Tell Me :
Talk
I agree 100% that the Mocambo set should have been released WAY WAY earlier.
But NOT to replace LYL. I disagree with you 100% on that aspect. LYL has always sounded very exciting to me. Especially side 4. Classic Stones live. It’s loud, ramshackled and bombastic. As far from Vegas as you can get in fact.
The Mocambo side, yes, wetting the whistle for what was thankfully to come, was obviously the odd side out. It sounds flat to me compared to the other three sides. Great music, fantastically played, but “listless” (not the right word, but all I can come up with to describe it versus the other 3 sides), compared to those loud, rude other 3 sides.
Rod
what happens in this forum, stays in this forum
You basically described the absurdity of LOVE YOU LIVE - side 3 doesn't belong!
Yet it's brilliant, for the most part, in that absurdity.
They thought what they thought back in 1977. Oh well. Look at what they left off of STILL LIFE.
Fortunately it's out now.
You said "I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in 1975-1976 and El Mocambo".
Well, that's one of the differences in sound. You can even hear that difference clearly on Love You Live.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-12 10:43 by DandelionPowderman.
No, I agree - not dated. However, with those Boogies, a better interplay between Ronnie and Keith and (slightly) tighter performances - there is no doubt there was a development sound-wise, imo. And I haven't mentioned Mick's vocals yet
I was revisiting Atlantic City (Steel Wheels Live), and I don't think it's fair to call that tour Vegas. The guitars sounded great, the setlist included 7 songs recorded since they had last toured - not to mention 2000 LYFH and Ruby Tuesday played on the whole tour. Even in 94/95, 97/98 and 99 (personal fave), while the warhorses settled in and didn't change from tour to tour, the Stones were still trotting out new material. The Voodoo Lounge recordings do lack balls in the guitar area, though.
Yes, they became more "professional" starting in '89, but things begin to feel more "static" in the 21st century.
T@3
Muscular.....I bet no one ever went into a Guitar Center and asked to try out a "muscular" amp. Time to roll my eyes again.
Interesting thought. I was there, too. And when I saw them performing "Bitch" or "Midnight Rambler" at Shea Stadium (2nd row!), I thought it was 1972 all over again - almost perfect replicas of their glory days live sound - and wondered if they could have been able to pull off stuff like that in 1981/82 (when I also attended numerous shows). Then again, in 1981/82 they did not exactly butcher "Time Is On My Side", it was a different arrangement, but still absolutely great imo - and I'm pretty sure that they could have done something similar great with "Ruby Tuesday".
However, if and how the sloppy energy of the songs you mentioned and "Whip", "LSTNT" or "Let Me Go" for example would have been possible in 1989 is a good question, indeed - just like how "Paint It Black" or "2000 Light Years" would have sounded in 1981/82.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-13 17:43 by retired_dog.
I was almost 10 years a fan before seeing them in November 1989. Two shows in Vancouver I think consecutive nights, though I may be misremembering.
Anyway, fabulous to have finally seen them for the first time.
I say earlier. I remember people weren't real enamored of that '81 tour. It seemed a little too slick, a little too good timey rock and roll. Still Life is one of their most half assed live recordings.
The only way to move "beyond" that sound would involve computers.
They moved within that sound with various amps for tours.
How they were recorded determines aspects of sound that on LOVE YOU LIVE side 3 proves.
And then the stadiumism of EL MOCAMBO to sound more recent? I don't know. Haven't read enough to understand the mentality behind that yet.
LYL's IORR mediocre?!?! It's the ultimate live version EVER mate!!
'81 too slick? Wow. Can't give that an upvote. Yes, it was sponsored by Jovan, which was a thoroughly novel idea at the time, but there is very little about the playing on that tour to resemble slick. The long jams on Imagination and Let Me Go, the ultimate mess of She's So Cold at one show.
T@3
Agree, LYL is great!
You remember people that weren't real enamored of the 1981 tour?
What, all 3 people?
That's absurd.
Your opinion about that tour is juxtaposed to the existence of The Rolling Stones ("a little too good timey rock and roll").
STILL LIFE is not as bad as you think. Perhaps you disregard the era and the single LP format vs LOVE YOU LIVE or the legalities of having certain other songs on the album. In regard to its place in their pre-official bootleg/live album vaults releases... it's still a damn fine live album.
Ridiculous! IORR is fantastic! SFTD is completely different than the previous live alum! And still better than anything done since!
The 'Vegas' reference didn't even exist in the late 1970's.
Mathijs
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
StonedRambler
()
Date: September 12, 2022 00:20
You heard it first in the late 70s? lol, I always thought it was a term that developed on this forum.Quote
24FPSQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
I first heard the Vegas Stones reference in the late 70s. And LYL is what kicked it off. SFTD and IORR are mediocre at best. We just got El Mocambo, and didn't get Live in Texas until 2011, so the general Stones public had nothing to compare it to.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
Taylor1
()
Date: September 12, 2022 03:36
Guitar sound being different because of amps doesn’t make the sound from1975-1976 dated or less muscular.It’s the same band with the same approach , arrangements, concepts.Taylor’s guitar sounded much different on the 1973 European tour than it did on the 1972 or Pacific tour, so I’m not sure what your point isQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in1975-1976 and El Mocambo.It still has Preston and Brown.The band is exactly the same.Woodand Richards are still playing a defined lead/ rhythm sound. The only difference I hear is Jagger isn’t slurring and barking his vocals like he’s really coked up. The sound of the band is the same taking into consideration they are playing in a club which might alter the sound a bit and the band always sounds slightly different from tour to tour.1981doesn’t sound exactly like 1982Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
The guitar sound is different, with the new Mesa Boogies they used at EM.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
Cooltoplady
()
Date: September 12, 2022 03:52
Quote
Taylor1Quote
DandelionPowdermanGuitar sound being different because of amps doesn’t make the sound from1975-1976 dated or less muscular.It’s the same band with the same approach , arrangements, concepts.Taylor’s guitar sounded much different on the 1973 European tour than it did on the 1972 or Pacific tour, so I’m not sure what your point isQuote
Taylor1Quote
GasLightStreetI don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in1975-1976 and El Mocambo.It still has Preston and Brown.The band is exactly the same.Woodand Richards are still playing a defined lead/ rhythm sound. The only difference I hear is Jagger isn’t slurring and barking his vocals like he’s really coked up. The sound of the band is the same taking into consideration they are playing in a club which might alter the sound a bit and the band always sounds slightly different from tour to tour.1981doesn’t sound exactly like 1982Quote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.[/
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
The guitar sound is different, with the new Mesa Boogies they used at EM.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-12 06:14 by Cooltoplady.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
bitusa2012
()
Date: September 12, 2022 05:14
Quote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement.
I agree 100% that the Mocambo set should have been released WAY WAY earlier.
But NOT to replace LYL. I disagree with you 100% on that aspect. LYL has always sounded very exciting to me. Especially side 4. Classic Stones live. It’s loud, ramshackled and bombastic. As far from Vegas as you can get in fact.
The Mocambo side, yes, wetting the whistle for what was thankfully to come, was obviously the odd side out. It sounds flat to me compared to the other three sides. Great music, fantastically played, but “listless” (not the right word, but all I can come up with to describe it versus the other 3 sides), compared to those loud, rude other 3 sides.
Rod
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: September 12, 2022 05:33
Quote
StonedRamblerYou heard it first in the late 70s? lol, I always thought it was a term that developed on this forum.Quote
24FPSQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
I first heard the Vegas Stones reference in the late 70s. And LYL is what kicked it off. SFTD and IORR are mediocre at best. We just got El Mocambo, and didn't get Live in Texas until 2011, so the general Stones public had nothing to compare it to.
what happens in this forum, stays in this forum
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: September 12, 2022 05:37
Quote
bitusa2012Quote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement.
I agree 100% that the Mocambo set should have been released WAY WAY earlier.
But NOT to replace LYL. I disagree with you 100% on that aspect. LYL has always sounded very exciting to me. Especially side 4. Classic Stones live. It’s loud, ramshackled and bombastic. As far from Vegas as you can get in fact.
The Mocambo side, yes, wetting the whistle for what was thankfully to come, was obviously the odd side out. It sounds flat to me compared to the other three sides. Great music, fantastically played, but “listless” (not the right word, but all I can come up with to describe it versus the other 3 sides), compared to those loud, rude other 3 sides.
You basically described the absurdity of LOVE YOU LIVE - side 3 doesn't belong!
Yet it's brilliant, for the most part, in that absurdity.
They thought what they thought back in 1977. Oh well. Look at what they left off of STILL LIFE.
Fortunately it's out now.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: September 12, 2022 08:20
Quote
Taylor1Guitar sound being different because of amps doesn’t make the sound from1975-1976 dated or less muscular.It’s the same band with the same approach , arrangements, concepts.Taylor’s guitar sounded much different on the 1973 European tour than it did on the 1972 or Pacific tour, so I’m not sure what your point isQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in1975-1976 and El Mocambo.It still has Preston and Brown.The band is exactly the same.Woodand Richards are still playing a defined lead/ rhythm sound. The only difference I hear is Jagger isn’t slurring and barking his vocals like he’s really coked up. The sound of the band is the same taking into consideration they are playing in a club which might alter the sound a bit and the band always sounds slightly different from tour to tour.1981doesn’t sound exactly like 1982Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
The guitar sound is different, with the new Mesa Boogies they used at EM.
You said "I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in 1975-1976 and El Mocambo".
Well, that's one of the differences in sound. You can even hear that difference clearly on Love You Live.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-12 10:43 by DandelionPowderman.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
Taylor1
()
Date: September 12, 2022 14:22
But it doesn’t make the sound dated or more muscular or that they moved beyond that soundQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1Guitar sound being different because of amps doesn’t make the sound from1975-1976 dated or less muscular.It’s the same band with the same approach , arrangements, concepts.Taylor’s guitar sounded much different on the 1973 European tour than it did on the 1972 or Pacific tour, so I’m not sure what your point isQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in1975-1976 and El Mocambo.It still has Preston and Brown.The band is exactly the same.Woodand Richards are still playing a defined lead/ rhythm sound. The only difference I hear is Jagger isn’t slurring and barking his vocals like he’s really coked up. The sound of the band is the same taking into consideration they are playing in a club which might alter the sound a bit and the band always sounds slightly different from tour to tour.1981doesn’t sound exactly like 1982Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
The guitar sound is different, with the new Mesa Boogies they used at EM.
You said "I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in 1975-1976 and El Mocambo".
Well, that's one of the differences in sound. You can even hear that difference clearly on Love You Live.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: September 12, 2022 14:34
Quote
Taylor1But it doesn’t make the sound dated or more muscular or that they moved beyond that soundQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1Guitar sound being different because of amps doesn’t make the sound from1975-1976 dated or less muscular.It’s the same band with the same approach , arrangements, concepts.Taylor’s guitar sounded much different on the 1973 European tour than it did on the 1972 or Pacific tour, so I’m not sure what your point isQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in1975-1976 and El Mocambo.It still has Preston and Brown.The band is exactly the same.Woodand Richards are still playing a defined lead/ rhythm sound. The only difference I hear is Jagger isn’t slurring and barking his vocals like he’s really coked up. The sound of the band is the same taking into consideration they are playing in a club which might alter the sound a bit and the band always sounds slightly different from tour to tour.1981doesn’t sound exactly like 1982Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
The guitar sound is different, with the new Mesa Boogies they used at EM.
You said "I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in 1975-1976 and El Mocambo".
Well, that's one of the differences in sound. You can even hear that difference clearly on Love You Live.
No, I agree - not dated. However, with those Boogies, a better interplay between Ronnie and Keith and (slightly) tighter performances - there is no doubt there was a development sound-wise, imo. And I haven't mentioned Mick's vocals yet
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
TeaAtThree
()
Date: September 12, 2022 17:46
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
StonedRamblerYou heard it first in the late 70s? lol, I always thought it was a term that developed on this forum.Quote
24FPSQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
I first heard the Vegas Stones reference in the late 70s. And LYL is what kicked it off. SFTD and IORR are mediocre at best. We just got El Mocambo, and didn't get Live in Texas until 2011, so the general Stones public had nothing to compare it to.
what happens in this forum, stays in this forum
I was revisiting Atlantic City (Steel Wheels Live), and I don't think it's fair to call that tour Vegas. The guitars sounded great, the setlist included 7 songs recorded since they had last toured - not to mention 2000 LYFH and Ruby Tuesday played on the whole tour. Even in 94/95, 97/98 and 99 (personal fave), while the warhorses settled in and didn't change from tour to tour, the Stones were still trotting out new material. The Voodoo Lounge recordings do lack balls in the guitar area, though.
Yes, they became more "professional" starting in '89, but things begin to feel more "static" in the 21st century.
T@3
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
Cooltoplady
()
Date: September 12, 2022 18:24
Quote
Taylor1But it doesn’t make the sound dated or more muscular or that they moved beyond that soundQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1Guitar sound being different because of amps doesn’t make the sound from1975-1976 dated or less muscular.It’s the same band with the same approach , arrangements, concepts.Taylor’s guitar sounded much different on the 1973 European tour than it did on the 1972 or Pacific tour, so I’m not sure what your point isQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in1975-1976 and El Mocambo.It still has Preston and Brown.The band is exactly the same.Woodand Richards are still playing a defined lead/ rhythm sound. The only difference I hear is Jagger isn’t slurring and barking his vocals like he’s really coked up. The sound of the band is the same taking into consideration they are playing in a club which might alter the sound a bit and the band always sounds slightly different from tour to tour.1981doesn’t sound exactly like 1982Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
The guitar sound is different, with the new Mesa Boogies they used at EM.
You said "I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in 1975-1976 and El Mocambo".
Well, that's one of the differences in sound. You can even hear that difference clearly on Love You Live.
Muscular.....I bet no one ever went into a Guitar Center and asked to try out a "muscular" amp. Time to roll my eyes again.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: September 12, 2022 19:40
Quote
TeaAtThreeQuote
treaclefingersQuote
StonedRamblerYou heard it first in the late 70s? lol, I always thought it was a term that developed on this forum.Quote
24FPSQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
I first heard the Vegas Stones reference in the late 70s. And LYL is what kicked it off. SFTD and IORR are mediocre at best. We just got El Mocambo, and didn't get Live in Texas until 2011, so the general Stones public had nothing to compare it to.
what happens in this forum, stays in this forum
I was revisiting Atlantic City (Steel Wheels Live), and I don't think it's fair to call that tour Vegas. The guitars sounded great, the setlist included 7 songs recorded since they had last toured - not to mention 2000 LYFH and Ruby Tuesday played on the whole tour. Even in 94/95, 97/98 and 99 (personal fave), while the warhorses settled in and didn't change from tour to tour, the Stones were still trotting out new material. The Voodoo Lounge recordings do lack balls in the guitar area, though.
Yes, they became more "professional" starting in '89, but things begin to feel more "static" in the 21st century.
T@3[/quote
They varied. The '89 tour was more regal than Vegas. It was indeed a well oiled machine though. Better than the '81 tour, but the '82 tour was better due to time spent on the road. Remember they only did 17 live concerts for 77-80. No Security is the standout tour post Wyman due to their heavy touring from 97-99. Since then it's been a slow descent, although their recently completed tour sounded a little sharper, and indeed they've been touring more frequently.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
georgie48
()
Date: September 12, 2022 20:50
Instead of creating a new thread, I put my question in this "El Mocambo" one.
My favorite El Mocambo song for decades has been "Crackin' Up". But ... I mean the version that appeared in the Love You Live album.
I very much enjoy the "Live in El Mocambo" CDs, but ... the Crackin' Up version on there (off course it's the same recording) is
somewhat different from the LYL album. To me it sounds a little hollow (slight echo or so) and the balance between the different instruments and Mick's voice is a little different. For instance the piano (perfectly timing with the lead guitar during the song, really) loses a little "power" (or should I say slightly to the background) and being a part of the before mentioned hollowness makes the overall production a little weaker.
Anyone have a similar experience when comparing the two productions?
I'm a GHOST living in a ghost town
My favorite El Mocambo song for decades has been "Crackin' Up". But ... I mean the version that appeared in the Love You Live album.
I very much enjoy the "Live in El Mocambo" CDs, but ... the Crackin' Up version on there (off course it's the same recording) is
somewhat different from the LYL album. To me it sounds a little hollow (slight echo or so) and the balance between the different instruments and Mick's voice is a little different. For instance the piano (perfectly timing with the lead guitar during the song, really) loses a little "power" (or should I say slightly to the background) and being a part of the before mentioned hollowness makes the overall production a little weaker.
Anyone have a similar experience when comparing the two productions?
I'm a GHOST living in a ghost town
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
Taylor1
()
Date: September 12, 2022 23:01
The 1989 tour was great in its own way. Iam not old enough to remember the 1972 tour but hearing the crappy sounding recordings and the films of that tour,it was as great as any they did.They never topped it. It was a magical summer in America. But I love the 1989 tour just as much , with a different band
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: September 12, 2022 23:05
Fair enough ....
ROCKMAN
ROCKMAN
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
Elmo Lewis
()
Date: September 12, 2022 23:51
I don't know if it's the small room or what, but the El Mocambo stuff sounds great.
The performances are excellent too.
Vegas Stones started with Steel Wheels tour.
The difference between 81 and 89 was vast. Both great in their own way - for example, Ruby Tuesday would have been butchered in 1981, while the sloppy energy of say, She's So Cold or T & A wouldn't have been there in 1989.
Yes, I was there - not basing these thoughts on YouTubes or "live" albums.
The performances are excellent too.
Vegas Stones started with Steel Wheels tour.
The difference between 81 and 89 was vast. Both great in their own way - for example, Ruby Tuesday would have been butchered in 1981, while the sloppy energy of say, She's So Cold or T & A wouldn't have been there in 1989.
Yes, I was there - not basing these thoughts on YouTubes or "live" albums.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
retired_dog
()
Date: September 13, 2022 02:18
Quote
Elmo Lewis
I don't know if it's the small room or what, but the El Mocambo stuff sounds great.
The performances are excellent too.
Vegas Stones started with Steel Wheels tour.
The difference between 81 and 89 was vast. Both great in their own way - for example, Ruby Tuesday would have been butchered in 1981, while the sloppy energy of say, She's So Cold or T & A wouldn't have been there in 1989.
Yes, I was there - not basing these thoughts on YouTubes or "live" albums.
Interesting thought. I was there, too. And when I saw them performing "Bitch" or "Midnight Rambler" at Shea Stadium (2nd row!), I thought it was 1972 all over again - almost perfect replicas of their glory days live sound - and wondered if they could have been able to pull off stuff like that in 1981/82 (when I also attended numerous shows). Then again, in 1981/82 they did not exactly butcher "Time Is On My Side", it was a different arrangement, but still absolutely great imo - and I'm pretty sure that they could have done something similar great with "Ruby Tuesday".
However, if and how the sloppy energy of the songs you mentioned and "Whip", "LSTNT" or "Let Me Go" for example would have been possible in 1989 is a good question, indeed - just like how "Paint It Black" or "2000 Light Years" would have sounded in 1981/82.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-13 17:43 by retired_dog.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: September 13, 2022 22:44
Quote
Taylor1
The 1989 tour was great in its own way. Iam not old enough to remember the 1972 tour but hearing the crappy sounding recordings and the films of that tour,it was as great as any they did.They never topped it. It was a magical summer in America. But I love the 1989 tour just as much , with a different band
I was almost 10 years a fan before seeing them in November 1989. Two shows in Vancouver I think consecutive nights, though I may be misremembering.
Anyway, fabulous to have finally seen them for the first time.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: September 14, 2022 05:21
Quote
Elmo Lewis
I don't know if it's the small room or what, but the El Mocambo stuff sounds great.
Vegas Stones started with Steel Wheels tour.
I say earlier. I remember people weren't real enamored of that '81 tour. It seemed a little too slick, a little too good timey rock and roll. Still Life is one of their most half assed live recordings.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
donvis
()
Date: September 14, 2022 05:35
1981 was my least favorite tour. But I only go back to US tours since 1975. Only tour I haven’t seen since then was the Desert Trip year.Quote
24FPSQuote
Elmo Lewis
I don't know if it's the small room or what, but the El Mocambo stuff sounds great.
Vegas Stones started with Steel Wheels tour.
I say earlier. I remember people weren't real enamored of that '81 tour. It seemed a little too slick, a little too good timey rock and roll. Still Life is one of their most half assed live recordings.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: September 14, 2022 06:45
Quote
Taylor1But it doesn’t make the sound dated or more muscular or that they moved beyond that soundQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1Guitar sound being different because of amps doesn’t make the sound from1975-1976 dated or less muscular.It’s the same band with the same approach , arrangements, concepts.Taylor’s guitar sounded much different on the 1973 European tour than it did on the 1972 or Pacific tour, so I’m not sure what your point isQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in1975-1976 and El Mocambo.It still has Preston and Brown.The band is exactly the same.Woodand Richards are still playing a defined lead/ rhythm sound. The only difference I hear is Jagger isn’t slurring and barking his vocals like he’s really coked up. The sound of the band is the same taking into consideration they are playing in a club which might alter the sound a bit and the band always sounds slightly different from tour to tour.1981doesn’t sound exactly like 1982Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
The guitar sound is different, with the new Mesa Boogies they used at EM.
You said "I don’t hear any difference between the sound of the band in 1975-1976 and El Mocambo".
Well, that's one of the differences in sound. You can even hear that difference clearly on Love You Live.
The only way to move "beyond" that sound would involve computers.
They moved within that sound with various amps for tours.
How they were recorded determines aspects of sound that on LOVE YOU LIVE side 3 proves.
And then the stadiumism of EL MOCAMBO to sound more recent? I don't know. Haven't read enough to understand the mentality behind that yet.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
MadMax
()
Date: September 14, 2022 18:41
Quote
24FPSQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
I first heard the Vegas Stones reference in the late 70s. And LYL is what kicked it off. SFTD and IORR are mediocre at best. We just got El Mocambo, and didn't get Live in Texas until 2011, so the general Stones public had nothing to compare it to.
LYL's IORR mediocre?!?! It's the ultimate live version EVER mate!!
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
TeaAtThree
()
Date: September 14, 2022 21:15
Quote
24FPSQuote
Elmo Lewis
I don't know if it's the small room or what, but the El Mocambo stuff sounds great.
Vegas Stones started with Steel Wheels tour.
I say earlier. I remember people weren't real enamored of that '81 tour. It seemed a little too slick, a little too good timey rock and roll. Still Life is one of their most half assed live recordings.
'81 too slick? Wow. Can't give that an upvote. Yes, it was sponsored by Jovan, which was a thoroughly novel idea at the time, but there is very little about the playing on that tour to resemble slick. The long jams on Imagination and Let Me Go, the ultimate mess of She's So Cold at one show.
T@3
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: September 15, 2022 04:23
Quote
Paul Kersey
Love You Live is a great live album. Not sure why some people dislike it. Best live versions of SFTD and IORR. Just a shame Hey Negrita wasn't included.
Agree, LYL is great!
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: September 15, 2022 06:16
Quote
24FPSQuote
Elmo Lewis
I don't know if it's the small room or what, but the El Mocambo stuff sounds great.
Vegas Stones started with Steel Wheels tour.
I say earlier. I remember people weren't real enamored of that '81 tour. It seemed a little too slick, a little too good timey rock and roll. Still Life is one of their most half assed live recordings.
You remember people that weren't real enamored of the 1981 tour?
What, all 3 people?
That's absurd.
Your opinion about that tour is juxtaposed to the existence of The Rolling Stones ("a little too good timey rock and roll").
STILL LIFE is not as bad as you think. Perhaps you disregard the era and the single LP format vs LOVE YOU LIVE or the legalities of having certain other songs on the album. In regard to its place in their pre-official bootleg/live album vaults releases... it's still a damn fine live album.
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: September 15, 2022 06:18
Quote
MadMaxQuote
24FPSQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
I first heard the Vegas Stones reference in the late 70s. And LYL is what kicked it off. SFTD and IORR are mediocre at best. We just got El Mocambo, and didn't get Live in Texas until 2011, so the general Stones public had nothing to compare it to.
LYL's IORR mediocre?!?! It's the ultimate live version EVER mate!!
Ridiculous! IORR is fantastic! SFTD is completely different than the previous live alum! And still better than anything done since!
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
ProfessorWolf
()
Date: September 15, 2022 13:49
lyl is definetly not as bad as people in this thread make it out to be even if it does pale in comparison to el mocambo
but then again what doesn't short of brussels
but then again what doesn't short of brussels
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
Taylor1
()
Date: September 15, 2022 14:03
LYL Sympathy is great.Would like to hear better sounding other performances of that song from that tour, like the Carlos Santana oneQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
MadMaxQuote
24FPSQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
I first heard the Vegas Stones reference in the late 70s. And LYL is what kicked it off. SFTD and IORR are mediocre at best. We just got El Mocambo, and didn't get Live in Texas until 2011, so the general Stones public had nothing to compare it to.
LYL's IORR mediocre?!?! It's the ultimate live version EVER mate!!
Ridiculous! IORR is fantastic! SFTD is completely different than the previous live alum! And still better than anything done since!
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: September 15, 2022 14:19
Quote
24FPSQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
24FPS
Expanding on what Doxa said, it is a pity that El Mocambo wasn't released in total, in place of Love You Live. LYL is what started the whole 'Vegas' Stones talk. It felt contrived, and lacked excitement. El Mocambo brought them back to that compressed feeling of being on a small stage. (Something they replicated with good effect with Sticky Fingers at the Fonda).
LYL was from 1975 and '76 shows. The Stones had already moved past that sound to a leaner, more muscular sound on El Mocambo. And Ronnie was totally integrated by 1977.
I've never seen/heard it that way ie Vegas. Upon a few years later, it was the 1989-90 tours that started the Vegas bit.
I first heard the Vegas Stones reference in the late 70s. And LYL is what kicked it off. SFTD and IORR are mediocre at best. We just got El Mocambo, and didn't get Live in Texas until 2011, so the general Stones public had nothing to compare it to.
The 'Vegas' reference didn't even exist in the late 1970's.
Mathijs
Re: The Rolling Stones Live at the El Mocambo
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: September 15, 2022 14:58
The difference between LYL and Live In Texas is essentially that they are respectively pre and post "Punk " .
The Stones "moving with the times and fashions "...which they've usualy been quite good at .
The Stones "moving with the times and fashions "...which they've usualy been quite good at .
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
djrambler , Peachykindagirl , perkmo , Quique-stone , rcfoxy , smokeydusky , steffialicia , voodoodrew
Guests:
989
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10