I loved them live, from the beginning through 1999. Then it got to be slower, and the same old same old. That being said, I loved hearing them live. Yes, some songs didn't work, but others came alive on stage, like 'If You Can't Rock Me', and 'Dancing with Mr. D.' I guess I could still listen to them live just to hear the magnificent blues opera of 'Midnight Rambler'

I really liked the recent BBC release. Brian Jones almost seems to play the same arrangement for every song. But there is an electric version of 'I Can't Be Satisfied' that really sounds different.

Mick Taylor brought a soaring to the music that was never quite captured in studio. I want more the '73 Tour, when the band was at its live apex.

Some studio versions don't even exist live. They've never really played Jumping Jack Flash like they did on record. Same with Street Fighting Man. Both songs work great either way.

Quote
24FPS
...
Some studio versions don't even exist live. They've never really played Jumping Jack Flash like they did on record. Same with Street Fighting Man. Both songs work great either way.

Closest they got to doing SFM like the record was arguably that Stripped version when Keith tried the acoustic.

The result was a kind of hybrid feel between the original and the modern stage version.

JJF is one of the main reasons I started this thread. I was watching some clips of the last tour and couldn't get my head around how flat out terrible JJF is live. It's just so off, completely lacking the tempo and feel of the original and has to be the worst song for Jagger to sing live - he just can't catch that song at all. It gets away from him every time. Likewise, the guitars are almost always out of time, clunking all over the place, like it's the first time they're ever rehearsing it. I don't consider that to be "gloriously sloppy magic" it's just a complete inability to play one of their key songs live.

On record JJF is so distinctive, timeless and never gets old. Live, an utter mess, every single time.

GLS wrote: "Whatever. I read what you said, it still didn't have any weight to it."

Yes it did because radiohead and n.c are still student muzak and if someone thinks about them as being the bees knees then I am not surprised they don't get the Stones, ESPECIALLY live. What's so hard to understand?

Guess using the phrases "whatever" and "jerk", well, now I understand why you can't comprehend what I am saying. We do have the eternal right to slag off any band on this forum. However we do not call each other names, it ain't fair.

Have a good day Sir

WAY wrote:
"On record JJF is so distinctive, timeless and never gets old. Live, an utter mess, every single time."

The Stones are an organic band, think about you stand there being Keith or whoever. ready to go on stage, 50 k in the audience and your adrenaline pumping, you gonna approach the song differently especially as you played it in E-tuning and now you've changed to G at the 4th, etc etc. No click tracks, just adrenaline and in the old days your liquor of choice + colombian marching powder, the song is gonna come out different.

I can relate as I play guitar in a band myself and the demos we do sound utterly different than live. Maybe your prefered live acts use click tracks or have a vision to recreate what's on record? The Stones heroes are Jimmy "wife is my telepromter" Reed, George "No Show" Jones and other assorted geniuses who without them the world would be a BORING Place as all their shows would sound the same.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-02-18 12:24 by MadMax.

Quote
WorriedAboutYou
JJF is one of the main reasons I started this thread ... the guitars are almost always out of time …

You dont' like the live arrangements? Fair enough.

But to state that the guitars are almost always out of time … that is objectively a huge load of BS!

Ready to take back what I wrote if proved wrong


C

<Does anyone else not get it live?>

I get it.

we've all probably gotten it...just maybe not so much anymore....these ticket prices don't help/....$350 for a decent seat to hear what exactly?...a piano version of Sympathy?....lets get real...they need to play smaller venues at these prices...then maybe the shows will be a little more intimate and sort of refreshing...this version of the Stones is not the real Stones...sorry.

A handful of scrubby bootlegs have been hard work but no, I have have enjoyed every show I've been to starting in 1976 - Earl's Court and Knebworth with the exception of Cardiff 1990 where I had a blinding migraine from sitting in the sun too long waiting to get in - obviously, this was not the fault of the band..................Burls' Creek last year was fantastic............



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2020-02-18 14:23 by EddieByword.

Hey Worried, 3500 views and approaching a 100 posts, this is a great wind up!

I love it, keep it going.

Keith Richards loves to play 'after the note'. Just like Sinatra liked to sing after the note. It's risky, cause it's got to be spot on. it's about milliseconds. He seems to lose this timing more and more. Ron Woods tries to patch/catch up, but the shift leaves him less time. Ron is a player who plays on the note but relies on his love for bended sustain too much. so it all gets in the way. This creates a timing that doesn't feel right while listening to. it's like trainwagons trying to catch up with the locomotive. Not everyone is able to hear this. that's the division in this discussion.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2020-02-18 15:07 by paulspendel.

Quote
paulspendel
Keith Richards loves to play 'after the note'. Just like Sinatra liked to sing after the note. It's risky, cause it's got to be spot on. it's about milliseconds. He seems to lose this timing more and more. Ron Woods tries to patch/catch up, but the shift leaves him less time. Ron is a player who plays on the note but relies on his love for bended sustain too much. so it all gets in the way. This creates a timing that doesn't feel right while listening to. it's like trainwagons trying to catch up with the locomotive. Not everyone is able to hear this. that's the division in this discussion.

Oh yes, we hear it. It's the infamous wobble. Bill and Charlie adjust to that as well. The result is the unique Stones sound we love so much.

I respect that others find this unusual when comparing with other rock bands' sound, though. IMO, it creates something extra for the Stones's groove. One might get an uneasiness and think that it will all fall apart any minute. That rarely happens, though, and it's instrumental for the "danger" and the energy in the racket they make on stage.

I get your point. I love the wobble too. But the wobble is slowly turning into a too stretched wobble, I think.

Quote
MadMax
GLS wrote: "Whatever. I read what you said, it still didn't have any weight to it."

Yes it did because radiohead and n.c are still student muzak and if someone thinks about them as being the bees knees then I am not surprised they don't get the Stones, ESPECIALLY live. What's so hard to understand?

Guess using the phrases "whatever" and "jerk", well, now I understand why you can't comprehend what I am saying. We do have the eternal right to slag off any band on this forum. However we do not call each other names, it ain't fair.

You're clueless.

Part of why that's obvious is your little saying "the bees knees". The rigidity is hilarious.

Radiohead is student muzak...

Fortunately I or WorriedAboutYou will never have to deal with such troglodyteism over something so stupid and teenage in real life.

It very rarely happens but I'm at a loss for words.

Quote
paulspendel
Keith Richards loves to play 'after the note'. Just like Sinatra liked to sing after the note. It's risky, cause it's got to be spot on. it's about milliseconds. He seems to lose this timing more and more. Ron Woods tries to patch/catch up, but the shift leaves him less time. Ron is a player who plays on the note but relies on his love for bended sustain too much. so it all gets in the way. This creates a timing that doesn't feel right while listening to. it's like trainwagons trying to catch up with the locomotive. Not everyone is able to hear this. that's the division in this discussion.

Play after the note ?????????

Ron Wood tries to catch up what???

Love for bended sustain?????????

Clearly I am not able to hear it.

Not even sure of what I should be hearing!!

C





C

GLS wrote: "You're clueless.

Part of why that's obvious is your little saying "the bees knees". The rigidity is hilarious.

Radiohead is student muzak...

Fortunately I or WorriedAboutYou will never have to deal with such troglodyteism over something so stupid and teenage in real life."

I rest my case.

(WAY is polite, you are not. Learn from him). Have a great day.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-02-18 17:06 by MadMax.

Quote
liddas

Quote
paulspendel
Keith Richards loves to play 'after the note'. Just like Sinatra liked to sing after the note. It's risky, cause it's got to be spot on. it's about milliseconds. He seems to lose this timing more and more. Ron Woods tries to patch/catch up, but the shift leaves him less time. Ron is a player who plays on the note but relies on his love for bended sustain too much. so it all gets in the way. This creates a timing that doesn't feel right while listening to. it's like trainwagons trying to catch up with the locomotive. Not everyone is able to hear this. that's the division in this discussion.

Play after the note ?????????

Ron Wood tries to catch up what???

Love for bended sustain?????????

Clearly I am not able to hear it.

Not even sure of what I should be hearing!!

C





C

What we're hearing but struggling to put into words is that the feel and tension in music happens between the notes and beats...and that's where the unique Stones' magic happens.

Quote
rbk
It very rarely happens but I'm at a loss for words.

PSA As of today, ALL Fan cards are revoked. You may reapply at will if you are able to put forward a conclusive argument

I personally think they are the greatest "live" act in the history of music.

Quote
Elmo Lewis
I personally think they are the greatest "live" act in the history of music.

Same here. I think I said it on Page 1 or 2 of this thread.
And I understand well what paulspendel said. It is cumbersome to put into words; and usually a thankless task, because there is always someone who will say "Hey it's Rock'n roll; you're not supposed to over think it'. But what are we doing on this board if not over thinking every little thing about the Stones?
I do think that the Stones had one thing on top of practically every other band that has ever existed - and that is this bigger-than-life image. Almost other wordly. There is no one who generated the fever and anticipation like the Stones did for Live shows in their prime. I'd say it lasted through the '81 tour.
Whole cities shut down. grown men broke down from shaky nerves, and the ladies, we all know about. They embodied sexual energy like hardly anyone else. That is why every rockn roll stereo-type from the road came from them, an was justified. Every following band tried to copy them, aND went through the motions, but it was not really justified.
So the reason I think they are the top live act of all time is because it is not only music (with or without the wobble) that they deliver, but also a unique euphoria. And it is only those very personalities who can bring it.

PR 2000 wrote: "Same here. I think I said it on Page 1 or 2 of this thread.
And I understand well what paulspendel said. It is cumbersome to put into words; and usually a thankless task, because there is always someone who will say "Hey it's Rock'n roll; you're not supposed to over think it'. But what are we doing on this board if not over thinking every little thing about the Stones?
I do think that the Stones had one thing on top of practically every other band that has ever existed - and that is this bigger-than-life image. Almost other wordly. There is no one who generated the fever and anticipation like the Stones did for Live shows in their prime. I'd say it lasted through the '81 tour.
Whole cities shut down. grown men broke down from shaky nerves, and the ladies, we all know about. They embodied sexual energy like hardly anyone else. That is why every rockn roll stereo-type from the road came from them, an was justified. Every following band tried to copy them, aND went through the motions, but it was not really justified.
So the reason I think they are the top live act of all time is because it is not only music (with or without the wobble) that they deliver, but also a unique euphoria. And it is only those very personalities who can bring it."


Just cooked dinner for the old lady and my Little Angie, doing the old circuit, putting on The Possum live in Florida Before the big assorted DVD show on telly with the lads (tonight's Seattle 81), and listening to Who's gonna fill their shoes with GJ I read this. God bless you Sir. Some people won't get what your saying, their loss as we ONLY LIVE ONCE

…. if ya don't get it live ya probably
best ta just go to an Adele show with ya mother in law ……

Oh … and take ya best handbag ….



ROCKMAN

Quote
Rockman
…. if ya don't get it live ya probably
best ta just go to an Adele show with ya mother in law ……

Oh … and take ya best handbag ….

Agreed Terence!

Live Stones is the ultimate legal high - end of story! The albums and all the other stuff we buy is just to fill in time between Tours. Nothing beats seeing Jagger right in front of you, with the crowd in his grasp, pouncing like a proud black panther....

I'll stick my knife right down your throat, baby
And it hurts!

The thought of seeing them again just brings tears of joy to my eyes, that nothing else in life can replicate.

My 2c

Cheers
Richard - In Another Land

Haven’t read every post, but Rockman and Richard are dead nuts on.

Show #59 since 81’ coming for me.

There are Deadheads (I’m not.) I was, and am a big Allman Brothers fan. So, I’ve made some treks to the Beacon & get why ppl loved seeing that band live.

To realize I’m going to my 59th Stones show...is to realize a few things: #1 They’ve been my favorite band since I was 11. The 1st album I bought on realest & w my own $ was Some Girls. It wasn’t til I saw them “live” when I was 15 at the LA Coliseum that I became a ridiculous fanatic. I thought every band and every show could be “this.” How wrong I was. Hey, Van Halen, KISS & some others put on some great shows, but no one addicted me to the live performance like the Stones.

Greatest revelation/realization over the years?

As I’ve seen shows across the USA, Canada, & Tokyo...I haven’t missed a tour, and I’ve been able to double the number of shows I’ve seen in just the last 18 yrs - because I could afford it a bit easier. That said, my soon to be 59th show is NOTHING compared to the multitude of folks I’ve met across the globe. A number of ppl younger than I have seen this great band 100’s of times.

There’s nothing like this band. It’s “all” about the great music translated to the stage. “The Greatest R&R Band In The World” is all about the live experience.

Quote
Elmo Lewis
I personally think they are the greatest "live" act in the history of music.

conclusive, simple as that

Quote
WorriedAboutYou
JJF is one of the main reasons I started this thread. I was watching some clips of the last tour and couldn't get my head around how flat out terrible JJF is live. It's just so off, completely lacking the tempo and feel of the original and has to be the worst song for Jagger to sing live - he just can't catch that song at all. It gets away from him every time. Likewise, the guitars are almost always out of time, clunking all over the place, like it's the first time they're ever rehearsing it. I don't consider that to be "gloriously sloppy magic" it's just a complete inability to play one of their key songs live.

On record JJF is so distinctive, timeless and never gets old. Live, an utter mess, every single time.

The beauty of how they played it in 1969 and on through 1971 is that it had its own new groove - an entire different way of being played - of equal value to the original, similar to how Honky Tonk Women was performed in 1975-76 (as on LOVE YOU LIVE as well as 1978 - the LIVE IN TEXAS performance is stellar - and as well as the 1981-82 tour, available on whatever). For whatever reason they've not maintained that level of performance, yet songs like Midnight Rambler have been quite consistent more so live.

Since 1972 JJF's been the same howling and blasting, with the only major differences being the speed it's done. Although in 1971 it had started to turn into the blasting that it became, with how Mick sang (he started to yell/howl) it and the chorus lamely reverting back to how the record was, it still had the swagger that Charlie and Bill provided.

By 1972 and onward it's a leave the concert number when they close with it.

One thing I find interesting about this thread is the comments about "glorious, sloppy rock and roll," which I do enjoy. But from 1989 on, have the Stones been all that sloppy? Not really to my ears. Sure Keith may flub an intro or solo now and then but one thing that amazes me about how they sound now is how tight and professional they've become compared to the tours up till 1981-82. I mean. compare recent live albums like Sticky Fingers Live, Havana Moon, and the live tracks from Honk. Light years tighter and slicker than Love you Live, Still Life, Some Girls Live, etc. I actually prefer the sloppier days but whatever one wants to complain about the Stones these days, I don't think sloppiness is a big problem in the modern era.

"Gonna find my way to heaven ..."

Quote
MadMax
GLS wrote: "You're clueless.

Part of why that's obvious is your little saying "the bees knees". The rigidity is hilarious.

Radiohead is student muzak...

Fortunately I or WorriedAboutYou will never have to deal with such troglodyteism over something so stupid and teenage in real life."

I rest my case.

(WAY is polite, you are not. Learn from him). Have a great day.

No politeness required with pointing out arrogance and intolerance. Don't be rude.

I remember back when Keith wasn’t a cartoon character and really said things that had meaning he noted that he believed the Stones had never been captured properly on a record.
And this was in the mid-seventies
The entire band is based on playing live, even the songs on the weaker latter day albums kill it onstage.
I saw them bring an entire stadium to their feet, singing along to streets of love.
I don’t even listen to the albums anymore, it’s bootleg live and bootleg studio only.

GLS wrote: "No politeness required with pointing out arrogance and intolerance. Don't be rude."

I am awfully sorry, I didn't realize that you're not a gentleman.

Have a beautiful weekend.