Just got home from the gig, heres my review:

Audio:
Horrible. For the first 4 songs we couldn't hear nothing at all.
Not only on the golden circle but everywhere as I heard from other peope in different sections of the venue.
It ruined the show for me from the very beginning.
Constant calls for volume were yelled at the staff with no results.
We started hearing jinda better after about 10 songs in the show, still I coul dhere the person next to me bumming smokes way better than the band.
At a certain pint I rushed to first row and got hold of a PA technician and told him about it, he couldn't care less.

Set-list:
We finally got Midnight Rambler and that is something, way better than 2003.
I was really impressed by Con le mie lacrime così, Mick's a true entertainer, he trooped through the song even though 65.000 people were laughing their asses off, Keith included.
I coulda used some other songs in place of SFTD and IORR but it was a fairly good setlist.

Band's performance (0 to 10):
Mick Jagger: 8
This man's got huge balls, a real pro as usual, during Midnight Rambler he looked transfigured to me, as if he were 25 again.
He kind of f**ks-up on SOL because the audience started too early to sing the refrain :wink:
Keith Richards: 4
Horrible, I hate saying this as he's always been my favourite Stone, but enough is enough.
He makes a LOT of mistakes, he completly forgets the lyrics and chord progression to BTMMR, I mean, with SA, is the only song he has to sing.
Completly f**ks-up on about 1/3 of the songs and on SFTD plays a solo even a 5 year-old could play.
I think that rather than coming off the palm tree he sould come down to Earth
and understand that we pay money to see him play like we like him to and not to see him on stage just to see him.
He would deserve an extra encouragment point for saving Mick's life right before SMU.
Mick was strolling on stage dangerously close to the flame throwers on front-stage and Keith called him and told him: "Mick, careful, this one's got fireworks". Mick realized how careless he was and smiled back, looking quite worried.
Ron Wodd: 5 1/2
He is not to be heard throughout the whole show due to bad audio and bad playing of his, still performs a killer solo on YCAGWYW.
Charlie Watts: 6
Some minor f**k-ups but basically an ordinary performance.

A special mention to Lisa Fisher, stealing the show on TNITRT, with a nipple slip out of her shirt

Stage:
I really liked the streamlined backline, seems like Ronnie and Keith have cut down on amps on-stage.
Color changes near the on-stage seats were awesome.
The moving stage wa sa very bad idea, basically anybody in the pitch could only see roadies going back and forth carrying guitars and the back of the band's amps, at least they coulda show them on the giant screen.

Ass-licks:
They showed Italy's winning goals at the World Cup before YCAGWYW and then brought Del Piero and Materazzi on stage after the band's final bow, the stadium exploded with chants for our national team.

Conclusions:
I am very sad as the thought of never going to see the Stones again has been ricocheting in my mind since the lights came back.
Keith is in no condition at all to perform up to is standards.
I'd rather know him enjoying a much deserved retirement, doing some shows every now and then than seeing him in the condition he was tonight.
On the 28th I'll be in Paris and I do really hope that this opening show was born under a bad star and that they will give me a chance to reconsider my thoughts of tonight's.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-07-12 05:29 by dunhill.

oh man thanks for the review.. but i'm a bit sad to read what you have to say about keith

stoned_in_dc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> oh man thanks for the review.. but i'm a bit sad
> to read what you have to say about keith
I am sad too, I love the man to death, I felt so bad for him.
Maybe he was just a bit nervous.
Hope they get the PA right on the next show.

I'm bummed too. I was following the setlist and I thought it looked pretty awesome. Sorry to hear that the sound sucked and that the band was sloppy. I guess we were all hoping for a monster comeback with all cylinders firing.

I guess it doesn't take long for them to get rusty, and unfortunately, it seems to take even longer to shake off the rust.

Oh well, here's hoping that the shows only get better for all of you in Europe.

Cheers

funny i saw him in ft lauuderdale in march,keith was outstanding.

john scialfa

Just came back from the show. It's almost 5 AM in Venice. I agree about the sound problems. But I think your judgment on Keith is way too severe. He has always forgotten lyrics to songs (listen to some early 70s versions of Happy). He sounded perhaps a bit more ragged than usual tonight, but not so bad after all. SFTD - as well as many other songs - sounded much, much better tonight than at any time I have seen them on this tour (Fenway, Moncton, Albany, and Boston Garden), so any issues you might have found have nothing to do with coconut trees. It was good to see him running around and smile for the entire duration. Wasn't the best show I have seen, but I was delighted nonetheless. My dad, who had never seen them before, was completely mesmerized.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-07-12 05:36 by Raoul Duke.

dunhill Wrote:
> Keith Richards: 4
> Horrible, I hate saying this as he's always been
> my favourite Stone, but enough is enough.
> He makes a LOT of mistakes, he completly forgets
> the lyrics


So the arthritis in his fingers isn't the only problem now. It seems that the head injury has caused some serious problems with his memory. Maybe he needed more rest, they sure rushed to get the tour back on schedule. Sad to hear it, Keith has always been my favorite also. I'm having second thoughts about attending any more shows when they come back to the US in the Fall. The last show I saw was LA Forum in '06, and it was indeed a Bigger Bang! Despite Keith and Ronnie's inferior guitar playing, it was a great show, and one that I want to remember forever...the Stones going out on top.

Hairball Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Despite Keith and Ronnie's
> inferior guitar playing, it was a great show, and
> one that I want to remember forever...the Stones
> going out on top.


Hairball - how do you reconcile these comments? They are a GUITAR band - if the guitar playing isn't up to standard, how can it be an "on top" show?

Hard review IMO, a friend said that they were incredible except the early sound problems.

dunhill wrote

>>>>Mick was strolling on stage dangerously close to the flame throwers on front-stage and Keith called him and told him: "Mick, careful, this one's got fireworks".>>>>

Ah Ha...ain't it good to see that the
love of those Glimmer Boys is alive and well.....XXX



ROCKMAN

I'm just curious... who is Ron Wodd ??

Also, after brain/skull surgery a few weeks ago, I'll give Keith a few more weeks to get his "stage legs" back... and if he never does, I'll accept that too, it's just "tumblin' dice" of luck one way or the other...

....not criticize his performance as "worse than a 5-year old"...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2006-07-12 07:27 by TombstoneShadow.

Well, this is honest, and I appreciate that. There is no excuse for sound that can't be heard from the front of the stage?

Here is "my" viwe of the opening night.

The volume of the first part, at least up to Lacrime, was so low that you could hardly hear them. True that everybody started shouting "volume" in a stadium fashion after the end of every song. At one point you could see Jagger and Richards looking at each other trying to understand what we were raving about.

Things got slighlty better from Rambler onwards, but only because the volume was turned up to 10. At this point I understood that the volume was not the only problem
with the PA. Guitars whent in and out. At some point you could hear them crystal clear, at some other they were completely absent. The bass and kick drum were a big mash. Vocals were good.

To give an idea of how much the sound was important, you should have been there to see how san siro reacted when finally you could hear them LOUD on a whar horse (SMU), and how the band reacted ...

Anyway, I struggled hard to find a place where you could have a decent sound, I believe my review should start from the moment I fond a decent spot (more or less on Before TMMR).

From what I could hear and guess, the band delivered a very very strong performance.

I don't agree at all with Dunhill (sorry) re the playing: it's been ages since I've seen Ron so into it. Keith was great as usual, only not in one of his "i'll solo all the time" night (which is good). Watts was truly great. His treatment of satisfaction was superb. Jagger, guess what?, was absolutely great!

The rest of the band, great as usual.

Something changed compared to 2003. The band on stage is practically the same (except did I see a second keyboardist at one point aside chuck or what?) as last time, but there was more swing in the music. I loved it.

Set list, as always when they play rambler, great!

C

>StonesTod Wrote:
> Hairball - how do you reconcile these comments?
> They are a GUITAR band - if the guitar playing
> isn't up to standard, how can it be an "on top"
> show?





For a very simple reason Stonestod.
The fact is that their guitar playing has been inferior ever since Mick Taylor left the band,
and we can all agree on that. Ever since then, it has been touch and go with Ronnie and Keith -
whether it's studio or live. Some nights are better than others, but none compare to the golden era.

But I have to say that the last show I saw at the Forum '06 rates an 8 & 1/2 out of 10.
In my mind, they were near their best that night, despite their age and regardless of Keith and Ronnie's inferior playing.
And at the time, I thought it would be the last Stones show I would ever see, so it was a bit emotional.
Hopefully they will return to the US in the Fall. I'll be there!
And I stand by my words.

"Despite Keith and Ronnie's
inferior guitar playing, it (L.A. Forum '06) was a great show,
and one that I want to remember forever...the
Stones going out on top." - Hairball '06


ps- I just read a review of the Italian concert, and supposedly Keith and Ronnie's guitar playing was
quite a bit sub-par according to the reviews.
Hopefully Keith will shake offf the rust and cobwebs, and get back to his old self.

How can it be that the sound could be so bad? I would expect with all the sound checks and the tons of technicians there that this would be like a well-oiled machine. I'm not going to bitch about ticket prices here, but it's not like they can't afford to give the people the best bang for the buck in terms of sound quality. I believe that was always somewhat of a priority.

Someone should get fired for that. That is bullshit.

TombstoneShadow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> Also, after brain/skull surgery a few weeks ago,
> I'll give Keith a few more weeks to get his "stage
> legs" back...


A few more weeks? Then the tour will be almost over...

I have just read a review from a morning paper and it gave the consert the best review: they played extremely well, they we superb - that no other band comes close to the Stones....

So this negativism in this thread is just the usual boring stupid thing coming from people liking to bash the Stones.......

I have a question for Dunhill and who ever else was at the show. Does it look like Keith has quite drinking (Alcohol)? Wasn't that part of the deal after his head injury - that he was gonna dry out? I remember reading that he was only drinking 3 cans of beer a day during recuperation at his home in the US. So if he's back to drinking as much alcohol as he did before the accident that could be part of the sloppy problem....what do you think?

The band was great and the crowd was great. If you look for superiority and the unique rather than counting mistakes then I am sure you will be able to enjoy the show a lot more. Everybody was singing along to Streets Of Love. I mean everybody. IORR was another great winner. Midnight Rambler was making everybody around me and in the rest of the stadium jump and dance like crazy. Con Le Mie Lacrime - Mick's voice was crystal clear and the sound perfect where I was on the field/floor.

And if you did not go to the show and have comments on the set list then it's your proble. You were not there. This show was for the fans in Milan and Italy, not for the internet judges making points on variations of set lists. The crowd loved it, and so did the press too it seems.

Bjornulf

country honk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have just read a review from a morning paper and
> it gave the consert the best review: they played
> extremely well, they we superb - that no other
> band comes close to the Stones....
>
> So this negativism in this thread is just the
> usual boring stupid thing coming from people
> liking to bash the Stones.......

Here's the link - at least for all Scandinavians here
[www.jp.dk]

I am with BV, as for Hairball mourning about the guitar playing of the last 30 years since MT left, that is his opinion and he is welcome to it. I have enjoyed much of the last 30 years , and while the style is different , would not put any version of the Stones above another. I just could not imagine MT and his fluid vibrato on Some Girls, or even on the new songs like RJ or ONNYA.

I was right at the B Stage, and they have rerturned apparently to the Licks verions of two sounds sytems. in the USA they seemed to keep the main sytem running at all times. But here, as the band moved back, there was a transitiion from one sound system to the other that at times seemed to create a loud muddy mix. Even Chuck at one point was looking off to techs grimacing and rolling his eyes. Mick seemed unhappy about his microphone, but other than those few songs, while not the best sound, it was not as bad as the above want to complain...at least not where I was standing.

Kieth is Kieth. Oh God yes, he messed up the lyrics to BTMMR, but he was so happy to be playing it, and considereing the past few weks, he was playing as a statement of defiance in a way. His heart was totally into to it. During Sympathy, when he strode forward with all the Rock Star arrogance he could muster, sat at the edge of the stage, and ripped off another solo, I was overjoyed. Sure, 100 edgy technically proficient players could have wowed us with a more difficult solo, Hell probabaly half the majors in Music at UCLA in guitar could have run more scales, bent more notes,employed more vibrato, BUT THIS WAS KEITH POURING HIS HEART OUT, and to me, he played exactly what he needed to play.

This was openintg night guys, and the Stones have had shaky opening nights for 40 years. IN that light, I would say this went well. It cretainly went better than a lot of people hoped for. I am glad I was there to enjoy it all. Audience members kept holding up a sign that said "OLD LIONS ROAR AGAIN." They did indeed and as far as I am concerned, the roar was loud and proud.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-07-12 13:03 by kahoosier.

I have also to recognize that I was a lot disappointed yesterday night.
It was the premiere of Con Le Mie Lacrime, but Mick was all the time looking on the screen to read the words and this was a very "flat" version.
Premiere of Streets of Love...this song is a mistake on Bigger Bang, so no way it's different on stage, but here in Italy most of young audience seems to like that, like they love Zucchero !

But I was mainly embarrassed with Keith yesterday. OK he's got a serious injury some weeks ago, but the 2006 Keith Richards is far far away from the 2003 one with his guitar.
The number of mistakes he made was incredible. I repeat, I was embarrassed for him. Specially on songs he played for decades. I don't understand what happens.
Mick is always Mick, but now he can't anymore save the errors of his alltime mate.

Good lightshow, awful sound = a very average night for me in San Siro.

I'm in Massachusetts USA, and didnt attend the Milan show and wont comment on it specifically, but I have seen several shows on the US tour, and agree with liddas - the band swings, and since the mid 90s has moved away from both the overly synchronized aspect that marred the '89-90 tours (well, except for possibly SFTD), and relies less on keys/horns (on ABB, the tour) than any time since the early 80s...And sorry about any sound problems that frustrated attendees - but again the guitars have been upfront, raw, and grungey...

Will they bring Zidane on in Paris?

MicksBrain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have a question for Dunhill and who ever else
> was at the show. Does it look like Keith has quite
> drinking (Alcohol)? Wasn't that part of the deal
> after his head injury - that he was gonna dry out?
> I remember reading that he was only drinking 3
> cans of beer a day during recuperation at his home
> in the US. So if he's back to drinking as much
> alcohol as he did before the accident that could
> be part of the sloppy problem....what do you
> think?

CAN SOMEONE THAT WAS THERE ANSWER THIS PLEASE ?

Nikolai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Will they bring Zidane on in Paris?

Guest list whiner.

----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."

"Shit!... No shit, awright!"

Good one, Greg!

I bet yer arse the gig reports on the review pages and press give a glowing show report...... not the usual griping from a select few on this board.

Sod em! I'm glad there back and can't wait till Twicks.....

Sod em ! You guys still use that one ?

I’m sorry, but I’m not with bv on this one. No offense to the guy – his work here is tremendous – but I have the feeling that, if the four members of the Rolling Stones collectively attacked him in some dark alley in Harlem and proceeded to arse rape him and beat him to a pulp only to leave him for dead, he’d still find some way to justify what they did to him.

A couple of thoughts for those of you interested (probably not many):

01.) I never really considered the Stones a “guitar band,” but rather more of a high-energy bare-bones rock and roll act. I don’t know many people that go to Stones shows to concentrate on the guitar playing, like they would have for maybe Stevie Ray Vaughn. The Allman Brothers Band is a guitar band. When you go to see the ABB you know more than half the show will be just guitar solos and that’s why most people go.

02.) Why is it such a bad thing to comment negatively on Keith’s and Ronnie’s playing after listening to a boot or watching a video. Was Keith’s horrible “Brown Sugar” intro at the Columbus show last year (for example) any different live than on tape? Most of us have seen them in the past five years (at least on the Licks tour) to know that Ronnie and Keith aren’t as good as they were. It’s not necessarily a reason for me to not see a show, but I should be allowed to comment on it. I think the atmosphere and energy of a live show make many pay less attention to exactly how good or bad the guitar playing really is.

03.) Although I wouldn’t say the Stones lost their guitar sound with the departure of Taylor, it sure became less of a role. And yes, Ronnie’s playing isn’t that great. The guy relies on sloppy bends, out-of-tune notes and a lack of imagination in his solos. I cringe sometimes when I hear the solos his plays. Keith seems to be a bit more “in tune” but he doesn’t do much. I wouldn’t call that a bad guitarist, though. I think he’s paying more attention to his posing and prancing about..

04.) Why is the press hailed for giving the show a positive review, but condemned when they say something bad about our guys? Take a stance and stick with it.

Why is commenting negatively on the band’s performance such a bad thing? Does it make anyone less of a fan? Why can’t we also be critical of the things we love? I love the Stones, but know of many other bands who are technically better. It doesn’t change my love for the band and their music, but I should be afforded the right to criticize them when I’m paying them.

Peach out!

Duane-o