Nothing wrong with hoping/expecting it to sound great,Debra - but I think the word I used was 'definitive'. The live debut of this song has been expected, clamoured for and hyped up for so many years that I think some people's expectations were a bit high as a result

People are comparing it to the studio version and saying they shouldnt bother. I dont think thats a fair comparison to make for a first live performance that hasnt had all the wrinkles ironed out yet.

As camper said earlier, if we were that obsessed with comparing a live song to a great studio piece, then the band by definition should never have attempted to perform such pieces of studio musical perfection as Jumpin Jack Flash or Gimme Shelter.

A song doesnt have to live up to the original or even sound like it. If anything, its better (IMO) that the original is seen as a template to give the band something to work with as they develop and breathe new life into the song as a performance piece over the years. ("Midnight Rambler" being a case in point, or even the new 2005 version of "19th Nervous Breakdown")

Last night's performance was aimed at the 20,000 or so people in that venue, not for us to dissect based on a recoridng a member of the audience made (although Im glad that Drake did it!). Its hardly uncommon for the Stones not to nail a song the first time they play it. If youve heard some of the dodgy early performances of songs down the years, you'll see what I mean. If the internet had been around then, the band would probably have given up after reading the comments..lol

I'm delighted they finally played it and I hope they continue to do so and take a few more chances instead of playing it safe as they have done up to now.

I'd prefer them taking risks and having a few flaws over songs they can play in their sleep anytime

good points Gazza - but there are predecents for them nailing a debut - SG in Oakland '99. Even though I had every reason to believe they would disappoint me with this much-anticipated debut of one of my favorite Stones songs - I was absolutely stunned by it (there in person, of course). It not only exceeded my expectations - it BLEW AWAY the album version. So, it is possible....

some girls is not as difficult to play as sway for the most part

that's not the point - the Stones threw out the studio arrangement and came up with a new gem. and, who said Sway was difficult to play? Carla Olson's band absolutely blew away the Stones own studio version, IMO.

so far almost everyone has been bashing ronnie cause he cant play it , thats who

melillo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> some girls is not as difficult to play as sway for
> the most part

That's what I was gonna say, lol.

So I just listened to it...great audience recording, btw...it was COMPETENT. It wasn't earth-shattering, but I really do like it.

In some ways, it's near unrecognizable from the studio recording...and I don't necessarily mean that in a bad way. I don't expect Charlie to play frenzied drum fills like he did on the album, or Mick to screech way out of his range like on the album, and of course I don't expect Ronnie to hold a candle to MT's original solo on the album.

What matters to me is they gave it a shot. They're stretching and that's important. It sounded good to me, and if I had been there, I'm sure it would've sounded GREAT.

i haven't - I thought RW held up his end of the bargain - KR and MJ didn't fare so well, IMO.

i agree stones tod , i liked the effort from ronnie. and i like the version
its just a little to fast

you know - with technology we can actually slow the song down ourselves!

something the stones should think about

I am sick of hearing about and talking about this, but I just can't help myself. It's just this evil thread that has me in its Sway.

come on every one
the song finally got played, after all the setlist comments, and claiming that the band wasn't playing enough old gems, sway emerges and we find anything we can to pick it apart.
the new arangement, ron's solo, the tempo etc etc etc.

im just glad the song is being played. im sure live it has an effect all to its own that doesn't transfer from a huge stage, a huge PA system and thousands of fans onto a little computer file.

just hoping for it in toronto, i can only afford one stones show this year, and TO is it

Debra: You say that Mick and Charlie don't mess up songs? Have you heard Stray Cat Blues from Circus, Stockholm? Mick's totally out of it....
Have you heard Let's spend the nught together from Knebworth 75/76? Charlie uses like 3 minutes to get into the groove....
And my god, listen to Keith.... I was in MSG a couple of weeks ago and he completely screwed up the set by playing Satisfaction instead of Shattered, at Globen in Stockholm he started You got me rockin' instead of If you can't rock me, leaving Ronnie playing air-guitar for half a song, and not during all the club shows he was able to play Hand of fate right!

I think Roonie gets much too much bull from people who would love to see Taylor back in the band. Ronnie will never ever play like him, and I think that's the right thing to do.

Compare Lynyrd Skynyrd to the Stones. Skynyrds changed the whole guitar lineup, except for Rossington, several times, and all the guitarist play Kings, Collins and Gaines, solos exactly the same way they did. Note by note! It's terribly boring, and shows that they are just replicas of the inventors of the solos. They are not musicians, they are just people who are good in copying.

Ronnie has always put his mind to bringing his own style into the Stones. Just like Taylor did when he replaced Jones. They are true musicians!

It would be no problem at all for the Stones to replace Ronnie with some guy who could play the solos like Taylor did. There are thousands of bands who can actually copy every note the Stones have played. But do they sound like them? NO! Why? Because they don't play all the small mistakes and all the different ways that the Stones do. The Stones is a living band, developing all the time. Skynerd is dead and has been for two decades at least, along with a lot of other bands.

Ronnie, you're doing the right thing. That's exactly why Keith wants you by his side, and why Charlie and Mick added you and have kept you in the band!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-09-26 01:37 by Niklas.

canadian.sway Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> come on every one
> the song finally got played, after all the setlist
> comments, and claiming that the band wasn't
> playing enough old gems, sway emerges and we find
> anything we can to pick it apart.
> the new arangement, ron's solo, the tempo etc etc
> etc.
>
>

what's your point, exactly? this is what we do and why we're here.

Sway is great. The live version was the first trial and sounds good to me. All complaining on this board is luxury. Just bored guys waiting for some entertainment. First, they want to see Sway in the setlist and now, they want to have 1971 back.

When someone talks about the "good old times", the 70s, then you can read stories about the youth: A young band, a young audience. Everyone was stoned and drunk, there are almost no memories, but it was great. And now? Every detail is in memory, camera or bootleg and after comparing it with the original record you say: Well, I think there is a little mistake, isn't it?

What you need is a second hobby. It seems to me that you have got enough Rolling Stones. The only really problem is the ticket price. Maybe that is why somebody wants everything to be perfect...

I love the Stones. But the overall issue is their lack of desire. The Stones weren't into Sway. If you want to perform a song that every fan wants to hear, then practice it, perfect it, play your butt off and get the high musicians look for. Turning on the fans, & amazing them with a recreation of a true gem should be the high, not a bottle of vodka and a case of beer.

Mick did not put any effort into singing the song correctly. He sounds lazy, uninterested, and just waiting for the song ends. Remember those bad vocals from Stripped??? Come on, try a little harder, just as you did justice to Ray Charles, Ottis, and THSMLI from the last tour. He must have the same teacher as Shaggy; he works with such a small scale of notes.

Ronnie has no confidence. He has a disease, he's been ridiculed by his fellow band members, and if he reads these posts, has been asked to leave many times. Unfortunately, we will probably never get to see him perform his ass off, for an entire show. True, maybe EC should pop in and play more polished guitar solos on these old gems, rather than have them butchered by a not so professinal rhythm guitarist.

But as the musician from Stinky Fingers pointed out, my god at least practice and put out an effort! Mick's people probably saw the posts on the fan sites, and suggested they perform Sway. I think that's great. But Mick "the Leader" should have vetoed that idea if the song/Ronnie's solo sounded bad in the rehearsals. No excuses with these ticket prices averaging $300.

I don't believe in letting the STONES off the hook for being in their sixties or around along time. Jagger wants to be judged by todays audience and by todays standards. He's charging more than anyone ever in history for tix to a rock show, so they have to take the heat.

But...
This version of SWAY is very good. It's a working rock band for almost the first time on this tour trying out something new and dangerous. I like Ron's contribution. He's not Taylor. That's good. They could get Joe Satriani to come in and mimic him if they wanted to. This is the STONES 2005, bitch if you want ( and I do occasionally) but I'm more interested in them taking the chances and being willing to fall down than in them sticking to the warhorses. More SWAY guys, please!! Look at all the live versions of songs we thought we'd never hear (again if never) since the guys have been in their 50's (old men by most standards), MOONLIGHT MILE, SOME GIRLS, YOU GOT THE SILVER, SPIDER AND THE FLY, CAN'T YOU HEAR ME KNOCKING, SHE SMILED SWEETLY, SISTER MORPHINE, MEMORY MOTEL, and that's just off the top of my head.

Don't be deterred boys, play what you want!!

StonesTod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> good points Gazza - but there are predecents for
> them nailing a debut - SG in Oakland '99. Even
> though I had every reason to believe they would
> disappoint me with this much-anticipated debut of
> one of my favorite Stones songs - I was absolutely
> stunned by it (there in person, of course). It not
> only exceeded my expectations - it BLEW AWAY the
> album version. So, it is possible....


oh it sure is...I've seen a few great live debuts in person myself (Thru & Thru @ MSG in 2002, Moon Is Up @ Shepherds Bush in '99) plus a fabulous I Got The Blues at Hartford in '99 (only previously played at the Marquee show in '71)

(not to forget Keith's great renditions of Loch Lomond and Its A Long Way To Tipperary in Glasgow and Dublin respectively!)

Just emphasising that we cant always expect a masterpiece on a song's first public airing.

I havn't heard it yet.

But if Ronnie's work is as bad as some say......well for goodness sake don't make excuses for him, (or Mick or Charlie?)

Because they've had a week to rehearse and they are charging a lot of money.

Rehearsals are for sorting out the problems. They shouldn't be using live shows to rehearse songs at our great expense.

And is it true that Keith was not very audible? That would be even more of a shame - because it is the steady and assured rhythm guitar which is that songs basis. Would he not let Mick show him how it's done?!

poor immigrant Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't believe in letting the STONES off the hook
> for being in their sixties or around along time.
> Jagger wants to be judged by todays audience and
> by todays standards. He's charging more than
> anyone ever in history for tix to a rock show, so
> they have to take the heat.
>
> But...
> This version of SWAY is very good. It's a working
> rock band for almost the first time on this tour
> trying out something new and dangerous. I like
> Ron's contribution. He's not Taylor. That's good.
> They could get Joe Satriani to come in and mimic
> him if they wanted to. This is the STONES 2005,
> bitch if you want ( and I do occasionally) but I'm
> more interested in them taking the chances and
> being willing to fall down than in them sticking
> to the warhorses. More SWAY guys, please!! Look at
> all the live versions of songs we thought we'd
> never hear (again if never) since the guys have
> been in their 50's (old men by most standards),
> MOONLIGHT MILE, SOME GIRLS, YOU GOT THE SILVER,
> SPIDER AND THE FLY, CAN'T YOU HEAR ME KNOCKING,
> SHE SMILED SWEETLY, SISTER MORPHINE, MEMORY MOTEL,
> and that's just off the top of my head.
>
> Don't be deterred boys, play what you want!!

Well said...you've got the right idea.

All these comments based on an 'audience' recording? yikes!

Sway would be a difficult song for ANY band to make sound good live, let alone The Stones, just listen to it. It doesn't have a 'groove' it just kind of plods along. Which is probably why they speeded it up, AND, probably why they haven't played it live until now.

On the bright side, it was the songs 'first' time out, things can change if they keep it in the set-list. The thing about being in a band is that you 'know' in a very short time if a song is going to work live or not, the feeling just has to be there with ALL the members of the band, if it's not,...then you don't do it.

I would be VERY interested to know WHY they even tried the song. You at least have to give them credit for that.



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

For a first time effort it's a damn good job...if they continue to play it'll grow into a killer... all they've gotta do is ride the clutch a lil on the pace and extend the end...ya gotta love that chaotic racket around the 1.40 mark....but try not to dissect too much just let that noise pour on over ya...

Tip of my hat to you Drake for supplying...and nice intro ole son!!!

ROCKMAN

camper88 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Koen Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I'm sure he has technicians to tune his
> guitars.
> > But its very easy to play out of tune on a
> tuned
> > guitar by not applying the correct pressure
> on the
> > strings with your fingers. That's
> unfortunately
> > where Ronnie screws up a lot.
> >
>
>
> Perhaps I'm too much of a literalist, but that's
> not a guitar that's out of tune, that's misplaying
> the song (or note).

Isn't that what you meant, then? Maybe I misunderstood your original message...

StonesTod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> good points Gazza - but there are predecents for
> them nailing a debut - SG in Oakland '99. Even
> though I had every reason to believe they would
> disappoint me with this much-anticipated debut of
> one of my favorite Stones songs - I was absolutely
> stunned by it (there in person, of course). It not
> only exceeded my expectations - it BLEW AWAY the
> album version. So, it is possible....
I was there... you really need to lay off the crack pipe.
White girls just want to get @#$%& all night LOL

I heard it and thought that they need to do it a few more times. Jagger sounded impassione at first but stareted to rely on those BU vox more and more as song went on. The guitars...Ron did sound out of tune but this I know from experience: most times if you're there it all sounds completely different.
It would be nice to hear them find a way to deliver it live. Jagger is never going to recreate that vocal live today. He would have to find a whole new way to approach this song. And Ron IMO did just fine. It's live rock'n roll. Not really meant to be dissected on an mp3.
IMO it is really bad for one's personal serenity to get all fruited up about this..

We used to do Sway when I was in high school bands.
It's actually quite an easy song to play. Mind you, the rest of
the band were Stones freaks, too, so it was easy to find the groove to it.
I got lumbered with the solo, but I only copied 2 of Taylor's licks
from the record when we did it: the 2-note hammer-on's and the final 5-note lick
you hear at fade. The rest was up to me. It's only 2 chords.
THere's plenty of room to move. Maybe Ronnie was tying to copy Taylor
AND put his stamp on and got lost. Maybe he had guitar/amp problems.
Maybe he blew it. I've seen all 3. ALthough we played it for a while
and always loved the record, when we did it live, it never seemed
to go anywhere and ended up being quite boring to play...and perhaps listen to.
Perhaps that's why they've never done it intil now.
Plus a first-time, A#1 performance is very rare for anyone.
I would think after 3 or 4 more attempts and then if it doesn't work,
then scrap it. Luxury is a great example. Great (almost sublime) tune,
but never seemed to work live.

Completely agree with TOMK - Sway isn't that difficult to play....

I have tried to play it myself, after some practice it is very much possible....

Just one important thing - don't focus on trying to copy MT solo...

If you do so, then you don't focus on the song, you get lost, your solo becomes som misc masc or becomes a screwed up solo....

Play your own solo, and you will end up with an excellent solo, which in away is smililar to original, but still your own solo, maybe not as fluent as MT (if we have to bow our head to "God").....

This thread brings out all the themes that seem to recur on this board.
ACtually the original doesn't just 'plod along' - it SEEMS to, but it gathers momentum & tension throughout, (Charlie & Bill are masterful)'til the f*cking string section breaks the tension during MT's solo; Mick's vocal is personal, passionate, & with that perfect degree of knowing distance he brings to some of his best vocals of that era.
Did Mick play that chunky rhythm guitar on this version? If not, then neither original guitarist is playing it in 2005, as Keith provides only backing vocals for the classic original. I have not been as fixated on 'Sway' as being emblematic of all the classic songs the Stones are too lazy to bother playing live. (I love it, & love the Carla Olsson/MT version, tho she can't get close to Jagger's subtlety so it doesn't beat the original)
With greater familiarity, less anxiety perhaps, the band could nail this.

BOBM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I never liked Sway, but I'm glad everyone got
> their wish finally. People who were there thought
> Wood's solo was outstanding. Mathijs is too hung
> up on that overrated little hero, Mick Taylor.


RIGHT ON BOB!!!!

The people who are "educated" musicians, like Mathijs seems to be (He does, hands down, know quite a bit about guitar), has really lost something. They can't listen properly to the Stones anymore. I mean: They CAN, but they are way too focused on mistakes. I would NEVER go to a Rolling Stones concert that had no mistakes at all. It's not about playing correct. I bet they were out of tune at the Richmond Station Hotel back in the early sixties too at times. But that's the holy grail. We can't touch that. Sure they have played sloppy and bad sometimes during their career. Who cares? It's all about feeling. And if you look past that, sure you can say that they did some mistakes. But it's not the point. It never were.

JumpingKentFlash



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-09-26 11:25 by JumpingKentFlash.

Well I've really had enough of the so-called educated musicians...