For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
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.
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....
Quote
Stoneage
This rudeness towards each other, which is notable sometimes, - is it really necessary?
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
Quote
RawIguanaCologne
Have you listened to the IORR version?
Gosh, that´s what I call sped up!!!
Quote
RawIguanaCologne
Have you listened to the IORR version?
Gosh, that´s what I call sped up!!!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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]