Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
The Sicilian

Quote
StonedRambler

Quote
Chris Fountain

Quote
Irix

Quote
Chris Fountain

Where is the S referred?

Here in this thread: [iorr.org] .

So maybe the setlist could look a bit like that:
Brown Sugar
IORR
TD
Ride em on down/just your fool
?
?
?
YCAGWYW
HTW
KR1
KR2
SFTD
MY
MR
PIB
SMU
JJF
---
GS
S

I would leave the stadium in tears if that was the setlist. My brother passed on the Stones this tour and paid $800 for two floor seats to Paul McCartney's show in Las Vegas. The first show of his mini tour is this Saturday in Petco Park San Diego. We'll see which show is the better value.

Is it because you truly have expectations of a different set list? That's a tall order. Everyone knows they're only going to do at least 2 different songs, the rest will be the nostalgic hits show.

I'm always hopeful, but have low expectations. I'd like to think the Stones will someday have an epiphany moment and actually put on a magnificent show but then reality sets in. I can only take so much of how great this or that sounded for the 100th time in the last few years.

Quote
The Sicilian

Quote
StonedRambler

Quote
Chris Fountain

Quote
Irix

Quote
Chris Fountain

Where is the S referred?

Here in this thread: [iorr.org] .

Thanks - It's good to read that they are playing well. However, songs rehearsed or seen were not new as Keith indicated they would do in an article posted several days ago.

The Rocks Off post said they were invited to come in after Midnight Rambler and PIB. Then they were playing "SMU, JJF, GS & S". So this seems to be the second half of the final setlist (after Keiths set). The rare songs are normally played in the first set. What's really interesting is that Brown Sugar was not played in the second set but Paint It Black instead. Maybe this means Brown Sugar could be the opener?
So maybe the setlist could look a bit like that:
Brown Sugar
IORR
TD
Ride em on down/just your fool
?
?
?
YCAGWYW
HTW
KR1
KR2
SFTD
MY
MR
PIB
SMU
JJF
---
GS
S

I would leave the stadium in tears if that was the setlist. My brother passed on the Stones this tour and paid $800 for two floor seats to Paul McCartney's show in Las Vegas. The first show of his mini tour is this Saturday in Petco Park San Diego. We'll see which show is the better value.

Quote
TornAndFried

Paul McCartney's show is hands down a better value. He plays 30-34 songs over 3+ hours (without an intermission) and plays at least 20 Beatles songs each night...both hits and album cuts. He changes his setlist just enough on each tour to keep it interesting and he is always "on." His band is excellent too. Looking forward to seeing him again soon.

Quote
Stoneage
Sorry Dandy, but it's two different sentences. The first sentence there reflects to the sentence before that. Do you read me?

Quote
Stoneage
So, Macca's voice is gone? What about auto-tune or voice-back then? Like Madonna. Sir Michael's voice is a faint echo of a past glory also. But I'm the only one who has noticed that...

Quote
Spud

Quote
Stoneage
So, Macca's voice is gone? What about auto-tune or voice-back then? Like Madonna. Sir Michael's voice is a faint echo of a past glory also. But I'm the only one who has noticed that...

Mick probably sings more today than at many other times in the band's history.


If he'd persisted with that fierce bellowing and hollarin' that typified the 7Os and early 80s, he'd have no voice at all by now !

Quote
Spud
I don't think any of us would argue that Micks's voice hasn't changed...

We know that he's had stress issues with it on the road from time to time and needs to look after it.

That said , his voice has not changed or deteriorated to the point where it has severely affected his range or compromised his intonation.

It still does the job admirably !

[ I'm impressed that he can still reach and pitch the falsetto stuff too .
I'm about 15 years younger and I'm certainly starting to struggle with the high notes. ]

Quote
dennycranium
Everyone, we are NOT going to get deep album cuts. If we get one at all consider yourself lucky.
They will play 20 to 21 songs like they've done the past few years.
I'll bet 95% plus of crowd are casual fans. They like or love the Stones but aren't "purists" like we claim to be.
95% of the crowd will most likely "yawn" at Lady Jane or something similar.
Clap very politely at the end and wonder when HTW will start.
Case in point:
In April 1998 me and 25 other people in a group saw the tour closer in Toronto. ( A rescheduled date)
The Stones played Faraway Eyes. Me and my purist friend high fived each other when they played it.
On the bus, on the way home, 20 of our group went- "what was with the country song? Never heard it before?" Most people didn't like the song.
Me and my buddy loved it. 20+ others hated it or didn't know it.
21 years later? Probably same result.
I haven't seen the Stones since 2005.
So looking forward tohearing SMU, BS, JJF, Sympathy, PIB and so on. They're old friends, now
If my wife (her first show) hear Emotional Rescue? We'll be over the moon.

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
Spud
I don't think any of us would argue that Micks's voice hasn't changed...

We know that he's had stress issues with it on the road from time to time and needs to look after it.

That said , his voice has not changed or deteriorated to the point where it has severely affected his range or compromised his intonation.

It still does the job admirably !

[ I'm impressed that he can still reach and pitch the falsetto stuff too .
I'm about 15 years younger and I'm certainly starting to struggle with the high notes. ]

but mick most songs has a 1 octave range which for a singer is not that good or hard to screw up. only is his falsetto does he get out of that range. he practically talks the songs now

Quote
Stoneage

Quote
Spud

Quote
Stoneage
So, Macca's voice is gone? What about auto-tune or voice-back then? Like Madonna. Sir Michael's voice is a faint echo of a past glory also. But I'm the only one who has noticed that...

Mick probably sings more today than at many other times in the band's history.


If he'd persisted with that fierce bellowing and hollarin' that typified the 7Os and early 80s, he'd have no voice at all by now !

The difference is that in the late 70's he could manhandle the voice live. In the punk era that seemed to be norm almost. Still he would sound good on records (in the old days when they still made records...). Something happened to his voice in the late 90's though. I don't know what it is - maybe a virus on his vocal cords? His voice sunk several octaves and broke up more easily. Even in his speaking voice he often sounds as if he has a cold. Here is a British comedian demonstrating how Jagger's voice can change in only one sentence (0:42):
[www.youtube.com]

Quote
Winning Ugly VXII

Quote
dennycranium
Everyone, we are NOT going to get deep album cuts. If we get one at all consider yourself lucky.
They will play 20 to 21 songs like they've done the past few years.
I'll bet 95% plus of crowd are casual fans. They like or love the Stones but aren't "purists" like we claim to be.
95% of the crowd will most likely "yawn" at Lady Jane or something similar.
Clap very politely at the end and wonder when HTW will start.
Case in point:
In April 1998 me and 25 other people in a group saw the tour closer in Toronto. ( A rescheduled date)
The Stones played Faraway Eyes. Me and my purist friend high fived each other when they played it.
On the bus, on the way home, 20 of our group went- "what was with the country song? Never heard it before?" Most people didn't like the song.
Me and my buddy loved it. 20+ others hated it or didn't know it.
21 years later? Probably same result.
I haven't seen the Stones since 2005.
So looking forward tohearing SMU, BS, JJF, Sympathy, PIB and so on. They're old friends, now
If my wife (her first show) hear Emotional Rescue? We'll be over the moon.

They didn't play "Far Away Eyes" in Toronto 1998.

I don't even think that they played it at all in 1998. Performed in 1994,1995,1997,2002,2006 etc. but definitely not in Toronto 1998.

Besides,the point is that they have plenty of songs from greatest hits albums which they never play or rarely play. It doesn't need to be the same 12 every time. It doesn't NEED to be a real deep album blues or country song either ..... to provide variety.

Quote

The difference is that in the late 70's he could manhandle the voice live.

Quote
keithsman

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
Spud
I don't think any of us would argue that Micks's voice hasn't changed...

We know that he's had stress issues with it on the road from time to time and needs to look after it.

That said , his voice has not changed or deteriorated to the point where it has severely affected his range or compromised his intonation.

It still does the job admirably !

[ I'm impressed that he can still reach and pitch the falsetto stuff too .
I'm about 15 years younger and I'm certainly starting to struggle with the high notes. ]

but mick most songs has a 1 octave range which for a singer is not that good or hard to screw up. only is his falsetto does he get out of that range. he practically talks the songs now

I remember a Michael Jackson interview around the time he did some tracks with Mick, State Of Shock etc, Micheal and the sound engineers could not believe how flat Micks voice was, he said they had a job tweaking it to sound passable.