I think of "Satisfaction" and "Under My Thumb" as never having left the rotation from '67, though I may be wrong.

From my perspective, I don't really think of the berry tunes as "their" songs, or coming from any particular time, even if they recorded some and didn't record others. Just seems like they throw in a few berry tunes or other oldies at every show (and they are often highlights!). I could be idiosyncratic in that view.

And then there's "I'm Free."

I guess the question would be, did listeners in '69 feel like they were old songs? I'd really like a book of compiled reviews.

Not bored with it at all, a diverse setlist for a new fan (pre-Some Girls) like me. Lotta 'Some Girls' and 'Tatto You' material mixed with classics. I was a pip during The Stones' heydays in 1969-1973 so this was my generation Stones. I saw the Stones at one of the Largo, MD '81 shows, which two tracks ended up on "Still Life" live album (Going to a Go Go & Twenty Flight Rock). 'Going to A Go Go' was magic, little would I know it would end up on the live album. I remember being impressed by 'Shattered' and "Start Me Up" (yeah, they're sloppy now, but back then were great). A faster version of 'Let Me Go' was a nice rocker. I can't recall 'She's So Cold' but it's good that it's brought back in the current setlist. I think I wanted to hear 'Emotional Rescue' as I had memories when that came out. 'Time Is On My Side' and 'You Can't Always Get What You Want' were quite a classic experience as well. It's nice 'Beast of Burden' came out on the Rarities cd, I need to get that as it's a pretty good performance than others I'd heard. To one's own.

i guess i think of old numbers as old whether they've left the rotation or not.
meanwhile, i need to recant on Little Queenie - timeisonourside.com indicates that they played it for the first time in 69. sorry!


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith

Well, you really had to be there. Gothenburg 1982 was my first 2 Stonesconcerts, and I will never forget them (have a look here [www.stonesvikings.com], I believe this was the last real "guitar tour". I love all of the bootlegs that came out of the 81/82 tour, I won´t even complain about the stale setlists, I simply love them! It was such an experience to be there, and I can´t imagine someone who was´nt there could pass a just judgement, just as I can´t pass a just judgement on previous tours, altough the livedocuments that exist suggest they were even greater. I love to listen to the Taylor era ( OK, I admit, I am an closet Taylor fan, don´t hold it against me, as I don´t try to push it here).

Vilhelm
Nordic Stones Vikings



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-11-25 21:40 by mickijaggeroo.

Esky my man, I guess you have drank too much beer today You are absolutely wrong! The 81 tour is just great. I would say it (and 82) was their last great tour.

I really cannot understand those of you who say that ABB is better than 81. You cannot be serious. Or maybe you just like more Las Vegas acts than rock bands ??!!

Jep , must agree with Vilhem , Gothenburg 1982 was absolutely great specially When the Wip Comes Down was a highlight for me as far as I remember.
But from that on the live acts have become even better and better imo . The Urban Jungle tour was several steps up in the quality of the shows . And uptil our days they still deliver the fantastic rock and bluesmusic like they did in their hey days of Get Yer Ya-Ya`s Out !
It`s so GREAT they are still touring and I think it`s such a gift that we have them here in Europe next year !!!!!

i think that the bottom line is that rock shows in baseball stadiums suck ... having seen the stones in '78 (anaheim), '81 (l.a. coliseum), '89 (l.a. & oakland coliseums), '94 (rose bowl & denver mile high), '97 (dodger stadium), i can confidently say that those shows were all, more or less, pathetic ... fortunately, i've seen them at a bunch of smaller venues too

My one and only Stones show was during that 1981 tour -- I saw the band in Lexington KY. Simply being there was good enough for me. At least I got to see them while Bill was still there.

The thing that escapes most people is the overall experience of BEING THERE -- that can't be captured on a bootleg.

Given the ecstatic reviews of the fans who were THERE during 2005, the boots don't mean a thing.

For example, I'm listening to a 1981 boot right now -- I missed much of what was happening in each song simply because I was so caught up in the overall spectacle.

Put simply, the Stones "make show" like no one else, and are STILL doing it.

I detect a lot of bitterness in the negative posters, because the prices in 2005 are exhorbitant. How much did I pay to see the Stones in 1981? $16 -- no shit -- I still have the ticket stub.

Bill was still there 8 and 9 years later.

cc

The Urban Jungle tour was the most tight the Stones ever been (did not see the Steel Wheels tour, but it was the same), the musicianship and tightness of the band was outstanding. I sometimes see someone asking the question if not a band like AC/DC is better (referring to the 2003 joint gigs), and it´s like two completely different bands, that can´t be judged against each other. Stones music is loose but verý groovy, accadacca´s music is very tight, but also very groovy. They are the two sides of the coin, therefor they go so well together.
I saw the Stones in Boston this August, and the opening show...well, the second show was the band I love, and everytime I see them, there comes a moment in the show, where they´ll bring tears to my eyes. Please forgive an old Viking, Í just had some beers.....

Vilhelm
Nordic Stones Vikings

The '78' and '81' tours were the last of the great Stones tours. Both tours were pushing very good albums. The guitar work on the '81' tour was outstanding, a pure weaving twin guitar attack that produced great results. Micks voice changed for the worse as he got older (for me) and in '81' it was still cooking. Charlie and Bill what can you say but rock solid in '81'. The band still looked very cool, Keiths look in '81', what guitar player didn't want to be Keith Richards!
That being said I loved the '69' and '72' tours but '78' and '81' defines part of there legend. To me eveything that came after '81''82' left me longing for the good old days. But hey my wife was better in the sack in the old days to!

ohcarol, I think you are very right.
Keith looked very cool on this tour.
They all did. You get the feeling that they are really enjoying themselves, and rocking without "having" to rock.
In the 70s it was more "underground", many people have heard the Stones, but didnt dare to go to concerts. In 81/82 there were bigger concerts, and a kind of nice and friendly magic in the air. And these legends in the Rolling Stones who played rock music, was much more alive than other "rock-legends". To me, it was the first tour they were "grown-ups", but still with plenty of energy (unlike some shows in the 90s/2000s).
Its kind of strange, though, that the concerts in 1982 was lacking that extra spark they had in 1981.
They seemed to have fun on the stage in 1981, theres plenty of videos to witness that.

ChelseaDrugstore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am curious LOGIE - do you think the post 89
> tours were better or worse than 81?


Very good question ChelseaDrugstore!

I personally consider both the Voodoo Lounge and Bridges to Babylon shows to be miles better than anything from the 81/82 tour, and even when at their sloppiest during the Licks extravaganza, they could never come close to reaching the depths plummeted at Roundhay Park, Leeds. My God, even the stage on that tour resembled a giant bouncy castle.

You are right, the sax often destroyed many songs on this tour. E.g. "You can't Always Get what You Want": Ernie Watts join the band usually during the vocal part in the beginning, and it sounds terrible. On many songs you get the impression that the sound was overloaded with instruments. "Beast of Burden" is a exception: I like the sax, the guitar solos and then the interweaving part of all instruments. But the most annoying thing is that the vocals of Mick Jagger are somewhat too deep. Sometimes he sang like a opera singer, and this didn't fit to the character of a rock band, sometimes he was barking like a dog ...

T&A Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 81 was the last of the great pure rock'n'roll
> tours. Been a lounge act since '89. The weave
> disappeared on stage after 81 as well. If you
> don't "get it" then....well, you just don't get it
> and you never will.


AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ernie was a very cool addition to the act in '81. His fills and riffs were the perfect tonic to the twin guitar assault.

Not sure where these folks are comming from.............obviously did not see the tour live>>>>>>>>>>>>>>. Can anyone say Hampton...........Both shows I saw were without complaint!!!!

Boulder and Kansas City here...like T&A said,"If you don't "get it" then..well,you just don't get it and never will"

I really preferred the setlist of the 81 tour, but the playing and vamping of the 78 tour. Jagger's barking vocals and the overbearing sax of Ernie Watts didn't do it for me.

81 was my first tour so I had nothing to compare it with. Thought they were very energetic (coulda been the coke), but very sloppy and drunk. Lots of fun, not the best sound.

All that said, it really is almost by rote these days. Sound is much better, but no spontaneous moments (not many anyway). It kinda depends on one's preference.

i thought the band sounded really sloppy and the sound was bad. i attended the pontiac silverdome show around dec 1 1981. the 'still life' album really lacked fire although i do like the first 4 tracks on it. there must've been better tracks to pick from the tour than that.

santana and iggy pop opened that nite and they both played a lot better. the stones kept us waiting 2 hours 1/2 before they took the stage after santana left.

the 89 tour was much better with better song selection and set but as someone else said almost cabaret. now i'm afraid we're back to a very sloppy inconsistent sound again as shown the music awards.

Man! What opening acts: Santana and Iggy! Without question the Detroit show had to have been the best one of the ENTIRE 81-82 tour in spite of Buffalo's great "Down the road apiece". Or then again, perhaps the Stones played that as well that night in Detroit. In short, Iggy + Mick&Keith==rock and roll freaking NIRVANA.

Charles Baudelaire
1821-1867

Speaking of opening acts.....Van Halen rocked Orlando during the 81 tour.

Every Rolling Stones concert ever played sucked, and every Rolling Stones concert ever played was great.

I think the above statement explains everything.

The 1981 tour is one of my fave.For me it's the great cool BOOGIE TOUR. Sometimes they play like a jazz band, I love the KR/RW guitar race, the cool jazzy drumming of CW, the boogie piano.The best is Down the road apiece! It was the last non commercial sound of RS tours.

the 81-82 tour was the last great tour before the vegas style tours
starting with steel wheels to the present day, 81-82 was just kick ass rock n roll , no frills

81 was full of poor lead vocals, drunk guitar players, lousy back up vocals and a dominating sax player. Some of these shows were barely up to profesional standars.

If by Vegas style, you mean harmonies, sober guitar players, guitars that are actually in tune, players actually playing in the right key.........gimme Vegas.

Shawn20 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 81 was full of poor lead vocals, drunk guitar
> players


right, in other words, THE ROLLING STONES

I saw the Stones at the Superdome in New Orleans in December 1981 for $18.75. Very good show but the Superdome is too big for a concert. This show was said to have been the largest indoor event ever at the time. The 78 show I attented in Memphis was superior.

The two 2005 ABB shows (Atlanta, Hollywood 1) that I've attended so far this tour I feel were much better than 1981.

As value goes......it is hard to beat the $18.75 ticket. I was also at the Superdome show of 81. The Neville Brothers and George Thorogood were the opening acts. It was a good show, but does not begin to compare with 89 Steel Wheels show I saw in the dome. As far as the size goes.....I was in the very back and top of the Dome for the 89 show and it was great. Steel Wheels was a major improvement over 81........not even close. The tickets were expensive for the time, but still not a bad value. They were in the $35-$55 range.