The first pic in this thread is indeed from Anaheim!

Sorry Rockdoc and Chelsea....Someone in the forums here a long while ago indicated that the shoe throwing took place in Cleveland. And I took it as gospel. I'll get my facts straight next time I post.

"I'm the bleeding volcano"

Leonard - on the above 'shoes' pic - could that be your all-star converse shoe on the far right of the picture?

for my taste, the '78 tour is the stones at their garagy best......love the sloppy, balls to the wall performances......beats the hell out of cautious, perfect shows...........mistakes....big deal...that's part of the Stones charm...makes 'em that more real........usually fans who like raw, punkish music love this tour........and that includes me

T&A Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Leonard - on the above 'shoes' pic - could that be
> your all-star converse shoe on the far right of
> the picture?


T & A.....those are too big....i'm a shrimp....black converse, size 8...................nothin like walkin barefoot through the hot cement of the parking lot in the hot southern california summer...........great memory...'78 was a Some Girls summer

I love Handsome Girls--they were rockin'--badasses--the last tour where the Stones were actually relevant. Love the version of Love in Vain. And they played almost all of Some Girls! Since then they've become an oldies act. Only die hards like us care about hearing the new stuff. 1978--the last year of Glory--wish I was there! The last time that they were really trashy--look at Mick's duds!

Mick Rotten says: you're the easiest lay on the White House lawn!

Never seen that shot before,very nice.Thanks.

Chas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I love Handsome Girls--they were
> rockin'--badasses--the last tour where the Stones
> were actually relevant. Love the version of Love
> in Vain. And they played almost all of Some Girls!
> Since then they've become an oldies act. Only die
> hards like us care about hearing the new stuff.
> 1978--the last year of Glory--wish I was there!
> The last time that they were really trashy--look
> at Mick's duds!
>
>
>

I must confess to agreeing with you at the cost and risk of being trashed as "nostalgic" and "stuck in the past." But the truth of the matter is that (for whatever reasons you choose) they have become an oldies act, albeit a very good one at that.

mick was at the height of his fruityness on the 78 tour, and the best thing was that he didnt care what anyone thought, thus the face licking on snl

To, the 1978 and 1981 tours will always be my favorite ever tours. They are aggressive, raw, bold, punk, rude. No matter if someone makes a mistake, it's the attitude dripping from the speakers. Both tours have Charlie and Bill at their best, and the weaving between Wood and Richards just couldn't be better. I just love it.

Mathijs

Wish I was old enough to have gone to a show in '78. I was 4 years old at the time and wasn't turned on to the Stones for another 3 years (thanks big brother). So I guess I have to live vicariously through those of you who were there and watch/listen to my bootlegs of the tour.

ok---I was on holiday in california 1978. Really like the "some girls", saw the Stones in Anaheim--24th of july--and oakland--26th of July 1978.
i was a little bit dissapointed . Sure---they played a lot of "girls"-stuff--but the sound was awful. nevertheless--i like the Stones---and we had great party on micks 35 birthday

Inopeng said about the 1978 Chicago concert: "Funny thing about that Chicago show, the temperature itself was only 68 that day...but all of those bodies and all that sun..."

I don't know where you were that day, but in Soldier Field it was HOT. The Farmers Almanac states July 08, 1978 the Meigs Field minimum temp. was 72F with a high of 86F. Inside there on the field itself in the mid to late afternoon it had to have been 90-100F. I had to take my girlfriend off the field for water as she was getting dehyrdrated and about to faint. This was during Beast of Burden and I was upset to have missed much of this. Fun day though. I will always remember how strikingly healthy Keith appeared compared with the 1972 through 1976 tours.

And that's the way it was...

bigfrankie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> rainhog Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > bassplayer617 mentioned the '78 dvd. is it
> > watchable? is it enjoyable? any info would
> be
> > great. I think the '78 tour was sloppy
> r&r
> > (classic stones) which I find GREAT to listen
> to!!
> > IN YOUR FACE ROCK AND ROLL...........
>
>
> Hey Hog. The 78 Ft worth DVD is very watchable. I
> think there's athread on it from a couple weeks
> back. Anyway, here's the BigFrankie review:
>
> 1) Let it Rock- out of key sloppy solo by Ronnie,
> Mick forgets the words to the second verse- Keef
> looks at him and smiles (it still sounds good)
> 2) ALl Down The Line (average)
> 3) Honky Tonk Women ( pretty good)
> 4) STar Star( Keef screwes up the opening- ok
> version)
> 5) Whip COmes DOwn (GREAT- Keef and Ronnie singing
> into one mic)
> 6) Beast of Burden (GREAT GREAT GREAT- mick and
> Keef singing into one mic, Keef and Ronnie are in
> a ZONE!- GREAT)
>
> The picture is not perfect but very watchable
>
> The second part is interviews with Mic mixed in
> with short concert bites.
>
> I think it was well worth $17.99.
>
> The only issue I have is it's not the complete
> show.
>
> In regard to 78 overall. Memphis (I have the
> complete show "Summer Romance") which I got on
> vinyl shortly after the show- is one of teh best
> Stones live shows I ahve ever heard. Some of the
> others were sloppy- but somehow still very good.
> If you like Some Girls you liked 78.
>
> don't give me that ole one two, one two three four
big frankie, thanks for the info. just ordered myself a copy.

I'd take the stripped down and raw 78 tour over the high gloss and glitz of 89-90 and beyond any day! Every picture the band seems drenched in sweat and completely rocking out every last bit of energy left.

Absolutely overated. Sure they had great energy but they were 28 years younger. If there was ever a tour where they just went throughh the motions to finish a show and go home this was the One.

recordings don't lie, virgil. you can honestly listen to Handsome Girls and tell me they were going thru the motions? if so - I say: "I second those motions!"

virgil Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Absolutely overated. Sure they had great energy
> but they were 28 years younger. If there was ever
> a tour where they just went throughh the motions
> to finish a show and go home this was the One.


wow...interesting how different people react differently to music....when i hear Handsome Girls & watch the live video from '78, it's nothing but inspiration, blood & guts, sweaty energy, riding high on the artistic and commercial success of Some Girls and the challenge of the punk movement at that time

T&A Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> recordings don't lie, virgil. you can honestly
> listen to Handsome Girls and tell me they were
> going thru the motions? if so - I say: "I second
> those motions!"


I am not denying the energy or the quality but they varied the setlist miniscule.The shows were rushed, Averaged 90 minutes. They played songs they really did not require alot of effort. Also twice that tour from my seats I could see them running to get out of there.

INteresting Note: I remember in Buffalo, I am not sure why but Mick had to take the lead on Happy about 1/2 way through.

Mick took the lead on Happy on every version through 1978...nothin' unusual there. As for requiring effort - half the '78 set had never been played before - that ALONE required attention and effort, unlike today's setlists which can literally be played in their sleep. I'll take 90 takes of adrenaline and high-octane energy over a been-there-done-that 2 hour show anyday....

Personal bias - Hate the sunlight and Mick's caps.

the Madman of Buffalo




Lies that my papa told

Go chippy...damn fine images your hangin' on the wall..keep 'em comin'



ROCKMAN

That definitely wasn't Chicago...I have a video boot of that show shot from pretty high but close to the stage on Keith's side...have they come a long way...
the outdoor shows were done in the day because they didn't need lights and there were no video screens...it really makes it more unbelieveable that they could rock 90,000 people who couldn't even see them.

I believe that first picture is Anaheim.

PECMAN

In regard to 78 vs 81. I was around then and have listened to many boots. 78 was much better, much more intense and flat out better. 78 was also different in that The Stones played virtually all of Some Girls at each show, plus some favorites. The big downside of 78 was the lack of some classic stuff.

You have to remember at the time. The Stones were "proving" that they did not have to rely on the "oldies". At that time that meant anything pre-1974.

If you listen to Memphgis 78 vs. Still Life- I just don't see how 81 compares. Listen to Just My Imagination 78 and then 81. Nuff said.

don't give me that ole one two, one two three four

1978. I was at the Anaheim show and the sound sucked but the shoe throwing incident was very funny! You should have seen the stage. It was covered with shoes.

T&A Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mick took the lead on Happy on every version
> through 1978...nothin' unusual there. As for
> requiring effort - half the '78 set had never been
> played before - that ALONE required attention and
> effort, unlike today's setlists which can
> literally be played in their sleep. I'll take 90
> takes of adrenaline and high-octane energy over a
> been-there-done-that 2 hour show anyday....


1. Why Did Mick take the lead. 2. Sway, Worried About you, ATPTB Could be done in there sleep. I don't think so. I'll take 2 hrs and some Mediocre gems here and there any day over the consistent garage setlist of 78.

virgil Wrote:
> I'll take 2 hrs and some Mediocre
> gems here and there any day over the consistent
> garage setlist of 78.

Then go see Foreigner or Dire Straits or something. "Garage" is what the Stones were all about from '63 until '81. It was there absolute strength, making brilliant music with a garage attitude. That's what's Sticky and Exile is all about.

Mathijs

I've seen the Stones about 25 times. Always refer to the 78 show at JFK in Philly as the worst. Besides the rain, they raced through the set (lucky if it was an hour) and the crowd was so pissed, it threw everything they could find at the stage. I remember the crew running around and things getting destroyed. Does anyone remember this?? I was young, but I am sure it happened.