For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
SomeGuyQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
SomeGuy
I guess they didn't like to tour that much every year. By that time they had already established the habit of touring alternate parts of the world with every other album so to speak.
1969 - US basically BEGGARS BANQUET with some LET IT BLEED
1970 - Europe LET IT BLEED
1971 - UK STICKY FINGERS
1972 - North America EXILE
1973 - Pacific (Oceania), Europe EXILE, GHS
1975 - North America MADE IN THE SHADE
1976 - Europe BLACK AND BLUE
1978 - US SOME GIRLS
1981 - US TATTOO YOU
1982 - Europe TATTOO YOU
1989 - North America STEEL WHEELS
1990 - Japan, Europe STEEL WHEELS
1994 - North America VOODOO
1995 - North America, South America, Africa, Asia, Oceania, Europe VOODOO
1997 - North America BRIDGES
1998 - North America, Asia, South America, Europe BRIDGES
1999 - North America BRIDGES, NO SECURITY
Between 1970 and 1979, 3 out of those 10 years they didn't tour.
Between 1990 and 1999, 4 out of those 10 years they didn't tour.
They probably needed a break! 1978-1981 was a good one.
Exactly. When other bands would do world tours with every album they had, mostly, The Stones toured then this part of the world behind a new album, then another part of the world only behind the next album, so effectively they only did half the touring that other bands did. Also, in the 70s their tours weren't that long.
In Tony Sanchez' book we can read that Ronnie was advised that joining The Stones would be a good idea if only because he wouldn't have to play many shows.
All this has changed considerably from the 90s on (i.e. long tours, but not every year), until the 50 and counting tours of course. But then, their recording efforts seem to be lacking somewhat...
To return to the issue: I read somewhere that Keith was p*ssed off that Mick didn't want to tour in 1980, calling it "not working but writing off a whole year..."
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
SomeGuyQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
SomeGuy
I guess they didn't like to tour that much every year. By that time they had already established the habit of touring alternate parts of the world with every other album so to speak.
1969 - US basically BEGGARS BANQUET with some LET IT BLEED
1970 - Europe LET IT BLEED
1971 - UK STICKY FINGERS
1972 - North America EXILE
1973 - Pacific (Oceania), Europe EXILE, GHS
1975 - North America MADE IN THE SHADE
1976 - Europe BLACK AND BLUE
1978 - US SOME GIRLS
1981 - US TATTOO YOU
1982 - Europe TATTOO YOU
1989 - North America STEEL WHEELS
1990 - Japan, Europe STEEL WHEELS
1994 - North America VOODOO
1995 - North America, South America, Africa, Asia, Oceania, Europe VOODOO
1997 - North America BRIDGES
1998 - North America, Asia, South America, Europe BRIDGES
1999 - North America BRIDGES, NO SECURITY
Between 1970 and 1979, 3 out of those 10 years they didn't tour.
Between 1990 and 1999, 4 out of those 10 years they didn't tour.
They probably needed a break! 1978-1981 was a good one.
Exactly. When other bands would do world tours with every album they had, mostly, The Stones toured then this part of the world behind a new album, then another part of the world only behind the next album, so effectively they only did half the touring that other bands did. Also, in the 70s their tours weren't that long.
In Tony Sanchez' book we can read that Ronnie was advised that joining The Stones would be a good idea if only because he wouldn't have to play many shows.
All this has changed considerably from the 90s on (i.e. long tours, but not every year), until the 50 and counting tours of course. But then, their recording efforts seem to be lacking somewhat...
To return to the issue: I read somewhere that Keith was p*ssed off that Mick didn't want to tour in 1980, calling it "not working but writing off a whole year..."
That's strange. They did videos, promo parties and worked on TATTOO YOU in 1980. Not exactly a "writing off".
Quote
SomeGuyQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
SomeGuyQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
SomeGuy
I guess they didn't like to tour that much every year. By that time they had already established the habit of touring alternate parts of the world with every other album so to speak.
1969 - US basically BEGGARS BANQUET with some LET IT BLEED
1970 - Europe LET IT BLEED
1971 - UK STICKY FINGERS
1972 - North America EXILE
1973 - Pacific (Oceania), Europe EXILE, GHS
1975 - North America MADE IN THE SHADE
1976 - Europe BLACK AND BLUE
1978 - US SOME GIRLS
1981 - US TATTOO YOU
1982 - Europe TATTOO YOU
1989 - North America STEEL WHEELS
1990 - Japan, Europe STEEL WHEELS
1994 - North America VOODOO
1995 - North America, South America, Africa, Asia, Oceania, Europe VOODOO
1997 - North America BRIDGES
1998 - North America, Asia, South America, Europe BRIDGES
1999 - North America BRIDGES, NO SECURITY
Between 1970 and 1979, 3 out of those 10 years they didn't tour.
Between 1990 and 1999, 4 out of those 10 years they didn't tour.
They probably needed a break! 1978-1981 was a good one.
Exactly. When other bands would do world tours with every album they had, mostly, The Stones toured then this part of the world behind a new album, then another part of the world only behind the next album, so effectively they only did half the touring that other bands did. Also, in the 70s their tours weren't that long.
In Tony Sanchez' book we can read that Ronnie was advised that joining The Stones would be a good idea if only because he wouldn't have to play many shows.
All this has changed considerably from the 90s on (i.e. long tours, but not every year), until the 50 and counting tours of course. But then, their recording efforts seem to be lacking somewhat...
To return to the issue: I read somewhere that Keith was p*ssed off that Mick didn't want to tour in 1980, calling it "not working but writing off a whole year..."
That's strange. They did videos, promo parties and worked on TATTOO YOU in 1980. Not exactly a "writing off".
A promo takes about a day to make. And a little known fact is, that 'they' didn't work on TY.
Besides, the issue was about touring or not touring, not throwing parties, at half of which Keith never showed up anyway.
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
SomeGuyQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
SomeGuyQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
SomeGuy
I guess they didn't like to tour that much every year. By that time they had already established the habit of touring alternate parts of the world with every other album so to speak.
1969 - US basically BEGGARS BANQUET with some LET IT BLEED
1970 - Europe LET IT BLEED
1971 - UK STICKY FINGERS
1972 - North America EXILE
1973 - Pacific (Oceania), Europe EXILE, GHS
1975 - North America MADE IN THE SHADE
1976 - Europe BLACK AND BLUE
1978 - US SOME GIRLS
1981 - US TATTOO YOU
1982 - Europe TATTOO YOU
1989 - North America STEEL WHEELS
1990 - Japan, Europe STEEL WHEELS
1994 - North America VOODOO
1995 - North America, South America, Africa, Asia, Oceania, Europe VOODOO
1997 - North America BRIDGES
1998 - North America, Asia, South America, Europe BRIDGES
1999 - North America BRIDGES, NO SECURITY
Between 1970 and 1979, 3 out of those 10 years they didn't tour.
Between 1990 and 1999, 4 out of those 10 years they didn't tour.
They probably needed a break! 1978-1981 was a good one.
Exactly. When other bands would do world tours with every album they had, mostly, The Stones toured then this part of the world behind a new album, then another part of the world only behind the next album, so effectively they only did half the touring that other bands did. Also, in the 70s their tours weren't that long.
In Tony Sanchez' book we can read that Ronnie was advised that joining The Stones would be a good idea if only because he wouldn't have to play many shows.
All this has changed considerably from the 90s on (i.e. long tours, but not every year), until the 50 and counting tours of course. But then, their recording efforts seem to be lacking somewhat...
To return to the issue: I read somewhere that Keith was p*ssed off that Mick didn't want to tour in 1980, calling it "not working but writing off a whole year..."
That's strange. They did videos, promo parties and worked on TATTOO YOU in 1980. Not exactly a "writing off".
A promo takes about a day to make. And a little known fact is, that 'they' didn't work on TY.
Besides, the issue was about touring or not touring, not throwing parties, at half of which Keith never showed up anyway.
"They" being Mick and Keith that worked on TATTOO YOU!
You might be being a bit dismissive of the promotional aspects: it may take one day to do a video but it was probably a matter of a few weeks to get it together etc. Those things don't "just happen". And with Keith being zonked out...
Quote
SomeGuy
From what I read on this board TY was put together only by Mick and Chris Kimsey, from leftover recordings from earlier sessions. The "writing off" phrase is not mine, but it was what Keith said about not touring in 1980. If they had toured, they still would have had to make the videos, do the promotion for the album yada yada yada, anyway. Apparently not touring meant not working for Keith, and I can see his point.
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
SomeGuy
From what I read on this board TY was put together only by Mick and Chris Kimsey, from leftover recordings from earlier sessions. The "writing off" phrase is not mine, but it was what Keith said about not touring in 1980. If they had toured, they still would have had to make the videos, do the promotion for the album yada yada yada, anyway. Apparently not touring meant not working for Keith, and I can see his point.
There was mixing work done on ER in the spring as well as apparently doing 4 videos and what seems to be a lot of interviews with Mick with seemingly a majority of those done in June.
Mick and Keith worked with Kimsey on what to do with leftovers in September after all the various promotional work for ER was over with. In October and November-December work on the vocals started and Keith apparently did some work as well.
Keith said he hoped to get another Stones album out that year and tour. If I recall correctly that interview was steered by a fifth of whisky.
However Keith felt about it it appears they agreed not to tour. It's difficult to find any details stating that but just looking at what other things they did it seems obvious. By the time ER came out it was roughly a month shy of 2 years since the SG tour ended. All band recording for ER was done by October of 1979 with overdubs continuing into 1980.
Quote
SomeGuy
In 1980 Keith had come off his Canadian problems and drug addictions (sorta) and was ready to go at it again and really wanted to tour. Mick was doubtful as to visa problems because of Keith's drug convictions and all. What didn't help was the fact that this time Ronnie had had a drug bust that was highly publicized at the time. Mick was giving off mixed signals to the press about touring in 1980, in one interview he said they were going to tour and in the next he denied it again. In the end Keith flew off to some holiday resort (I forget where) and after two days he got a telex from Mick stating that the tour was off. That really infuriated Keith, as Mick could have just said it in person two days earlier, but instead had chosen to wait until he had left.
The ER period is when Keith started to feel that Mick wasn't happy with Keith's return to power as it were, as Mick had grown accustomed to making decisions on his own and didn't seem to want to give up that position anymore.
This situation continues to this very day.
Quote
Stoneage
Imagine the seventies...a new, good, Rolling Stones album almost every year... Seems like a fairytale talking about it now...
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
Stoneage
Imagine the seventies...a new, good, Rolling Stones album almost every year... Seems like a fairytale talking about it now...
Don't complain, be positive. Now you can buy Ron Wood's "art" of setlist and paintings of himself and his band for only 1000 pounds a copy. You couldn't, back then. It was the dark ages. Only boring things like music.
Quote
wonderboy
All About You is amazing -- the feel, the lyrics, the vocals, the background vocals, the production. Keith has written some of the most beautiful jazzy-type ballads and done so completely under the radar. It's like the music establishment has him pegged as the riff-meister and can't hear anything else.
I don't think Mick knew what to do with this song, the same way Keith didn't know what to do with Emotional Rescue. Maybe musical differences really were the reasons for WW3.
Quote
Hairball
Any version of ER (the tune) is a bad version imo, including the live versions they did a few tours back. The bass line is annoying and childish. Another main problem with the tune is Mick really can't sing falsetto when compared to the greats - nearly every song he tries it ends up lame. Worried About You might be the exception where it works...and maybe the spoken word/sung part of Dear Doctor as that's sort of a mockery anyways...
But tunes like ER and Fool To Cry are completely forced and unnatural sounding compared to the greats - Eddie Kendricks, Curtis Mayfield, Marvin Gaye, Junior Murvin, et al....even the BeeGees and KC (of the Sunshine Band) are better imo.
Quote
georgemcdonnell314
I don't think Emotional Rescue worked very well live either. It was too drawn out like Miss You is compared to the earlier tours (78 & 81).
There were so many other choices of songs they could have used instead..........Love is Strong, Worried About You, Memory Motel I could go on and on but I still think this song was a poor choice for them to play.
Although it was nice to get a song we have never heard live before and it is doubtful we will get another one.Quote
Hairball
Any version of ER (the tune) is a bad version imo, including the live versions they did a few tours back. The bass line is annoying and childish. Another main problem with the tune is Mick really can't sing falsetto when compared to the greats - nearly every song he tries it ends up lame. Worried About You might be the exception where it works...and maybe the spoken word/sung part of Dear Doctor as that's sort of a mockery anyways...
But tunes like ER and Fool To Cry are completely forced and unnatural sounding compared to the greats - Eddie Kendricks, Curtis Mayfield, Marvin Gaye, Junior Murvin, et al....even the BeeGees and KC (of the Sunshine Band) are better imo.
Quote
wonderboy
All About You is amazing -- the feel, the lyrics, the vocals, the background vocals, the production. Keith has written some of the most beautiful jazzy-type ballads and done so completely under the radar. It's like the music establishment has him pegged as the riff-meister and can't hear anything else.
I don't think Mick knew what to do with this song, the same way Keith didn't know what to do with Emotional Rescue. Maybe musical differences really were the reasons for WW3.