Quote
Stoneage
if you caught a position far back in the crowd I can understand someone's disappointment.

i find it hard to accept the argument. It's like saying "oh the gig was awful because the stoned guy next to me threw up thru the whole show".

Quote
Stoneage
To defend Stanlove a bit: There can be a huge difference between a professional recording (including edits) and your personal experience of a gig (or two).
The 81/82 sound production was not all that impressive and if you caught a position far back in the crowd I can understand someone's disappointment.

Did you catch them on that tour, Stoneage?

I'm sure there are posters on here that can confirm both the sound quality and the experience from back in the crowd.

Unfortunately, I was too young to catch that tour.

No, I didn't. I was too young and Gothenburg isn't exactly nearby from where I live. I'm sure different people had different perceptions of the concerts.
Even when it comes to sound and vision. My first hand experience of this tour was "Still Life"...

Watch the Buffalo video and see if the crowd is dead.

Maybe someone always eats sour grapes. I dunno.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Stoneage
To defend Stanlove a bit: There can be a huge difference between a professional recording (including edits) and your personal experience of a gig (or two).
The 81/82 sound production was not all that impressive and if you caught a position far back in the crowd I can understand someone's disappointment.

Did you catch them on that tour, Stoneage?

I'm sure there are posters on here that can confirm both the sound quality and the experience from back in the crowd.

Unfortunately, I was too young to catch that tour.

Saw them the first time '82 in Cologne at the stadium outdoor show.
With a couple of friends we got not FOS but somehow nearby.
If memory serves the sound was good,loud enough...I know sometimes
there are issues if you end up in the nosebleeds these days ( even nowadays)
but that could happen anywhere...depends on various circumstances and reasons,nothing which is related typically to the Stones I think.

Quote
Stoneage
To defend Stanlove a bit: There can be a huge difference between a professional recording (including edits) and your personal experience of a gig (or two).
The 81/82 sound production was not all that impressive and if you caught a position far back in the crowd I can understand someone's disappointment.

Actually its easy to prove I am correct.

Here is how the tour went. Huge buildup and lots of excitement leading up to the concert. Excitement when the Stones come on and then disappointment that they don't sound good.

I will start posting the videos to back that up and then watch the silly excuses.

BYW Jagger himself admitted that the tour was not that good and 1989 was going to have to be better. There is a reason they change for future tours.

Dead Crowd in Dallas as soon ad the music starts. Its like they are listening to a college lecture after the first minute.
[www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-02-28 19:24 by stanlove.

I saw them early ‘81 in Boulder and late ‘81 in Phoenix and in Basel, Switzerland in ‘82. My favorite, by far, was Boulder. Yes, Boulder was my 1st show so that may have something to do with it, but even today I prefer listening to my Boulder bootleg over Phoenix or Hampton or Leeds. Obviously, they were making a movie in Phoenix (which was cool and fun) but the show and the band were so much more polished and professional that even while being there it felt like something was missing. The danger and unpredictability and the Stones’ glorious raggedness were gone. I know Mathis thinks Hampton is the peak of the Stones live, and it very well may be, but somewhere between Boulder and Phoenix they went from being the dangerous, bad boys of rock ‘n’ roll to the family-friendly, corporate band that we’ve seen ever since. It was great to see them again in ‘82 but the European shows don’t really stand out in any way to me. The Leeds ‘82 recording and my great, fun memories of the Basel show don’t really stand out for me compared to the ‘81 shows. I’ve seen the band nineteen times since that ‘82 show, something from every U.S. tour up to and including 2013. I’ve enjoyed all of them but I’m so happy I saw them in early ‘81 because THAT was the band that I had fallen in love with as a teenager.

Not my favorite time period.
They looked unhappy, not together.
In the YCAGWYW video posted above, Jagger is glaring at somebody or something at :45 and 1:01. I remember seeing a lot of that from vids I've seen from these tours.

Quote
GasLightStreet
Watch the Buffalo video and see if the crowd is dead.

Maybe someone always eats sour grapes. I dunno.

The crowd was dead in Buffalo. I was there. You can look at the video and see for yourself that a couple of songs in the crowd was already dead.

Another video of a college lecture.


[www.youtube.com]

Quote
wonderboy
Not my favorite time period.
They looked unhappy, not together.
In the YCAGWYW video posted above, Jagger is glaring at somebody or something at :45 and 1:01. I remember seeing a lot of that from vids I've seen from these tours.

The direction he's looking in is where the stage monitor mixing station is. He was probably not happy with his levels in front of him. A very common thing that happens.

Quote
stanlove

Quote
GasLightStreet
Watch the Buffalo video and see if the crowd is dead.

Maybe someone always eats sour grapes. I dunno.

The crowd was dead in Buffalo. I was there. You can look at the video and see for yourself that a couple of songs in the crowd was already dead.

I did look at the video. Seems you're not seeing what is shown. The video shows people clapping etc. You make it sound like nobody clapped at all. Based on what is shown in that video, the crowd is not dead.

Quote
stanlove
Another video of a college lecture.


[www.youtube.com]

I've been to a lot of shows. No matter who it is, no one is dancing etc for EVERY song through a 2 hour show. People actually like to listen.

You see anyone leaving?

Your criticism of the crowd not clapping etc for every minute of every song is weak. Those are people digging listening. You're just creating straw man crowd fake drama.

Excellent version of Black Limousine posted above - haven't heard that in a while...the Stones haven't sounded that good since....1981!

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
stanlove
Another video of a college lecture.


[www.youtube.com]

A well done blues lecture...what did you expect the crowd to do except listening ?

“The crowds were dead and disappointed”

I completely disagree.
Disappointed? No way! It was the biggest, most fun tour ever at that point in time. Every city they went to was excited beyond belief. At the shows everyone (almost everyone, apparently) had a blast.

Dead? Well... maybe we did look a little bit dead. Back then we worked hard for our rock shows. We partied all night before the show, went to the stadium before noon, sat or stood in the hot sun, partied to the max, rocked out to at least two bands before the headliner and partied even more when they hit the stage. Unlike the tours since ‘89 where you’d rest up all day, get primed for the evening show, maybe show up half way through the warm-up band doing their short little set and watching out for security. So, yeah, we may have looked a little dead but it was alright. In fact, it was a gas.

I think 81 is the peak of crowd energy, while at the same time, people there actually listening to the music. After that it did become more of a Vegas show, for lack of a better term.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-01 22:38 by ryanpow.

great post, thumbprint!

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
wonderboy
Not my favorite time period.
They looked unhappy, not together.
In the YCAGWYW video posted above, Jagger is glaring at somebody or something at :45 and 1:01. I remember seeing a lot of that from vids I've seen from these tours.

The direction he's looking in is where the stage monitor mixing station is. He was probably not happy with his levels in front of him. A very common thing that happens.

Back in the day he wouldn't just be glaring, he would be shouting: "Turn up the f'in monitor, are you deaf or something?"


So, yeah. Its a gas gas gas.

jb



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-02 04:38 by jbwelda.

Quote
jbwelda

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
wonderboy
Not my favorite time period.
They looked unhappy, not together.
In the YCAGWYW video posted above, Jagger is glaring at somebody or something at :45 and 1:01. I remember seeing a lot of that from vids I've seen from these tours.

The direction he's looking in is where the stage monitor mixing station is. He was probably not happy with his levels in front of him. A very common thing that happens.

Back in the day he wouldn't just be glaring, he would be shouting: "Turn up the f'in monitor, are you deaf or something?"


So, yeah. Its a gas gas gas.

jb

There are other live shows where he can be seen looking and or gesturing etc. But just because he's not doing something in that particular one doesn't mean he didn't, it's just not on film like others. It's quite obvious, based on other footage of him doing similar, that the glare means it's not right yet. He's certainly not glaring at Keith.

Quote
stanlove

Quote
Stoneage
One observation about the 81/82 tour: Neither of the Tattoo You songs came out good live. I think they slaughtered SMU for instance.
Uninspiring. Black Limousine might be the exception though. It sounded pretty good.

Agreed. 1981 was their worst tour ever. They just basically butchered their own songs for 2 hours. The crowds were dead and disappointed. Not sure about 1982.

Speaking of 1982 in Europe, probably nobody who was born later can imagine how legendary the Stones were back then. It was like 'Whow, the STONES are coming to Germany!!!' You did not know what Songs they would be performing, and they and us were still young. It was not the 'hippie feeling' of 1976 but you got a very good show, and they were great. It is very hard to judge by videos or bootlegs if you were not there. You did not mind some mistakes they made in a live situation. After all, you could not compare the show you attended with other shows, and they were playing live so you did not expect the quality of the studio recordings.

In 1990 you got a 'Vegas show', a highly polished concert trying to recreate the studio versions. It was very professional and sometimes great (2,000 lightyears was choreographed perfectly) in perfect sound, but some of the live feeling was gone.

Later on it was rather like going to an oldies radio show. Everything ran smoothly and perfectly, but they and you were nostalgic elderly people reminiscing about the olden golden times when some of you had sex, drugs & rock'n'roll. Walking down Memory lane with a sense of Rebellion that had vanished from your real life.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-02 11:01 by saltoftheearth.

Quote
stanlove

Quote
Stoneage
To defend Stanlove a bit: There can be a huge difference between a professional recording (including edits) and your personal experience of a gig (or two).
The 81/82 sound production was not all that impressive and if you caught a position far back in the crowd I can understand someone's disappointment.

Actually its easy to prove I am correct.

Here is how the tour went. Huge buildup and lots of excitement leading up to the concert. Excitement when the Stones come on and then disappointment that they don't sound good.

I will start posting the videos to back that up and then watch the silly excuses.

BYW Jagger himself admitted that the tour was not that good and 1989 was going to have to be better. There is a reason they change for future tours.

Dead Crowd in Dallas as soon ad the music starts. Its like they are listening to a college lecture after the first minute.
[www.youtube.com]

FROM THAT YOU ARE JUDGING THE 81 TOUR?????? ITS NOT EVEN A VIDEO; ITS NOT EVEN A BAD RECORDING - ITS A HORROR RECORDING. I assume you haven't been to any gig personally. Not to one single gig of the 81 tour. How I cant say that? Because I'm just doing something you do: Bad tempered allegations. Bye bye.

The 81 tour was the birth of the Stones we got through the last 3 decades.
Without 81 everything which followed had'nt been possible.
Not even IOOR - this site.

Overall, 81-82 tours are my favourite version of the Stones live. 78 is a close second, but the set list 3 years later was better.

Was 14 when they played Torino and Napoli.

Remember very well, as saltoftheearth wrote above, the huge hype they generated. The excitement for seeing them for the first time on TV, short footage form the concerts, the mass of people!

Very frustrated I couldn't go, but mom was a Beatle fan ...

Italy winning the world cup healed everything!

C

I was 15 when The Stones came to Europe in 1982.
I loved the Stile Life album.
Went to see Let's spend the night together movie in cinema.
The whole stage was so colourful.
It's still one of my fafourite tours.

In 1982 I saw the Rolling Stones twice in "De Kuip" in Rotterdam. During the Saturday concert I was close to the stage (maybe 10-12 yards, to just stay out of reach of the water hoses that cooled down fans on that very hot day ), because I (miracle) managed to sneak in my reflex camera). The opening acts (J. Geils Band, George Thorogood & Destroyers, a psychedelic dance group) were great, the weather was amazing and the Stones were (obviously) great too. Beautiful memories. The other one I enjoyed from a seated location. Just as good, but the guys looked a bit smaller

Mick at some point went into a platform device (used for buildings, etc.) and almost passed above my head (great shot).
In an IMax theatre I saw a registration of a 1981 concert. Also a unique experience in those years. Man, more than 38 years ago ...

I'm a GHOST living in a ghost town

Quote
caschimann

Quote
stanlove

Quote
Stoneage
To defend Stanlove a bit: There can be a huge difference between a professional recording (including edits) and your personal experience of a gig (or two).
The 81/82 sound production was not all that impressive and if you caught a position far back in the crowd I can understand someone's disappointment.

Actually its easy to prove I am correct.

Here is how the tour went. Huge buildup and lots of excitement leading up to the concert. Excitement when the Stones come on and then disappointment that they don't sound good.

I will start posting the videos to back that up and then watch the silly excuses.

BYW Jagger himself admitted that the tour was not that good and 1989 was going to have to be better. There is a reason they change for future tours.

Dead Crowd in Dallas as soon ad the music starts. Its like they are listening to a college lecture after the first minute.
[www.youtube.com]

FROM THAT YOU ARE JUDGING THE 81 TOUR?????? ITS NOT EVEN A VIDEO; ITS NOT EVEN A BAD RECORDING - ITS A HORROR RECORDING. I assume you haven't been to any gig personally. Not to one single gig of the 81 tour. How I cant say that? Because I'm just doing something you do: Bad tempered allegations. Bye bye.

Your post doesn't even make sense. What does a bad recording have to do with what you can see?

Again. I went two 2 shows in 1981 and both sucks and everyone else I know who went to those shows agreed. Nothing special playing and dead crowds and the dead crowds throughout can be proven by video.

Mick Jagger himself agreed and promised that the 1989 tour would be harder and better. There is a reason their changed after that. It wasn't working and they knew it. They can see dead crowds with no energy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-02 18:09 by stanlove.

Dead crowd by the end of the first song.


[www.youtube.com]

The 1989-tour was harder? Please explain - in what way?

Quote
stanlove
Dead crowd by the end of the first song.


[www.youtube.com]

Well better we don't bore IORR any longer with this discussion.
Anyway: Thank you for your intensive contribution to this thread.
And on with the show.