Quote
jumpontopofmebaby
So. I have to ask. 19 songs ?

I know, right? Sooooo disappointing. Hell I was kinda bummed with 20...

Wow.

They're on cruise control.

It's done.

Lofl.

Ok. I'm trying to figure out what exactly happened before the show started. BV told us earlier that the show was going to start about a half hour late. This is what is posted on Rolling Stones Brazil: "The concert started a little after the deal, and it seems that Keith Richards took the schedule situation seriously, forgetting the band's announcement and entering the stage with "Street fighting man". despite this, the band managed to meet And the show went on with no bigger problems." It sounds like Keith went on stage at the originally scheduled time and started Street Fighting Man. lol.

Quote
Green Lady

Appears the twins have added their own signatures.

I thought Keith was really loud and locked in tonight. Rambler was exceptional. Mick his usual super human self. Charlie smiling a lot and really tight on the skins. Ronnie having a blast and slashing as well as ever. Excellent show.

Come on Levi's stadium... We have 4 in sec. 135 isle row 13, however now I'm thinking not good enough. Any idea's out there??? Maybe try to upgrade to sec 138??? Would love to be on field but we have a 12/15 year old's so with all the F'N phones in the air I'm thinking seats on the side? Maybe try customer service just before showtime???

Quote
StonedAsiaExile

Quote
Green Lady

Appears the twins have added their own signatures.

Live action footage of it's creation
[twitter.com]

Just got back to the hotel. My 3rd show this tour, I went to DC and Boston. Had tickets to PIT 1. Tonight They were tight. Opening band very good. As stated before, not intro “welcome the RS”. SFM opener was good. Ecstatic to hear Monkey Man! Play with Fire and Sweet Virginia great acoustic sets. Keith started playing on HTW before the cowbell. RAMBLER was the highlight. 10 out of 10. Slipping away and BTMMR sounded great. I do wish they would consistently play 20 songs but I am not complaining. If a 10 is perfect, this show was a 9.

Boy,good thing the raconteurs weren’t in town The Stones would’ve been in big trouble-LOL!!

It makes no sense - I’ve been seeing this band live since 1975 and I can’t remember them playing any better than this.
The 70s shows would jump up and down from breathtaking to “ouch,I partied pretty hard last night too guys but..damn.”
But this reminds me of a sweet spot they hit at times during Voodoo and again on No Security.
You’re seeing it,you’re hearing it but everything you have says it shouldn’t be so.
I was in New Orleans and I’m jumping back on this tour somewhere,it reminds me of Pulp Fiction when Samuel L Jackson says “I don’t care what you say, this was a damn miracle”

Just got back, really good night. Better than both Zip Code shows I saw, up there with 2013.

Gaslightstreet - Are you serious cruise control? The band is playing great. I don't like 19 songs but that is my only complaint.

3rd show of my tour, Chicago 1-2 and Jax was the best so far. Rambler was epic, but really, I enjoyed every song. Very tight, they sounded great. Can’t wait for Seattle

Quote
MisterDDDD

Quote
StonedAsiaExile

Quote
Green Lady

Appears the twins have added their own signatures.

Live action footage of it's creation
[twitter.com]

I thought Green Lady was talking about the Glimmer Twins, now it all makes sense.

Official Setlist Jacksonville 19-Jul-2019:

"Well I hope we're not too messianic, Or a trifle too satanic, But we love to play the blues... Thanks so much Jacksonville!"


[Twitter.com] · [www.Facebook.com] · [www.Instagram.com] · Large version

Ronnie Wood Is a Pussy !

Down to 19 songs. Would it kill them to add a third acoustic song on the small stage? That acoustic set is already too short and its placement in the show feels odd.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-07-20 18:39 by TornAndFried.

Quote
TornAndFried
Down to 19 songs. Would it kill them to add a third acoustic song on the small stage? That acoustic set is already too short and it's placement in the show feels odd.

Would it kill them?
Would it kill you to get from 75+ men ONE song less?
Which means for them to save energy.
How old are you?
May be 75 and still performing 2.15 hours live on stage twice a week.
If yes you have all my respect.

Quote
caschimann

Quote
TornAndFried
Down to 19 songs. Would it kill them to add a third acoustic song on the small stage? That acoustic set is already too short and it's placement in the show feels odd.

Would it kill them?
Would it kill you to get from 75+ men ONE song less?
Which means for them to save energy.
How old are you?
May be 75 and still performing 2.15 hours live on stage twice a week.
If yes you have all my respect.

Paul McCartney is older than both Mick and Keith (and granted he doesn't run around the stage) and he plays a nearly 3 hour show with over 30 songs. The Stones take 3 to 5 days off between shows these days. I'm pretty sure they have the energy to play another song or two. Especially if they do an acoustic ballad. They can sit down if they want.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2019-07-20 13:25 by TornAndFried.

So Brown Sugar got a new place in the setlist.

Quote
MacLaurens
So Brown Sugar got a new place in the setlist.

Yes, and I think having Gimme Shelter earlier instead of as part of the encore worked well.

Quote
TornAndFried

Quote
caschimann

Quote
TornAndFried
Down to 19 songs. Would it kill them to add a third acoustic song on the small stage? That acoustic set is already too short and it's placement in the show feels odd.

Would it kill them?
Would it kill you to get from 75+ men ONE song less?
Which means for them to save energy.
How old are you?
May be 75 and still performing 2.15 hours live on stage twice a week.
If yes you have all my respect.

Paul McCartney is older than both Mick and Keith and granted he doesn't run around the stage but he plays a nearly 3 hour show with over 30 songs. The Stones take 3 to 5 days off between shows these days. I'm pretty sure they have the energy to play another song or two. Especially if they do an acoustic ballad.

True, but his musicians are not in the mid seventies.
The drummer is around 50 y.o.

Quote
caschimann

Quote
TornAndFried
Down to 19 songs. Would it kill them to add a third acoustic song on the small stage? That acoustic set is already too short and it's placement in the show feels odd.

Would it kill them?
Would it kill you to get from 75+ men ONE song less?
Which means for them to save energy.
How old are you?
May be 75 and still performing 2.15 hours live on stage twice a week.
If yes you have all my respect.

Geez...this response seems a bit aggro?

T&F's comments are totally reasonable (it won't kill them) and everybody should stop throwing out the "they're 75" argument as some blind-defense of every critique of the Stones...

Sure...they're old...but, the Stones CHOSE to go on tour, nobody made them. The Stones chose to maintain the High Energy Rock n' Roll Act....nobody made them. If they can't handle 1 more acoustic song, then maybe they ARE too old? Or maybe they should change some of the act (keep reading)?

1 more sit-down acoustic song is not an unreasonably tall request and I think his point about "only 2-acoustic songs & odd placement" are excellent points.

I believe 3 acoustic songs would work much better.

however, to YOUR point: IF 19 is the maximum they can handle at 75, I'd still like 1 more acoustic song...they can dump IORR, Miss You or TD any night of the week and replace it w/ No Expectations....heck, they can dump all three of those "rockers" and give me 2 more acoustic songs and an 18 song set.

if they are too tired to do 20 songs...then just do an acoustic tour. I'm fine w/ that...in fact, I would love it.

but, for now I'll just hope that NY gets 20 songs and something special like 3-acoustic tunes.

not holding my breath, though....hearing "Heartbreaker" is my "this might actually happen" request.

I fell asleep and missed it all after following all the build up! Knackered after a week at work. Never mind, it sounds like another great show.

Quote
mtaylor

Quote
TornAndFried

Quote
caschimann

Quote
TornAndFried
Down to 19 songs. Would it kill them to add a third acoustic song on the small stage? That acoustic set is already too short and it's placement in the show feels odd.

Would it kill them?
Would it kill you to get from 75+ men ONE song less?
Which means for them to save energy.
How old are you?
May be 75 and still performing 2.15 hours live on stage twice a week.
If yes you have all my respect.

Paul McCartney is older than both Mick and Keith and granted he doesn't run around the stage but he plays a nearly 3 hour show with over 30 songs. The Stones take 3 to 5 days off between shows these days. I'm pretty sure they have the energy to play another song or two. Especially if they do an acoustic ballad.

True, but his musicians are not in the mid seventies.
The drummer is around 50 y.o.

I don't understand this "age" argument....are people saying the Stones are too old to do a longer set by 1 or 2 songs? Really?

one or two more acoustic songs would be too much for them?

I'm not buying either of those arguments.

Personally, I think the Stones are locked-in to their routine and have been for a long time (which is fine w/ me)....they make a few changes here and there, but basically they have a routine and stick to it....they see no reason to change radically, which is their decision and I respect it.

I'm not a Rolling Stone, so my opinion means nothing...but, I wish they would mix it up more...or just play acoustic concerts if they are "too old" for the Dog & Pony Show.

...or add a short intermission in the middle if they get tired - go backstage, get some oxygen, take a quick break...Pearl Jam does that and nobody complains.

Photos by Bob Self/The Florida Times-Union: