For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
keefriff99
It's hilarious that people are still trying to blame smartphone videos, as if the technology is capable of magically inserting wrong chords or bum notes into the audio stream.
If anything, high-quality videos are more accurate than reports from people who were there and caught up in the moment. Many times, I've been at shows and been completely overwhelmed by the spectacle, only to go home and watch videos that people uploaded and think, "How did I miss THAT mistake??"
Well, it's because I was swept up in the magic of live music and wasn't trying to critique the performances.
And that's great...but don't claim that audience recordings are somehow skewing the performances. Smartphone technology is incredibly advanced now. What you hear is what ACTUALLY occurred, not what you perceived when you were in the crowd.
Quote
stone4everQuote
keefriff99
It's hilarious that people are still trying to blame smartphone videos, as if the technology is capable of magically inserting wrong chords or bum notes into the audio stream.
If anything, high-quality videos are more accurate than reports from people who were there and caught up in the moment. Many times, I've been at shows and been completely overwhelmed by the spectacle, only to go home and watch videos that people uploaded and think, "How did I miss THAT mistake??"
Well, it's because I was swept up in the magic of live music and wasn't trying to critique the performances.
And that's great...but don't claim that audience recordings are somehow skewing the performances. Smartphone technology is incredibly advanced now. What you hear is what ACTUALLY occurred, not what you perceived when you were in the crowd.
I think this is possibly the most inaccurate post I have ever witnessed on IORR. I have filmed so many concerts on the most up to date smart phone and it plays back inferior recordings to the expirience of being at the gig. I mean you are challenging the whole perception of reality in your post. Just what is reality needs to be discussed but not on a let's butcher Keith Richards thread. He opened up a reality you people can fathom, he was on another level of consciousness when he wrote this music. He deserves some respect.
Quote
stone4everQuote
keefriff99
It's hilarious that people are still trying to blame smartphone videos, as if the technology is capable of magically inserting wrong chords or bum notes into the audio stream.
If anything, high-quality videos are more accurate than reports from people who were there and caught up in the moment. Many times, I've been at shows and been completely overwhelmed by the spectacle, only to go home and watch videos that people uploaded and think, "How did I miss THAT mistake??"
Well, it's because I was swept up in the magic of live music and wasn't trying to critique the performances.
And that's great...but don't claim that audience recordings are somehow skewing the performances. Smartphone technology is incredibly advanced now. What you hear is what ACTUALLY occurred, not what you perceived when you were in the crowd.
I think this is possibly the most inaccurate post I have ever witnessed on IORR. I have filmed so many concerts on the most up to date smart phone and it plays back inferior recordings to the expirience of being at the gig. I mean you are challenging the whole perception of reality in your post. Just what is reality needs to be discussed but not on a let's butcher Keith Richards thread. He opened up a reality you people can fathom, he was on another level of consciousness when he wrote this music. He deserves some respect.
There are high-quality videos of both concerts online where bum notes are being played left and right, and people are insisting that you can't trust these videos, that it sounded so much better when they were there, etc.Quote
stone4everQuote
keefriff99
It's hilarious that people are still trying to blame smartphone videos, as if the technology is capable of magically inserting wrong chords or bum notes into the audio stream.
If anything, high-quality videos are more accurate than reports from people who were there and caught up in the moment. Many times, I've been at shows and been completely overwhelmed by the spectacle, only to go home and watch videos that people uploaded and think, "How did I miss THAT mistake??"
Well, it's because I was swept up in the magic of live music and wasn't trying to critique the performances.
And that's great...but don't claim that audience recordings are somehow skewing the performances. Smartphone technology is incredibly advanced now. What you hear is what ACTUALLY occurred, not what you perceived when you were in the crowd.
I think this is possibly the most inaccurate post I have ever witnessed on IORR. I have filmed so many concerts on the most up to date smart phone and it plays back inferior recordings to the expirience of being at the gig. I mean you are challenging the whole perception of reality in your post. Just what is reality needs to be discussed but not on a let's butcher Keith Richards thread. He opened up a reality you people can fathom, he was on another level of consciousness when he wrote this music. He deserves some respect.
Quote
stonehearted
...despite the fact that Pete Townshend is still a monster on the guitar. Can still be the driving force of a 10-piece stage set-up recreation of his band.
Quote
maumau
yes finally we got there: reality is less real than a smartphone recording
god of whatever have mercy on us
No, but he didn't abuse himself into his 60s the way Keith did. He cleaned up RELATIVELY young and that saved some of his faculties.Quote
eradQuote
stonehearted
...despite the fact that Pete Townshend is still a monster on the guitar. Can still be the driving force of a 10-piece stage set-up recreation of his band.
What's also amazing is that Townshend is close to being deaf at this point.
He's no stranger to substance abuse as well.
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
maumau
yes finally we got there: reality is less real than a smartphone recording
god of whatever have mercy on us
Not to wax too metaphysical but I believe a smartphone recording is as accurate--and also as inaccurate--as any individual perception of what actually took place at an event.
How can two people have the same experience of a show? One of them views the event under entirely different circumstances from the other. One of them is drunk; one of them is not. One of them is standing and cheering in the midst of crazed Argentinians; one of them sitting in a group of restrained Danes. One of them has a headache; one of them does not. One of them has an obstructed view; one of them doesn't. One of them is in a peak speaker zone; for the other sound is slightly tinny or muffled. One of them has been listening to a lot of Shostakovich; the other has been on a heavy metal tear. One's daughter just left home for the first time; the other has a newborn baby waiting for her at home. One of them may be fearless and open to the universe; the other may be fearful and worried about the future.
There is no ONE experience of ANY event. In this light, is a cell phone recording any more or less accurate than one man's or one woman's experience at the gig?
Quote
maumauQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
maumau
yes finally we got there: reality is less real than a smartphone recording
god of whatever have mercy on us
Not to wax too metaphysical but I believe a smartphone recording is as accurate--and also as inaccurate--as any individual perception of what actually took place at an event.
How can two people have the same experience of a show? One of them views the event under entirely different circumstances from the other. One of them is drunk; one of them is not. One of them is standing and cheering in the midst of crazed Argentinians; one of them sitting in a group of restrained Danes. One of them has a headache; one of them does not. One of them has an obstructed view; one of them doesn't. One of them is in a peak speaker zone; for the other sound is slightly tinny or muffled. One of them has been listening to a lot of Shostakovich; the other has been on a heavy metal tear. One's daughter just left home for the first time; the other has a newborn baby waiting for her at home. One of them may be fearless and open to the universe; the other may be fearful and worried about the future.
There is no ONE experience of ANY event. In this light, is a cell phone recording any more or less accurate than one man's or one woman's experience at the gig?
I dare say you contradict yourself so that we agree your list of possible conditions of existence are all humans and that is what makes the whole experience of a concert something different from a smartphone recording which is far from absolute and objective for so many reasons already listed and more.
this is not to diminish its value. I do count on smartphone recordings to experience a concert if i cant be there. and it sure gives me an idea of the quality and a feel and it is a document albeit partial. so yes I am not arguing to say that keith blasted a perfect intro to BoB :-D or that he is the engine of the band as he once was..
just want to say that, as you demonstrate, to live a concert is on a completely different and fuller level
that's my take on that
Quote
wonderboy
Keith messed up the intro to BofB last time and is not playing well on the SFTD solo. You can see that on youtube or in person.
What is there to debate? There are certain things that are not subjective. His playing has slipped. Our reactions to that can be subjective.
If you don't mind, if you still enjoy the show for many good reasons, or admire him and the rest of them for carrying on (as I do), more power to you. As the song says, 'just as long as the guitar plays .... '
Quote
24FPS
For crying out loud, who doesn't know at this point that Keith's guitar playing has severely deteriorated? Or that Charlie has slowed considerably? Who is expecting them to be at the top of their game? That ended around 1999. As long as Keith doesn't screw up Jumpin' Jack Flash I think he can still get the tourists to shell out the big bucks. If you still got the money, and it gives you a thrill just to see them stand up there, go for it. The magic is over. Thank you, thank you, thank you Stones, Brian, Bill, Mick T., Keith, Charlie Mick J. and Ronnie for everything you've given us. You had about a good 30-year-run in the studio. Who does that? Not in Rock and Roll. Certainly not a group. And little nuggets you can still squeeze out, like Blue and Lonesome, is appreciated, but not expected. And if you can still find enough people to pay you millions a night, that's not on you.
Quote
Hairball
Well said keefriff99, and especially JMARKO for properly putting in to words what is a difficult subject for some - in fact it's a bit sad, sad, sad.
Quote
JMARKO
The original poster is spot on with his assessment.
When I went to see the Stones I went to enjoy their playing and listen to them.
What I have seen and heard on this tour is once again a downgrade from the previous tours:
1. Song tempos are still mid-tempo to slow on most numbers. While Charlie still seems to play well, the songs are obviously kept at a moderate tempo.
2. Keith is missing more notes, can't sustain riffs, drops out, comes in on/with wrong notes.
I think the tempos are slowed down specifically for Keith to be able to keep up. (And, sorry, but blaming it on technology is ludicrous - no phone or camera can create the inconsistencies in his playing - especially since many times you can see it with your eyes).
The choppiness of his playing results in most of the grooves being lost, the continuity of the guitar parts gets interrupted and thrown off. Great example are the solos in Sympathy. Sometimes he hits the first two - four notes and then the next thing you hear is some fumbled half/missed notes, a pause, then he tries to find his way back in. Plays another short lick, pause, pose and smile, flutter a couple of notes that may or may not hit or fit, are hopefully in key, repeat.
Similar with his rhythm playing. He hits some of the cords, misses or half plays others, loses his place, tries to find his way back.
I am plenty familiar with Keith's playing through the years - about leaving spaces, creating tension etc. That's not what he's doing anymore. His playing has deteriorated to the point where he can't build that necessary tension in the music. The misses and drop outs instead create confusion and a jarring, disjointed, incomplete feel. The first half of Midnight Rambler is often an example of this. It wanders and meanders all over the place. Keith comes in and out with riffs that are often misplaced or cut short.
Would I rather see a half-assed approximation of Midnight Rambler instead of not at all? That's not for me. I'm all for them growing, changing, and growing old gracefully. I just don't feel like that's what they are doing or what I am seeing/hearing.
I'm not comparing him to 72, 78, 81, or even 97-2002. I'm just listening to his playing. Sure, the Stones have always pushed the envelope, been a little sloppy, rough on the edges. Part of their great appeal. But he simply can't play the parts anymore.
For some people it is about the "experience" of seeing The Stones, and these kind of details don't matter and "yay Keith!" for even still just getting up there and performing. For me, it's about the music and listening to them play. But between the tempos, Keith playing, Mick's continued reliance on Bernard to fill him out - it sometimes feels like the entire show is an effort to protect Mick's voice, and the staid setlists I don't feel the passionate desire to see my favorite band live anymore.
J
(I do agree with some of the folks who have mentioned that Ronnie is playing well these days)
Quote
JMARKO
The original poster is spot on with his assessment.
When I went to see the Stones I went to enjoy their playing and listen to them.
What I have seen and heard on this tour is once again a downgrade from the previous tours:
1. Song tempos are still mid-tempo to slow on most numbers. While Charlie still seems to play well, the songs are obviously kept at a moderate tempo.
2. Keith is missing more notes, can't sustain riffs, drops out, comes in on/with wrong notes.
I think the tempos are slowed down specifically for Keith to be able to keep up. (And, sorry, but blaming it on technology is ludicrous - no phone or camera can create the inconsistencies in his playing - especially since many times you can see it with your eyes).
The choppiness of his playing results in most of the grooves being lost, the continuity of the guitar parts gets interrupted and thrown off. Great example are the solos in Sympathy. Sometimes he hits the first two - four notes and then the next thing you hear is some fumbled half/missed notes, a pause, then he tries to find his way back in. Plays another short lick, pause, pose and smile, flutter a couple of notes that may or may not hit or fit, are hopefully in key, repeat.
Similar with his rhythm playing. He hits some of the cords, misses or half plays others, loses his place, tries to find his way back.
I am plenty familiar with Keith's playing through the years - about leaving spaces, creating tension etc. That's not what he's doing anymore. His playing has deteriorated to the point where he can't build that necessary tension in the music. The misses and drop outs instead create confusion and a jarring, disjointed, incomplete feel. The first half of Midnight Rambler is often an example of this. It wanders and meanders all over the place. Keith comes in and out with riffs that are often misplaced or cut short.
Would I rather see a half-assed approximation of Midnight Rambler instead of not at all? That's not for me. I'm all for them growing, changing, and growing old gracefully. I just don't feel like that's what they are doing or what I am seeing/hearing.
I'm not comparing him to 72, 78, 81, or even 97-2002. I'm just listening to his playing. Sure, the Stones have always pushed the envelope, been a little sloppy, rough on the edges. Part of their great appeal. But he simply can't play the parts anymore.
For some people it is about the "experience" of seeing The Stones, and these kind of details don't matter and "yay Keith!" for even still just getting up there and performing. For me, it's about the music and listening to them play. But between the tempos, Keith playing, Mick's continued reliance on Bernard to fill him out - it sometimes feels like the entire show is an effort to protect Mick's voice, and the staid setlists I don't feel the passionate desire to see my favorite band live anymore.
J
(I do agree with some of the folks who have mentioned that Ronnie is playing well these days)
Quote
JMARKO
I don't feel the passionate desire to see my favorite band live anymore.
J