I've read that the 75 tour was considered to be great in 1975 but that the 1976 lacked something and that Keith was out of it. Is this true?? Any opoinions? I hear small differences but that's mostly the songs (Hot stuff, Hey negrita, Fool to cry etc) and the use of phasers on Happy in 1976. Did they change their sound?

This is an interesting topic. Europeans post all the time that the U.S. legs of tours are "warm ups" and that all the great shows come later in Europe. Others post that all the great shows are in North America and the Stones are tired and disinterested by the time they get to Europe. I have only seen them in North America, so my opinion, which is that the earlier shows are much better, is probably unfairly influenced by the experience of attending a few of the shows.

75 had that looovely phased Wild Horses. That's enough

Take a look at the video paris show in 1976 and you'll see keith wasn't out of it. There was great and loud guitars. During @#$%& you can see keith playing his solo with closed eyes; Really in it. He lives his solo. But now this time is over. I'm always happy to see the stones but it was not the same thing. They are great, they prove they have always rock'n'roll in they heart and body, they are always happy to play live but let be realist, they can't do what they've done by the past. If you have seen chuck berry in concert, it is the same, he can't now play the intro of his songs but it is always a pleasure to watch and listen him.
You don't run 100 meters at 60 than at 20 years old. That's life and this is the same for everybody, stones or not stones.
Well 75 and 76 were good tours. Not the same but excellent.

aprilfool Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Take a look at the video paris show in 1976 and
> you'll see keith wasn't out of it.


I know! He's great there but Ive read other reviews that say he's mostly out of it during that tour. I dont really agree and besides he's much more out of it at the LA FORUM, great but clearly H-high as a tower during Happy.

In 1976, Jagger tends to mimic himself. Hardly sung, sometimes. The sound of the band is dry, parodic. Listen to Earls Court's Hot Stuff.

... you know what had just happened the night they filmed that 76 Abattoirs gig, right?

from what i've heard/seen both tours were mighty freakin fine, but i like the 76 set list better.




"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith

I saw them twice in '76.

I don't think '75 or '76 shows were that good, if compared to anything prior to that.

Suddenly it had become a circus act. A Billy and Jagger clown act. Silly percussion. Keith was often out of it and although his leads and some of Ronnie's were good, Keith's rhythm had lost its instinctive flow, while ronnie's was just generally thin and scratchy. The songs had lost their tight rhythmic unity and power of anything '69-73. Jagger's 'singing' and attitude was sloppy. Charlie's drums not so hot either - and disrupted by Ollie's percussion which merant there was no Roll.

But, to answer your question!, if I had to choose the lesser of two evils, then I prefer '76, because of the B&B numbers.

1977 was best!





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-10-22 16:45 by Four Stone Walls.

I love both tours but I would say they probably sounded better in 75. The shows in 75 were longer not as restricted than in 76. Listen to If You Cant Rock me for example, there is a bit more jamming at the before they go into Cloud and Midnight Rambler is longer in 75. I also reckon that Ollie Brown complimented the sound, made it more funky..

1975---i think the stones were on fire...the new kid, ronnie wood played from his heart...he was just very excited to be with the stones...and i think it woke up keith...he played better...star star in the states was far better...
i think by 1977 the stones were now in their groove...not as hot...more playing by numbers..i remember when love you live came out, well i was disapointed because it did sound as good as i remember it sounding in 1975 or my boots from the 1975 shows. anyway it didn't sound bad...and it could be that i just loved the shows that i went to, in 1975...ha

75 blows 76 away. Band was clearly not playing as well consistently, and the inclusion of the B&B songs at the expense of some of the mainstays of the 75 set brought the whole proceedings down a notch or two. No-brainer.

i like all the 75 boots more than the 76 boots or the ugly love u live ,,,i thing by the time they hit U.K. they were burnt out & their playing was 2 overdone or 2 polished

Polished?????!!!!!!!!

Definately not polished! If you want polished then listen to them now.. I dont understand why people dont like Love You Live. The only problem is that it should be longer!

just listen Let's spend the night together in Knebworth 76

They DON'T KNOW how to stop it. Every time I listen to it I cry of laugh.

I don't think that's what we call polished.

Ernest Craven Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Definately not polished! If you want polished then
> listen to them now.. I dont understand why people
> dont like Love You Live. The only problem is that
> it should be longer!


Yeah, longer would have been fine. Much longer!

'76 was the worst series of shows the Stones have ever done - and Mick's lowpoint as a performer. I've never liked his singing voice from around that time (Love You Live being a prime example, an album which for the most part is, I think, a terrible record - aside from the El Mocambo songs) and it was the closest he ever came to being a parody of himself.

the '75 tour is far from my favourite tour too, but there are a lot of fine shows and performances on it.

Does anyone have a good far-away shot of the stage from the 1976 tour?
I only have the photos and the videos, and i've never seen a good
faw-sway shot of the stage.
OT- BTW, why Is Earls Court considered such an "acoustical death trap"
(to paraphrase Clinton Heylin)? It can't be any worse than the
basketball/hockey arenas here in the States, can it?

its an exhibition centre and its pretty old - its not even a proper sports arena, let alone a concert hall

awful sightlines and bad sound.

I think the problem with a lot of these old exhibition centres is (so I'm told) in many cases to them having concrete floors. So the sound 'bounces' all over the place.

We have an exhibition arena in Belfast called the Kings Hall which was (until a few years ago when we got a purpose built arena for music and sports) the main venue for larger scale acts. It holds about 8,000 for concerts which by UK standards until a few years ago was reasonably large. For concerts, the sound was horrible - however when it was used for boxing, it was regarded as one of the best arenas in the world because of the atmosphere it generated. The way the sound 'bounced' around in it made it sound like there were 80,000 in the place instead of 8,000.

with sssoul wrote:

... you know what had just happened the night they filmed that 76 Abattoirs gig, right?

No, what happened?

I haven't heard all that many shows from either, but I agree with those who prefer the '76 set list, b/c I like B&B far more than IORR, and the B&B songs are better to jam on. The '76 Paris shows are excellent -- would love to see the video -- though I agree that the Knebworth and Earls Court shows are not too great. I generally don't like the vibe of either tour... "circus," as someone said, seems right.

cc

Keith's newly born son died in Switzerland on 4th June when the band were in Paris for these shows. Considering the state he was in, he did pretty well. They didnt announce the child's death for a couple of weeks afterwards, however

The TV special was actually filmed over 3 of the 4 Paris shows, not one (mostly 6th June, plus some songs from the 7th and "Angie" from the 4th)

The LYL tracks from Paris come from the 5th,6th and 7th June.