburg - "even in Paris"!!

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon
enjoyable once you are there.

...with all due respect: Monsoon, were you even there, anywhen anywhere, on this tour?!?

Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

No. I think it was very sad to watch the No Filter Tour go downhill.

??????????????????

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon
an embarrassing autopilot set with minimal changes even in Paris

...these gigs SMOKED - from the 2nd week or so on, after Hamburg - "even in Paris"!!

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon
enjoyable once you are there.

...with all due respect: Monsoon, were you even there, anywhen anywhere, on this tour?!?

I bet Monsooon was sitting on his sofa. just let him be.
Jeroen

The Paris shows were dynamite ... esp 2 & 3 ......



ROCKMAN

I have been nowhere I had an accident in early September, still today cannot walk. Maybe they really burn down the same songs every day, I can imagine what you are talking about. I have the majority of the shows 12-16 on CD; the worst shows are better than the best shows of the 90s. Still - the setlists are too static for my taste. Maybe some of you want the same setlist every night; if I was there I wouldn't be very pleased to get 90% the same at every show.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-27 12:03 by Monsoon Ragoon.

We all go to shows for different reasons, and that's okay

I forget where I read it (what page) but I think it was in this thread about Eric Clapton playing on "most" of BLUE & LONESOME. Apparently everyone but that person knows that to not be true.

What was not said about him recording on the 2 tracks was, as far as I can recall, if he recorded on any Stones tracks for the new album. I'll take it as he didn't.

Keith's version of 'very, very shortly' back in July is amusing. What happened to the "boost in their energy and viability"? Or was he talking overall because of the upcoming tour? It kind of came off to be about recording.

Quote
GasLightStreet
I forget where I read it (what page) but I think it was in this thread about Eric Clapton playing on "most" of BLUE & LONESOME. Apparently everyone but that person knows that to not be true.

What was not said about him recording on the 2 tracks was, as far as I can recall, if he recorded on any Stones tracks for the new album. I'll take it as he didn't.

Keith's version of 'very, very shortly' back in July is amusing. What happened to the "boost in their energy and viability"? Or was he talking overall because of the upcoming tour? It kind of came off to be about recording.

I believe he very much meant playing live.

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon
I have been nowhere I had an accident in early September, still today cannot walk. Maybe they really burn down the same songs every day, I can imagine what you are talking about. I have the majority of the shows 12-16 on CD; the worst shows are better than the best shows of the 90s. Still - the setlists are too static for my taste. Maybe some of you want the same setlist every night; if I was there I wouldn't be very pleased to get 90% the same at every show.

OK - I understand! sorry to hear that, btw.
Truely hope you're getting better!

Yeah; I catch your drift as well -
the thing is: I too would want, would lóve, am craving for some more 'fan-friendly', 'deep-cuts-filled' setlists. After all, I've seen 37 shows grand total by now; and hearing "Miss You" for the umptieth time really is starting to have a way too grand effect on my bladder...

But if they deliver, really-really play the way they played most of the six NO FILTER shows I attended, I really-really don't care whether I'm hearing Jumping Jack Flash and/or Brown Sugar and/or Satisfaction even(!!) for the 2nd or 200th time...
because it always feels like a 'first ' then, to me.

And I truely think this should nót be the only, but definitely the most important criterium when judgung live music/ performances.
But that's just me.

Kudos, Monsoon Ragoon! Get well soon.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The show is only boring when you're not there

No. I think it was very sad to watch the No Filter Tour go downhill. From a pretty ambitioned setlist in Hamburg (which didn’t really work for the 82.000 I guess) to an embarrassing autopilot set with minimal changes even in Paris within one or two weeks. That doesn't mean that it isn't enjoyable once you are there.

Look at Springsteen, he's only some years younger than the Stones average and plays a totally different and much longer set every show. Even U2 play much less warhorses although they have nearly as many big hits meanwhile. I don't expect miracles but setlists like 2012/13/15 would be nice.

Hmmm, I see this is the wrong thread actually. Sorry.

Was the 1972 tour boring, too? It went downhill setlist-wise after Vancouver, when they dropped Ventilator Blues, Loving Cup, Torn And Frayed etc...

A good show doesn't necessarily have anything to do with playing as many different or obscure songs as possible. IMO, many of the Licks club shows were really bad. I had to turn off Dance from Cirkus Krone, for instance.

Yeah, but in 1972 they had several new ones in the set, fresh material like Bitch, Dice, Virginia, Rip This Joint, Rocks Off, Sugar plus "older" (in fact very recent back then) material that wasn't performed on previous tours (at least not regularly) like Gimme Shelter, You Can't Always Get What You Want. Plus Bye Bye Johnny. Exciting times whereas now, they more or less serve the basically same thing since 1989. They moved a few warhorses around in the setlist, notably Shelter and a (woahhh! surprise!!!) choir-less YCAGWYW), added two similar-sounding blues tracks from Blue & Lonesome and people wet their pants... The only real surprise was dusting off Dancing With Mr. D and well, maybe Play With Fire. Isn't it a bit cheap for a band with this fantastic catalog?



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-27 19:15 by retired_dog.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The show is only boring when you're not there

No. I think it was very sad to watch the No Filter Tour go downhill. From a pretty ambitioned setlist in Hamburg (which didn’t really work for the 82.000 I guess) to an embarrassing autopilot set with minimal changes even in Paris within one or two weeks. That doesn't mean that it isn't enjoyable once you are there.

Look at Springsteen, he's only some years younger than the Stones average and plays a totally different and much longer set every show. Even U2 play much less warhorses although they have nearly as many big hits meanwhile. I don't expect miracles but setlists like 2012/13/15 would be nice.

Hmmm, I see this is the wrong thread actually. Sorry.

Was the 1972 tour boring, too? It went downhill setlist-wise after Vancouver, when they dropped Ventilator Blues, Loving Cup, Torn And Frayed etc...

A good show doesn't necessarily have anything to do with playing as many different or obscure songs as possible. IMO, many of the Licks club shows were really bad. I had to turn off Dance from Cirkus Krone, for instance.

Comparing 2017 with 1972 is too absurd to make a comment. Apart from that I don't believe that every 2017 concert was a great one. (It was great for people aged 70+, that might be true.) People who say that are... don't know (don't wanna get banned).

Please take us through which gig you attended you found good and vice versa.

The point remains, though: You complain about a show from your armchair. There is no way you'll get the feeling of Shine A Light (Amsterdam), Under My Thumb and Play With Fire (Hamburg) from there.

It's okay to wish for hit or miss-versions of rarities from these 75 year olds, of course, but please don't tell me that the No Filter-tour went downhill. That's not what the people in Amsterdam (or Paris) said. In fact, if you check out the «favourite show-thread», you'll find that the Amsterdam and Paris-shows were among the fan favourites.

You must not get obsessed with words on a paper (aka setlists). It's how they play and the experience you get that counts, imo.

And if the way they play those songs suck we're not entitled to say that.

Edit: let me answer that beforehand: none.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-27 19:11 by Redhotcarpet.

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The show is only boring when you're not there

No. I think it was very sad to watch the No Filter Tour go downhill. From a pretty ambitioned setlist in Hamburg (which didn’t really work for the 82.000 I guess) to an embarrassing autopilot set with minimal changes even in Paris within one or two weeks. That doesn't mean that it isn't enjoyable once you are there.

Look at Springsteen, he's only some years younger than the Stones average and plays a totally different and much longer set every show. Even U2 play much less warhorses although they have nearly as many big hits meanwhile. I don't expect miracles but setlists like 2012/13/15 would be nice.

Hmmm, I see this is the wrong thread actually. Sorry.

Was the 1972 tour boring, too? It went downhill setlist-wise after Vancouver, when they dropped Ventilator Blues, Loving Cup, Torn And Frayed etc...

A good show doesn't necessarily have anything to do with playing as many different or obscure songs as possible. IMO, many of the Licks club shows were really bad. I had to turn off Dance from Cirkus Krone, for instance.

Comparing 2017 with 1972 is too absurd to make a comment. Apart from that I don't believe that every 2017 concert was a great one. (It was great for people aged 70+, that might be true.) People who say that are... don't know (don't wanna get banned).

Please take us through which gig you attended you found good and vice versa.

The point remains, though: You complain about a show from your armchair. There is no way you'll get the feeling of Shine A Light (Amsterdam), Under My Thumb and Play With Fire (Hamburg) from there.

It's okay to wish for hit or miss-versions of rarities from these 75 year olds, of course, but please don't tell me that the No Filter-tour went downhill. That's not what the people in Amsterdam (or Paris) said. In fact, if you check out the «favourite show-thread», you'll find that the Amsterdam and Paris-shows were among the fan favourites.

You must not get obsessed with words on a paper (aka setlists). It's how they play and the experience you get that counts, imo.

And if the way they play those songs suck we're not entitled to say that.

Edit: let me answer that beforehand: none.

Who gave you that idea? I just said that Dance (one of my favourite tracks) sucked in 2002/3.

Well, the point here was that the tour evidently didn't go downhill in quality after Hamburg, according to the fans. Check out the thread.

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Monsoon Ragoon

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The show is only boring when you're not there

No. I think it was very sad to watch the No Filter Tour go downhill. From a pretty ambitioned setlist in Hamburg (which didn’t really work for the 82.000 I guess) to an embarrassing autopilot set with minimal changes even in Paris within one or two weeks. That doesn't mean that it isn't enjoyable once you are there.

Look at Springsteen, he's only some years younger than the Stones average and plays a totally different and much longer set every show. Even U2 play much less warhorses although they have nearly as many big hits meanwhile. I don't expect miracles but setlists like 2012/13/15 would be nice.

Hmmm, I see this is the wrong thread actually. Sorry.

Was the 1972 tour boring, too? It went downhill setlist-wise after Vancouver, when they dropped Ventilator Blues, Loving Cup, Torn And Frayed etc...

A good show doesn't necessarily have anything to do with playing as many different or obscure songs as possible. IMO, many of the Licks club shows were really bad. I had to turn off Dance from Cirkus Krone, for instance.

Yeah, but in 1972 they had several new ones in the set, fresh material like Bitch, Dice, Virginia, Rip This Joint, Rocks Off, Sugar plus "older" (in fact very recent back then) material that wasn't performed on previous tours (at least not regularly) like Gimme Shelter, You Can't Always Get What You Want. Plus Bye Bye Johnny. Exciting times whereas now, they more or less serve the basically same thing since 1989. They moved a few warhorses around in the setlist, notably Shelter and a (woahhh! surprise!!!) choir-less YCAGWYW), added two similar-sounding blues tracks from Blue & Lonesome and people wet their pants... The only real surprise was dusting off Dancing With Mr. D and well, maybe Play With Fire. Isn't it a bit cheap for a band with this fantastic catalog?

Yeah, that's a different discussion, isn't it?

PS: Don't forget UMT..

I disagree strongly about 1989, though, as that setlist wasn't similar to today's setlist in any way. IMO, the Licks stadium shows started the real warhorse-heavy setlists.

The show format, however, stems from 1987.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-27 20:40 by DandelionPowderman.