Just when they seemed like they would mix it up a little the shows have settled into a familiar pattern IMHO.

The latter half is really dragging.
Why did they drop IORR as the encore ? I thought it was a refreshing change.

Latter half perks up when Paint it Black or OOC are added and JJF is the ultimate CLOSER !

B stage ditto.
How about;

1.Oh no Not You Again
2.SATISFACTION
3.Shattered
4.Lets spend the night
5.You can't always get w y w / fingerprint File
6.She saw me coming
7.Back of my hand / LIND / Worried about you
8.All down the line / Paint it black
9.HTW
10.Night time / Jigsaw puzzle / Rooster
11.This place / the worst
12.Little t&a
13.SMU - to B Stage
14.Rough Justice /Respectable
15.Let it Rock
16.Street Fighting Man - to Main Stage
17.Sympathy
18.B SUGAR
19.JJF

20.Rambler /Shelter
21.IORR

Very nice!!!!indeed MR as last song fits better thought.

im expecting a lot of changes when they come back to the states for a little bit and then major changes in europe, like i posted on another topic, they have played roughly 50 songs, so far, compared to the 80 or so last tour, so they definatly will be including more different songs. the thing is they are playing places that a) have never been played or b) havnt been played in awhile..so a relativly hits set list is neccisary... T/A FOR KEITH!

Yeah the set list and the show is now to borderline pathetic. That Rio show just proves it and then Argentina YAWN. The only song at Rio that was OK was RJ and GOOMC. I hope Stones dont make fools of themselves and release this crap on DVD. Hope the small venues in Vegas and NY to be much better and tape those for a release.

bersagurra i hope u saw my most recent post regarding the current set lists of the last few dates o by the way if they do release that dvd you dont have to buy it nor do you have to check out anymore shows

seems thats how they do it when the only play one show per country....

i was thinking the same thing after reading the last couple of set-lists..i hate to be negative, but a major makeover is needed..
even putting some of the warhorses up front..
monkey man, before they make me run, and loving cup would be welcomed additions.

I am not a big fan of recycling songs from recent tours although,Loving Cup is rare enough.I think that if they're going to go through "the trouble" of rehearsing and working up something,they should try something completely different or at least something that hasn't been done for a while.

Set list getting stale again? It's been stale since the second show of the tour! I admit it's getting even more stale lately, tho. It seems like lately about 17 of the 20 songs are written in stone and there are only about three spots where there's any drama at all. Boring!!!

In an effort to be positive, I will say at least they're playing four songs from ABB, not two or three like they were for awhile. It's the same four songs over and over, tho. I don't understand why they don't at least bring back Back Of My Hand. I'd much rather hear that than the umpteenth rendition of Rain Fall Down.

Its stale when you only look at the setlist night after night. But come on your not there most of the time letting these great songs blast in your ears. It's almost a waste of time to say what your saying. However, from afar like we all are only hearing a couple shows here and then and looking at the setlist every other night it does get old. Anyhow, Hail to the Stones! Tom

pretty good point tom...also people look at the set lists and im sure you guys went to a lot of shows back in the 70s-80s when there was absolutly no change in the set list at all can you imagine if they went out playing the some girls album night after night...it might seem like a nice idea now, but a month into the show you guys would be burning this place down

I agree, the set list from Sunday night is uninspired. I don't like the fact that they seem to be settling into a pattern of 20 songs for the stadiums, when it looked like they would be doing 21. On the other hand, I just watched Rio again, and saw them do all those old warhorses and guess what -- I can't wait to see my next show (LA Forum)!!

There's no question the performances are still outstanding for the most part - exciting, inspiring, etc. I give them an A for performance and a D for variety.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-02-28 06:37 by ohnonotyouagain.

Fair enough. Actually very fair enough.

That's the problem. The Stones on stage, playing the same old crap, and I would pay $400 to see them before I would pay $100 to see anyone else.

Oh great not this topic again just when I thought all the bitching had stopped some jerk starts running his mouth and crying again.

if I were a Mexican, I'd want my money back! what a lame set list last night!

Well just read all the reviews and everyone in mexico loved the show so take your opinion and shove it.

Rickster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh great not this topic again just when I thought
> all the bitching had stopped some jerk starts
> running his mouth and crying again.
So what do you call this post?It sounds like bitching and crying to me.If you like these last couple of set lists so much,then you must not have liked some of the more well balanced set lists from the past few tours.Or maybe you're one of those "no matter what they do,whatever they do is right" people.Some people actually like more than 5% of the songs the Stones have made & think that it sucks that they can't be heard live.Some people would like to see some kind of creativity.I don't think that's too unreasonable.

They did plenty of creativity druing the club shows on the licks tour unfortunatly they are not doing any club shows this tour But the reason they are not is because they want to play more citys not 3 shows per city that way people who have never seen them or have not seen them for many years get a chance to see them. Believe me the majority of the people attending there shows want the big hits so to think they will play a whole show of rare stuff in stadiums or areans is not going to happen becauase people want the hits when they pay big money.

Like I said before the Stones nowadays are mainly an oldies act, and luckily enough it works for them. So if the money comes in why should they bother about their setlists?

True, but they have a chance in Vegas and New York soon to really put on a show. I hope they do it, Im tired of complaining, I ve seen them on this tour and its stale. Too bad.

It isn't about set lits, it is about performances. The performances have been great. The people leaving the show are happy and satisfied at that's what counts, not people listening to 40 bootlegs from the tour or @#$%& on a website review setlist statistics.

I agree with a few of the posters here that the setlist will remain standard if they are playing one or two shows per country. When they play multiple shows in close proximity to one another, they usually change the setlist a little bit.

When you look at the stadium shows, there probably will not be a lot of variety. Many of the visuals are computerized and designed specifically for the type and length of the song they are playing. In other words, don't look for Can't You Hear Me Knocking in place of Start Me Up. Consequently, they will do little to no alteration to the warhorse section immediately following the b-stage. Lastly, they time their shows to be 2 hours in length give or take a few minutes depending upon how long Mick and Keith want to talk to the audience. Therefore, as I have said before, on nights when Rambler is played or something similar to its length of about 11 minutes, they will play only 20 songs. On nights where they can play two relatively fast numbers like Bitch, Shattered, All Down The Line, etc. they will probably play 21 songs.

I agree with rocksoff and tom that their setlists in the past up until Voodoo Lounge will nearly identical every night. Most people, like BV has said before see one or two shows and that is it and for many of the Europeans on this board, have yet to see a show on this tour. No, the Stones are not Springsteen who mixes his setlist dramatically almost every night. Then again, Springsteen is not the Stones who have choreographed many of their tunes through visuals, screens, etc that Springsteen just plays and could care less about visuals even when he is playing to 60,000 people. Personally, if I'm in the last row at a Stones concert, I guarantee you I'm having a better concert experience than somebody in the same seat at a Springsteen show. Keith may call the visuals the "whores for the eyes", but I think Mick is right. In a large venue, you need something to pique people's interest because the sound isn't always that great.

The one complaint I have is the indoor arena shows with not nearly as much visuals could be mixed up better and no matter where they are playing, the three song B-Stage could and should be changed. There is little to no visuals and although once again the Stones appear to be on a time limit, they could change it up and play three great non-warhorse tunes on the b-stage every night. I would suggest a Chuck Berry cover like Little Queenie in '97 (my fav would be Around and Around, great for a small stage that although is rectangular, Mick does go all the way around), Respectable, Shattered, Live With Me, You Got Me Rocking, ugh, Let It Rock, or even better yet a TWO SONG BLUES SET with Love In Vain/Back of My Hand/Laugh I Nearly Died and Midnight Rambler. Nearly all of these songs they have played or at least rehearsed for this tour. None of them require the horns or perhaps even Chuck to play, and there are so many more straight ahead rockers that people know, but are not considered part of the warhorses they could play here.

There you have it, at least change the b-stage setlist some and that will satisfy some of us.

Is it the set list thats stale or these threads? Always seems like a form of train spotting to me........

They must not be that stale since this is the top grossing tour of all time.

setlist is only stale,
if you are wealthy enough to be able to attend multiple shows.
99% of shows, outside the U.S are stadiums.
With stadium shows, (max 2 shows per city?) you're going to see a warhorses set.

Rickster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well just read all the reviews and everyone in
> mexico loved the show so take your opinion and
> shove it.


Everyone? Wow, you've got quite the access to ALOT of fans.

Looking positive again eh......

keepin' it real