Tell Me :
Talk
That was the 80’s for ya!
They had to update themselves, the music, the live performance, the image etc. to catch up with the trend of the era — and that was not only the Stones, many other musicians who had been around since the 60’s and the 70’s did the same.
That’s how they have been going active, well more or less, to this day, a way of survival. Purists may not like it, but I don’t think it is all bad.
I think Mick's point was from within the context of The Rolling Stones, so for that matter, anything he did that didn't sound like the Stones was potentially experimental - he was up against his own legacy, so songs like Half A Loaf, Running Out Of Luck, Turn The Girl Loose and the ridiculously hilarious title track certainly achieved that, where as Lonely At The Top is a bit of a strange choice to kick off his album but he has some hints of Stones elements with Just Another Night, Lucky In Love and Secrets.
If you listen to that album with an open mind, as in, the gist of what he's doing versus the decade it's in and the production that indeed dates a good bit of it, it's way off the wall in overall in his context of who he is. Keith went off about how it wasn't different enough, possibly based on what Mick said about doing anything etc and for Keith it wasn't far enough in "anything", which was just the pissed off kid in the sandbox. Keith's barbs, regardless of the emotional aspect of the Stones, was just a tiny bit grumpy and unnecessary.
It can only go so long until something becomes flat out stupid and ignorant and that idiot knows nothing of what he speaks. At least HMS had some passion behind his statements and took it in stride.
Perhaps the most brilliant ridiculous thing I've read in 2020. EXCELLENT! Completely ignorant, wrong and fake but very very very entertaining.
Mick Jagger interviewed in Adelaide, Australia October 23rd 1988, for New Zealand TV
ROCKMAN
ROCKMAN
Yes!!!
The club gig sound insane
They should released the whole set from The Corner Hotel in Melbourne - October 19 1988
Holy crap. That's too fast!
Indeed. Very few solo songs, mostly (poorly played) Stones songs. And it wasn't 15 years.
Yet Keith’s shows with the Winos have Gimme Shelter, Connection, little T & a, Time is on my Side and Happy in them didn’t they? Yes mostly Keith SUNG songs, but ALL Stones songs.
Rod
All those tunes were never in the same setlist, though.
You can add I Wanna Be Your Man as well, btw
Hard to listen to any of it - the band was skilled no doubt, but a bit too polished and sterile for Stones songs.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
ROCKMAN
But they weren't the dominant number of songs, which were Keith solo songs, so Mick doing a majority of Stones songs... not exactly a solo tour. It was a Mick Jagger Of The Rolling Stones tour.
Keith acknowledged the Stones while performing a majority of his solo material.
Oh sorry Rocky i didn't realize Lisa played with Mick on this 88 tour before Carol, my bad. Now i'm wondering why he dropped Lisa for Carol then went back to Lisa for the Stones 89' tour, and what happened to the other backing singer Cindy Mizelle from 89' tour, she was great too and took it in turns with Lisa to solo on GS.
It becomes clear after watching this 88' show / tour how Mick disciplined Keith and swayed him towards the professionalism we enjoyed on the 89' 90' tour and subsequent tours after that for a decade {After the 90's Keith lost the discipline } It was like hey Keith if you want to play with me again you play ball, you stick to a cold calculated show, no more lets wing it and hope for the best 81' 82' looseness and devil may care rock star attitude.
Since 82' it became like, lets rehearse and deliver the illusion of spontaneity as opposed to creating spontaneity in the moment.. they became the best Stones cover band in a way, they were never really authentic again after 81' 82' and that goes for the albums too.
Basically the way i see and hear it, the Stones, {although still the best band in the world} don't seem to have evolved since 89' its still the same show, and seeing Mick in that Australia show in 88' took me back to where the same old safe bet originated. Its brilliant, it works, the audience love it, but they aren't trying out new things and taking chances.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-05-16 15:30 by keefriffhards.
It absolutely became about money. Keith's RS interview in 1987 when asked about a future Stones tour and how they could make $40 million and Keith laughed and said 'A hundred million'.
Mick Jagger (1989): The money
Of course, we're doing it for the money, AS WELL. We've always done it for the money. People get highly paid in rock & roll. That's why it's so attractive. It's like boxing. People don't do boxing for nothing. They start off doing it because they hope to get to the top, because when they get to the top, they'll make lots of money. I mean, THAT'S America. But also, to my mind, it has to be done in a good way where it doesn't rip people off. It's got to be good value for money. You shouldn't charge less than everyone else. You can charge more than everyone else, but you also have to give them more than everyone else.
Ron Wood & Keith Richards (1989): No longer winging it
Ron: We're doing You Can't Always Get What You Want just like the record, with all the builds and crescendos. In '81, we would just start the song and kind of wing it. I used to have a solo that wasn't any specific length. But now we've got to work within limitations, certain amounts of bars. I've got to be on the ball or everyone will be making chord changes and I won't. That one song has got a lot of tricks in it for me personally.
Keith: Over the years, you develop a simplified road version of a song that you get used to. But this time, we thought, Let's go back and listen very carefully to the records to find what we were originally going for when we made it. All the subtleties and the half bar jumps. We thought we ought to do the songs up proud and have the things that were on the record. And once you go back and research what you did, you say, Well, the reason we did it like that is because we had these voices or because we had these horns. That's why we have the enlarged line-up. Tumbling Dice without the voices is kind of bare.
[www.timeisonourside.com]
Wow. Also the band: Simon Phillips on drums - killer. Doug Wimbish, Joe Satriani.. amazing crew.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
wonderboy
()
Date: November 20, 2020 18:28
I watched some of the show and it makes me sad.
You can see Mick putting together the model for the Vegas Stones, which they have largely followed for many years.
They could have chosen different paths that would have resulted in more interesting music, but probably less popular and less lucrative.
You can see Mick putting together the model for the Vegas Stones, which they have largely followed for many years.
They could have chosen different paths that would have resulted in more interesting music, but probably less popular and less lucrative.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
RisingStone
()
Date: November 20, 2020 20:54
Quote
wonderboy
I watched some of the show and it makes me sad.
You can see Mick putting together the model for the Vegas Stones, which they have largely followed for many years.
They could have chosen different paths that would have resulted in more interesting music, but probably less popular and less lucrative.
That was the 80’s for ya!
They had to update themselves, the music, the live performance, the image etc. to catch up with the trend of the era — and that was not only the Stones, many other musicians who had been around since the 60’s and the 70’s did the same.
That’s how they have been going active, well more or less, to this day, a way of survival. Purists may not like it, but I don’t think it is all bad.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
ryanpow
()
Date: November 20, 2020 22:08
Mick got it right on the show he did to promote Wandering Spirit. Only three Stone's songs at the end that were deep album cuts. The Webster Hall show has a loose, fun and creative energy. If he toured behind it playing theatres like the Winos, I think he would have given them a run for their money.
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2020-11-20 22:16 by ryanpow.
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2020-11-20 22:16 by ryanpow.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: November 20, 2020 22:18
The 1993 show was much better though. Even though it was a one-off (I think). It's actually enjoyable. And the band is very well rehearsed.
Webster Hall, NYC, Feb 1993: [www.youtube.com]
Webster Hall, NYC, Feb 1993: [www.youtube.com]
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: November 21, 2020 01:59
Quote
HairballQuote
GasLightStreet
I could do all kinds of things. I could go very commercial - very, VERY commercial American pop. Or I could go for just ordinary, straight rock and roll, in an English way. Or I could mix it up: some very... you know, some HITS, and some things that are a bit more experimental. Outside of this kind of mainstream rock. More like the stuff Material does. Slightly left of the mainstream, you know what I mean? You could do some interesting things in that area. I have a lot of stuff. I think I'm gonna do it relatively soon.
- Mick Jagger, September 1983
[timeisonourside.com]
I'd like to explore as many areas as I can, and at the moment I thought I should do more solo work. In a band, everyone is supposed to contribute, which is a wonderful way of making records, but there are other ways of making music. And I had a very clear idea of what I wanted to do and should sound like. The other musicians are very talented and they had ideas, but most of the things came out as I planned them on demos.
- Mick Jagger, 1987
[timeisonourside.com]
Interesting quotes, but not sure that much of Micks solo material is very experimental or adventurous at all, but I guess my definition of experimental/adventurous is a bit more extreme than Mick's.
My first impressions of his solo material was a softer and more generic version of Mick than what he had done with the Stones - more commercial even with the then state-of-the-art '80's production, etc.
There might be some his stuff that could be considered a bit "off the wall" and slightly outside of the mainstream, but generally speaking it's all rather tame, and dare I say boring to my ears
As for Keith solo - yes it's closer to the familiar turf of typical Stonesiness, but it really isn't that simply defined. I'm not even sure what "typical Stonesiness" means as they've covered so much territory as a band throughout their history, but maybe it has to do with some of the typical guitar heavy/riff driven rock and roll tunes they've recorded. But it went much deeper than that, and at times strayed in to a more personal rootsier vibe imo.
But we all have our personal opinions on what we like, and for me just so happens that Mick is a WAY better when he's with the Stones - clearly one of the all time greatest frontmen, and easily one of my favorites.
As for Keith, I think he's great with or without the Stones, but he'll always be a Rolling Stone first and foremost. If only they could get it together and release some more new Stones material...
It would be the best of both worlds, and pretty sure most here would agree with that. That said, it would also be nice to get some more Keith solo material some day....
I think Mick's point was from within the context of The Rolling Stones, so for that matter, anything he did that didn't sound like the Stones was potentially experimental - he was up against his own legacy, so songs like Half A Loaf, Running Out Of Luck, Turn The Girl Loose and the ridiculously hilarious title track certainly achieved that, where as Lonely At The Top is a bit of a strange choice to kick off his album but he has some hints of Stones elements with Just Another Night, Lucky In Love and Secrets.
If you listen to that album with an open mind, as in, the gist of what he's doing versus the decade it's in and the production that indeed dates a good bit of it, it's way off the wall in overall in his context of who he is. Keith went off about how it wasn't different enough, possibly based on what Mick said about doing anything etc and for Keith it wasn't far enough in "anything", which was just the pissed off kid in the sandbox. Keith's barbs, regardless of the emotional aspect of the Stones, was just a tiny bit grumpy and unnecessary.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: November 21, 2020 02:02
Quote
Stoneage
This rudeness towards each other, which is notable sometimes, - is it really necessary?
It can only go so long until something becomes flat out stupid and ignorant and that idiot knows nothing of what he speaks. At least HMS had some passion behind his statements and took it in stride.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: November 21, 2020 02:34
Quote
harlem shuffle
Learn to read before you speak Gas Light,my comments Are on you and you,re alter ego Hairball.It,s a lot of music i don,t like so much,soloalbums from both Mick Jagger and Keith Richards,especially She,s the boss and Talk is cheap,these albums are in my opinion not very good.And lots of other stuff from Mick and Keith,i almost never play.I have never been a Keith Richards hater as you and you,re hangarounds try to tell everybody.But you and you,re muppet friend Hairball has this antiJagger campaign for 10-15 years now.But of course Keith is a god for you and the rest of the muppetgang.Last concert i saw with the Stones,was in Stockholm october 2017,and to tell the truth,it was terrible to Watch what state Keith was in.First songs was terrible playing by Keith,a bit better later in the concert.Biggest dissapointments in my history of the Stones.So you,re antijagger comments and the godpraising of Richards are very comical and stupid.So take you,re muppet friends out for some time,and hopefully even you can see the daylight maybee
Perhaps the most brilliant ridiculous thing I've read in 2020. EXCELLENT! Completely ignorant, wrong and fake but very very very entertaining.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
NoPanic
()
Date: November 21, 2020 22:32
During that time I read in a french musicpaper that he was to play in Paris,Bercy. By that time I have never seen a Stone so I got very nervous and how to get tickets...But at the it did not happen.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: November 25, 2020 09:43
Mick Jagger interviewed in Adelaide, Australia October 23rd 1988, for New Zealand TV
ROCKMAN
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: November 25, 2020 09:55
ROCKMAN
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
Valeswood
()
Date: November 25, 2020 17:58
Thank you for posting those interviews Rockman.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
RawIguanaCologne
()
Date: November 26, 2020 13:06
Have you listened to the IORR version?
Gosh, that´s what I call sped up!!!
Gosh, that´s what I call sped up!!!
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
rollmops
()
Date: November 26, 2020 14:09
Great interview. Mick is relaxed and very open, answering the questions very honestly, it feels.
Thank you for posting.
rockandroll,
Mops
Thank you for posting.
rockandroll,
Mops
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
ds1984
()
Date: November 27, 2020 23:31
Quote
RawIguanaCologne
Have you listened to the IORR version?
Gosh, that´s what I call sped up!!!
Yes!!!
The club gig sound insane
They should released the whole set from The Corner Hotel in Melbourne - October 19 1988
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: November 30, 2020 03:04
Quote
RawIguanaCologne
Have you listened to the IORR version?
Gosh, that´s what I call sped up!!!
Holy crap. That's too fast!
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
colonial
()
Date: May 14, 2022 06:10
What's the name of the outback town in the video?
--------------
ColonialstoneNZ
--------------
--------------
ColonialstoneNZ
--------------
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
winos
()
Date: May 14, 2022 07:52
Silverton near Broken Hill NSW
pool's in but the patio ain't dry
pool's in but the patio ain't dry
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: May 14, 2022 09:38
Quote
ryanpow
I've always dismissed this tour as him being all coked out, but when you see a whole show put together like this, you do see his professionalism come through. And like others have pointed out, this was a prototype for the SW Tour.
Indeed. Very few solo songs, mostly (poorly played) Stones songs. And it wasn't 15 years.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
bitusa2012
()
Date: May 14, 2022 14:32
Quote
HairballQuote
GasLightStreet
Keith's point of view is accurate about Mick's tour:
Keith Richards (August 1988): Mick in Japan
I thought it was very sad that a high percentage of his show was Rolling Stones songs. If you're going to do something on your own, do stuff off the two albums you did. Don't pretend you're a solo artist and have two chicks prancing around doing Tumbling Dice, do you know what I mean? That severely pisses me off.
[timeisonourside.com]
It is interesting, though, to a point. It's too bad Mick didn't play the better (best) songs from PRIMITIVE COOL on the tour. Aside from Throwaway the rest of the PC songs don't make sense. But whatever. Pretty cheesy production nevertheless.
Gotta agree with Keith here, and can't blame Mick for not playing more of his solo material because maybe he realized it was weak for the most part, and a majority in attendance wanted Stones songs.
Unfortunately for Mick, the Stones songs sounded like glorified/sterilized cover band material which is essentially what it was. All great musicians no doubt, but they sucked the heart, soul, and life out of it all.
Yet Keith’s shows with the Winos have Gimme Shelter, Connection, little T & a, Time is on my Side and Happy in them didn’t they? Yes mostly Keith SUNG songs, but ALL Stones songs.
Rod
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 14, 2022 15:39
Quote
bitusa2012Quote
HairballQuote
GasLightStreet
Keith's point of view is accurate about Mick's tour:
Keith Richards (August 1988): Mick in Japan
I thought it was very sad that a high percentage of his show was Rolling Stones songs. If you're going to do something on your own, do stuff off the two albums you did. Don't pretend you're a solo artist and have two chicks prancing around doing Tumbling Dice, do you know what I mean? That severely pisses me off.
[timeisonourside.com]
It is interesting, though, to a point. It's too bad Mick didn't play the better (best) songs from PRIMITIVE COOL on the tour. Aside from Throwaway the rest of the PC songs don't make sense. But whatever. Pretty cheesy production nevertheless.
Gotta agree with Keith here, and can't blame Mick for not playing more of his solo material because maybe he realized it was weak for the most part, and a majority in attendance wanted Stones songs.
Unfortunately for Mick, the Stones songs sounded like glorified/sterilized cover band material which is essentially what it was. All great musicians no doubt, but they sucked the heart, soul, and life out of it all.
Yet Keith’s shows with the Winos have Gimme Shelter, Connection, little T & a, Time is on my Side and Happy in them didn’t they? Yes mostly Keith SUNG songs, but ALL Stones songs.
All those tunes were never in the same setlist, though.
You can add I Wanna Be Your Man as well, btw
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
keefriffhards
()
Date: May 15, 2022 00:56
Gimme Shelter kicked ass, the highlight of the show, but the song was written by Keith Richards, why go solo with a copy cat Keith guitarist singing Keith's songs when you have Keith.
The arguably positive thing about this tour was that this went on to be the polished shows that got Mick back in the groove with the Stones inspiring the 89' 90' Stones shows that we still get today. Not a lot has changed, and wow the girl singing GS Carol Kenyon, her solo performance was obviously copied by Lisa with the Stones the next year.
The arguably positive thing about this tour was that this went on to be the polished shows that got Mick back in the groove with the Stones inspiring the 89' 90' Stones shows that we still get today. Not a lot has changed, and wow the girl singing GS Carol Kenyon, her solo performance was obviously copied by Lisa with the Stones the next year.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: May 15, 2022 02:40
You could easily claim Carol Kenyon was copying Lisa's performance from Mick's tour of Japan earlier that same year.
Mick Jagger was touring. He did all the hits and a generous selection of new songs. Yet Stones fans like to parrot Keith's remarks that Mick should have played nothing but solo songs with just a handful of Stones songs. That would work if Mick wanted to play theaters and small halls, not arenas and stadiums.
Mick Jagger was touring. He did all the hits and a generous selection of new songs. Yet Stones fans like to parrot Keith's remarks that Mick should have played nothing but solo songs with just a handful of Stones songs. That would work if Mick wanted to play theaters and small halls, not arenas and stadiums.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: May 15, 2022 02:53
He did all the hits and a generous selection of new songs.
YEP !!!
ROCKMAN
YEP !!!
ROCKMAN
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: May 15, 2022 02:59
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
ryanpow
I've always dismissed this tour as him being all coked out, but when you see a whole show put together like this, you do see his professionalism come through. And like others have pointed out, this was a prototype for the SW Tour.
Indeed. Very few solo songs, mostly (poorly played) Stones songs. And it wasn't 15 years.
Hard to listen to any of it - the band was skilled no doubt, but a bit too polished and sterile for Stones songs.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: May 15, 2022 03:08
ROCKMAN
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: May 15, 2022 06:25
Quote
bitusa2012Quote
HairballQuote
GasLightStreet
Keith's point of view is accurate about Mick's tour:
Keith Richards (August 1988): Mick in Japan
I thought it was very sad that a high percentage of his show was Rolling Stones songs. If you're going to do something on your own, do stuff off the two albums you did. Don't pretend you're a solo artist and have two chicks prancing around doing Tumbling Dice, do you know what I mean? That severely pisses me off.
[timeisonourside.com]
It is interesting, though, to a point. It's too bad Mick didn't play the better (best) songs from PRIMITIVE COOL on the tour. Aside from Throwaway the rest of the PC songs don't make sense. But whatever. Pretty cheesy production nevertheless.
Gotta agree with Keith here, and can't blame Mick for not playing more of his solo material because maybe he realized it was weak for the most part, and a majority in attendance wanted Stones songs.
Unfortunately for Mick, the Stones songs sounded like glorified/sterilized cover band material which is essentially what it was. All great musicians no doubt, but they sucked the heart, soul, and life out of it all.
Yet Keith’s shows with the Winos have Gimme Shelter, Connection, little T & a, Time is on my Side and Happy in them didn’t they? Yes mostly Keith SUNG songs, but ALL Stones songs.
But they weren't the dominant number of songs, which were Keith solo songs, so Mick doing a majority of Stones songs... not exactly a solo tour. It was a Mick Jagger Of The Rolling Stones tour.
Keith acknowledged the Stones while performing a majority of his solo material.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
keefriffhards
()
Date: May 15, 2022 16:00
Quote
Rocky Dijon
You could easily claim Carol Kenyon was copying Lisa's performance from Mick's tour of Japan earlier that same year.
Mick Jagger was touring. He did all the hits and a generous selection of new songs. Yet Stones fans like to parrot Keith's remarks that Mick should have played nothing but solo songs with just a handful of Stones songs. That would work if Mick wanted to play theaters and small halls, not arenas and stadiums.
Oh sorry Rocky i didn't realize Lisa played with Mick on this 88 tour before Carol, my bad. Now i'm wondering why he dropped Lisa for Carol then went back to Lisa for the Stones 89' tour, and what happened to the other backing singer Cindy Mizelle from 89' tour, she was great too and took it in turns with Lisa to solo on GS.
It becomes clear after watching this 88' show / tour how Mick disciplined Keith and swayed him towards the professionalism we enjoyed on the 89' 90' tour and subsequent tours after that for a decade {After the 90's Keith lost the discipline } It was like hey Keith if you want to play with me again you play ball, you stick to a cold calculated show, no more lets wing it and hope for the best 81' 82' looseness and devil may care rock star attitude.
Since 82' it became like, lets rehearse and deliver the illusion of spontaneity as opposed to creating spontaneity in the moment.. they became the best Stones cover band in a way, they were never really authentic again after 81' 82' and that goes for the albums too.
Basically the way i see and hear it, the Stones, {although still the best band in the world} don't seem to have evolved since 89' its still the same show, and seeing Mick in that Australia show in 88' took me back to where the same old safe bet originated. Its brilliant, it works, the audience love it, but they aren't trying out new things and taking chances.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-05-16 15:30 by keefriffhards.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: May 16, 2022 19:16
Quote
keefriffhardsQuote
Rocky Dijon
You could easily claim Carol Kenyon was copying Lisa's performance from Mick's tour of Japan earlier that same year.
Mick Jagger was touring. He did all the hits and a generous selection of new songs. Yet Stones fans like to parrot Keith's remarks that Mick should have played nothing but solo songs with just a handful of Stones songs. That would work if Mick wanted to play theaters and small halls, not arenas and stadiums.
Oh sorry Rocky i didn't realize Lisa played with Mick on this 88 tour before Carol, my bad. Now i'm wondering why he dropped Lisa for Carol then went back to Lisa for the Stones 89' tour, and what happened to the other backing singer Cindy Mizelle from 89' tour, she was great too and took it in turns with Lisa to solo on GS.
It becomes clear after watching this 88' show / tour how Mick disciplined Keith and swayed him towards the professionalism we enjoyed on the 89' 90' tour and subsequent tours after that for a decade {After the 90's Keith lost the discipline } It was like hey Keith if you want to play with me again you play ball, you stick to a cold calculated show, no more lets wing it and hope for the best 81' 82' looseness and devil may care rock star attitude.
Since 82' it became like, lets rehearse and deliver the illusion of spontaneity as opposed to creating spontaneity in the moment.. they became the best Stones cover band in a way, they were never really authentic again after 81' 82' and that goes for the albums too.
Basically the way i see and hear it, the Stones, {although still the best band in the world} don't seem to have evolved since 89' its still the same show, and seeing Mick in that Australia show in 88' took me back to where the same old safe bet originated. Its brilliant, it works, the audience love it, but they aren't trying out new things and taking chances.
It absolutely became about money. Keith's RS interview in 1987 when asked about a future Stones tour and how they could make $40 million and Keith laughed and said 'A hundred million'.
Mick Jagger (1989): The money
Of course, we're doing it for the money, AS WELL. We've always done it for the money. People get highly paid in rock & roll. That's why it's so attractive. It's like boxing. People don't do boxing for nothing. They start off doing it because they hope to get to the top, because when they get to the top, they'll make lots of money. I mean, THAT'S America. But also, to my mind, it has to be done in a good way where it doesn't rip people off. It's got to be good value for money. You shouldn't charge less than everyone else. You can charge more than everyone else, but you also have to give them more than everyone else.
Ron Wood & Keith Richards (1989): No longer winging it
Ron: We're doing You Can't Always Get What You Want just like the record, with all the builds and crescendos. In '81, we would just start the song and kind of wing it. I used to have a solo that wasn't any specific length. But now we've got to work within limitations, certain amounts of bars. I've got to be on the ball or everyone will be making chord changes and I won't. That one song has got a lot of tricks in it for me personally.
Keith: Over the years, you develop a simplified road version of a song that you get used to. But this time, we thought, Let's go back and listen very carefully to the records to find what we were originally going for when we made it. All the subtleties and the half bar jumps. We thought we ought to do the songs up proud and have the things that were on the record. And once you go back and research what you did, you say, Well, the reason we did it like that is because we had these voices or because we had these horns. That's why we have the enlarged line-up. Tumbling Dice without the voices is kind of bare.
[www.timeisonourside.com]
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
schwonek
()
Date: May 16, 2022 21:58
Quote
Testify
I love this special about Mick Jagger's Australian tour.
I'm not a huge fan of this tour, but this footage is really good and Mick in great shape.
[www.youtube.com]
Wow. Also the band: Simon Phillips on drums - killer. Doug Wimbish, Joe Satriani.. amazing crew.
Re: Mick Jagger - Live in Australia 1988/03/15-19
Posted by:
TheflyingDutchman
()
Date: May 16, 2022 22:12
Just a different league of musicians. Very refreshing. And yes, Jagger was a bastard. 
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
2000
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10