I am of course referring to the set list.Why are we still getting songs like miss you,iorr,Tumbling dice,brown sugar,satisfaction etc?Surely they have been flogged to death.Is it because they want to please the majority or because they are lazy?I am becoming cynical.The venues they are currently playing are mainly smaller ones.Does this not suggest that a smaller audience are more likely to be hardcore fans,rather than a football stadium with 50,000 or so fans who are screaming for satisfaction.I think many fans who are catching the current US tour,are diehards and they want unplayed stuff from the back catalogue plus more new stuff from the classic new disc.I was lucky to see the recent shows in Boston and Hartford,and chatting to fans at the gigs the concensus seemed to be exactly that.You only have to go to the car park before the shows,and listen to the stuff coming from the car stereos.
So once again a plea dig out the stuff us hard working diehard fans want to hear.Sway,Time waits for no one,Winter,Fool to cry,Let me down slow.....you do the rest.Because there comes a time when even us hardcore fans aint getting any satisfaction anymore.

PS For me A Bigger Bang blew Exile into the dust.A classic 5 star album.

Jagger seems to be afraid of taking risks, with the club shows from the LL tour as an exception. In addition to that I think Keith and Ron and technically not good enough anymore to play songs they hardly do without rehearsing them thoroughly.
At MSG this week they only played three songs from ABB, a shame, although I don't think it is a 5 star album at all (3,5 - not significantly better than VL or Bt.

stargroover, did you enjoy the 'two' shows you saw? I for one cannot afford any shows this tour, you are lucky.

I ain't stupid, I'm just guitarded.

stargroover, the only reason is that the Stones are performing for the big audiences, not for a few fans. And do you know something? They do very well! God...Who says that even a huge number of fans don't love hearing JJF or Brown Sugar anymore? Who can prove that? I remember a poll on Keno's board - which is visited by hardcore fans, of course- two months ago: "Do you want to hear Satisfaction on the tour?". The answer was 72% "yes". Do you remember Olympia from Forty FlicKs? Into the crowd there was a placard demanding "Paint It Black"! Even in a so small venue...

We need a balance and i think in general terms we have it. Four new songs, two new covers, 7-8 warhorses (out of 10-12), some songs rarely played on previous tour and stuff that "represents" all the dacades. What exactly is so wrong? Do you want a concert without JJF? I don't...

kees wrote: "Jagger seems to be afraid of taking risks, with the club shows from the LL tour as an exception. In addition to that I think Keith and Ron are technically not good enough anymore to play songs they hardly do without rehearsing them thoroughly".
Don't underrate so much the Stones. Of course, during LL tour they did something like "unofficial" rehearsing in clubs. And now they play "Heartbreaker" much better than they did in Olympia. Kees, from your criterions and thoughts we must infer that Keith and Ronnie "technically" are much better today than they were in 1981/82 (who knows, maybe they are wiser...). Do you know why? Because on the whole 1981/82 tour the Stones played only 33 different songs, but after just the 9th concert of ABB tour they have performed already 30 different songs!

Nagging, nagging, nagging...

Nagging is perfectly fine. I was almost offened by the lack of a good set list in Boston. You can't compare the 81 tour because they did a bunch of new songs and even the hits they did were ones they hadn't done in years like Under My Thumb. And to top that off they played a bunch of songs from their previous two albums. They have way too many hits that would please all fans, they don't need to just play You Got Me Rocking, Miss You, TD and so on. Now I find myself trying to defend the Stones when my friends bust my balls about the shitty set list.

How hard would it be to replace TD with PIB or Get off My Cloud every once in a while.

I have seen the Stones 30 times and I don't think I will ever go again unless circumstances change. I know several others that feel that same way.

what's better to hear-a warhorse that sounds awesome or an obscure cut that sounds shitty? Wehn they played Moonlight Mile on the No Security tour, I thought it was pretty half assed. Judging by the crowd reaction, I wasn't alone. I think Sway is one they could pull off.

Didn't say anything about obscure songs, just meant all the hits that they treat as obscurities...

Get Off My Cloud
Mother's Little Helper
Under My Thumb
Let Spend the Night Together
Heart of Stone
19th Nervous Breakdown
As Tears Go By
The Last Time

Any of these songs can be played and everyone would know them. They even make songs like Paint It Black and Ruby Tuesday seem obscure because they are not play on every tour or mixed into the set list like say You Got Me Rocking.

Wouldn't mind hearing 2000 light years minus the psychedelic effects.

good point j-j- flash. The songs they play need to be switched around with some of your choices.

I could go on and on as well if you want to add songs like She Was Hot, Dance Little Sister, Hang Fire or like mentioned 2,000 Lights Years, which is a little more obscure than some of the others.

Imagine if they broke down 2,000 as a blues tune.

J-J-Flash

Of course i can compare the 81 tour. In the 1981 the Stones had already written 200 or more "diamonds" but played only 33 different songs. Does that mean "the same list every night", or not? That's my point.

You say : "they did a bunch of new songs and even the hits they did were ones they hadn't done in years like Under My Thumb".

That's right. But look at the lists of ABB tour. Shattered, She So Cold, Heartbreaker, Beast Of Burden, even Ruby Tuesdy... How many times they had been played on previous tours?

You say: "And to top that off they played a bunch of songs from their previous two albums"

They were playing 6 songs from Tattoo You, 2 from Emotional Rescue (not every night performed) and 4 from Some Girls. But it was Some Girls, the most succesful studio release of the Stones ever (9 million copies sold worlwide). Do you think now would be a good idea to play about 12 songs out of 21 from the ABB, B2B, and VL? I don't...
In 1981 they were playing nine songs from sixties. HTW, JJF,SFM, Satisfaction, YCAGWYW, Let It Bleed, Let's Spend The Night Together, Time Is On My Side, Under My Thumb (and TD, Brown Sugar, of course). So the old classic stuff were always present...

If "nagging is perfectly fine", the naggers must decide... Do you want much more new stuff, or much more old "diamonds" like Midnight Rambler, CYHMK, or Sway? Do you want to see PIB (already played two times) replacing TD or another song EVERY NIGHT, or after that you will nagg that "the lists are not changing"? Personaly i hate Miss You since 1978, i don't like so much YGMR (i love I Go Wild!), but have you noticed that a huge part of the audiences like both?

PS: J-J-Flash, also in 1989/90 tour the Stones played only 37 different songs without performing a lot of stuff from Dirty Work and Undercover. So, find adding arguments...

stickydion ,
My point is that they wouldn't need to mix it up as much if they had a better set list.

"Shattered, She So Cold, Heartbreaker, Beast Of Burden, even Ruby Tuesdy"

With the exception of She's So Cold, they played all of these songs on Licks and I saw each of them a few times in only 5 shows that I went to. And they have played these songs at almost every tour since 1989, maybe not every night but very often.

You say 6 songs from Tattoo You, that is great. A big reason why they should play more from Bigger Bang, because they have a great album to promote while touring. Do more than 3 or 4 songs from the new album since its gotten such great reviews.

And I realize that old stuff was always present, that is not my point either Compare that tour to now and they practically ignore pre-1968, with exception of Satisfaction and an ocasional treat of Ruby Tuesday or Paint it Black.

So yes everyone would like to see a little rotation in the set list but if that is not going to happen at least make the set list interesting instead of playing IORR as an encore instead of the opener or playing You Got Me Rocking for the 10th straight tour. They have way too many great songs (not obscurities, hits as well) to play the same canned set list tour after tour.

"PS: J-J-Flash, also in 1989/90 tour the Stones played only 37 different songs without performing a lot of stuff from Dirty Work and Undercover. So, find adding arguments..."

Again this tour was much different then what they did in the past. We got to hear plenty of new songs then gems like 2,000 Light Years, Play With Fire, Harleum Shuffle, One Hit, Undercover, Dead Flowers, Salt of the Earth, Little Red Rooster, PIB and on and on.

All which were either never played or not played in at least 15 years. There is only one song I can say that about this tour, She's so Cold. When Mick says we will do undone numbers, songs we have not played in many years and dig into the catelog a bit. Then you get your hopes up for a little more than what we have gotten. Plain and simple.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-09-16 18:53 by J-J-Flash.

"With the exception of She's So Cold, they played all of these songs on Licks"

How many times, J-J-Flash?

Out of Control once, Shattered 4 times, Heartbraker 4, Beast of Burden 4, Ruby Tuesday 4, the Worst 6. Also, PIB 15, Miss You 18, All Down the Line 26. During Licks Tour the did 117 concerts...

"And they have played these songs at almost every tour since 1989, maybe not every night but very often".

You have right only about Miss You. Ruby Tuesday and PIB were stable in the 1989/90 lists, not later. Worst only in 1994/95, Out Of Control only in 1997/98. So...

We have two subjects here. (a) if they are playing unusual songs (b) if they are playing more different songs. About the first one we can discuss, agree or disagree. But about the second one the things are clear: During the previous tours and on ABB tour the lists have much more variety than in 1981/82 and 1989/90. Come on, J-J-F, only 33 or 37 different songs mean the same list every night. Now we have some changes. I think we can recognize ATLEAST that.

I hear what you are saying about the amount of different songs played during the tours but what I am saying is although it may have been a more steady set list back then it was far better and seemed to include a much better variety. They also were not expected or did not state back then that they would try new things at different venues. Maybe we got spoiled from the Licks tour but the band went on to say they loved mixing it up and it kept them fresh. So maybe it was just hopeful thinking that they would continue. I just don't see how they can play to death a song like You Got Me Rocking then ignore some of their biggest hits from the 60's and throw us a treat here and there.

Every show I saw them play in the 90's (24) they played Paint it Black and I would never bitch about that because its a great song, however think about this, their most well known greatest hits compilation is probably Hot Rocks and more than half of those songs would be pretty big surprises if they ever played them live. Yet those are some of the band's biggest hits. I just think they are clueless sometimes and pretty much contradict themselves when they say they don't want to be an oldies act and go out and play the same old songs every night.. And I get frustrated because they have more hits songs to choose from then any band.

I think that, as Stones fans, we are pretty spoiled. I saw John Mellencamp and Joh Fogerty at the Hollywod Bowl, and they hve played the EXACT same setlist the entire tour. They did not add change one song or even switch the order of songs. It seems rare for any bug band to play with their set list at all. The Stones setlists are far more variable than other artists.