i know that setlist posts are a dime a dozen here. i have my preferences, just as all of you do, for how they could be better.
but..............

in all honesty
1) the set does cover a good part of their career
2) is designed for a huge entertainment styled show, for the mass majority of ticket buyers who really want to see the hits
3) is great for a first time stones show go-er


1) really, with 2,3 or 4 new songs each night, the new album is getting some rotation, so are some of the disco-ish songs- miss you, shes so cold. new-er songs even if they are repeated too often are getting played ie- the worst, you got me rocking, out of control. a few 60s tunes are getting rotation ie paint it black, get off my cloud, 19th nervous breakdown, satisfaction and the 70s, especially sticky fingers are being well represented. unless you are an 80's fan, you are getting a wide range of tunes from the career.

2) sure the warhorses are around, but in all honesty, the reason is they are some of the biggest rock hits of all time, and do get the biggest reaction live. when i saw the stones in toronto, there was a 50 year old guy in front of me, who brought his wife and kids, when satisfaction got played on the b-stage, this man came alive and he and his wife looked ageless, dancing around having the time of their lives. i felt so good to see how happy this guy was, for his sake alone i was happy satisfaction was played, let alone it was one of the top three songs of the night. if you are an 'average' or 'casual' stones fan (which none of us are) the set is made for you, and really, so is the show. which one of us requires the huge stage to enjoy the stones? the stage/ lights/ setlist is for the casual fans, for whom the music alone may not be enough.

3) sure, its cool to see how on the licks tour the set changed sometimes rather drastically from night to night, and i agree the set is repeating itself. but, really, the setlist i saw in toronto was fine for someone like me. i have only seen the stones twice now, and the setlist was overall quite different from the first time i saw them on the licks tour. i got out on control, instead of midnight rambler, dead flowers instead of angie, a few new tunes instead of shattered etc. so between those two shows i have seen quite a variety of stones tunes. for a young fan like me, the set really does give you access to a lot of songs.
and really... unless you planned going to more than one show, i do feel the tour's setlists are fine. no offence to those who get to enjoy the stones more than once on this tour, but really, if it is a one off thing, the set is fine.

and when it all comes down to it....
forget the set, its how they play them live

im not a huge dead flowers fan listening to sticky fingers, but it was probably the best song all night in toronto. where as, i am a huge bitch fan, and it was not a highlight of the night.
its how they play the songs, not which ones they play.

as i have said before, it may not 'look' good just to see that the same songs were played, sitting at our computers, doing arm chair reviews, but live, mere words mean nothing.

ok, this has been long winded enough

Tampa:
5 from the 00s
3 from the 90s
2 from the 80s
6 from the 70s
4 from the 60s (all clustered at the end)

Yes I'd like around 5 or 6 new ones (plus a new cover) rather than 4, & maybe 1 or 2 fewer warhorses, but they play these generally with a lot of energy & conviction.




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-10-20 19:15 by john r.