Well, I don't like the setlist. Period.
Playing only 18 (I guess the show had a 1978-length) songs, mostly big hits that have been performed for years, in front of an audience that payed several hundred dollars is close to a rip-off.
I'm sure people were mostly happy after the show, but they could have been more happy with 21 instead of 18 songs.
This whole tour sucks, every step in the right direction is followed by 1 step backwards.
During nearly 100 shows, the Stones proudly ignored their huge back catalogue, not to speak of their latest album.
The biggest lows:
Kicking out "Out Of Control" after Seattle last year and creating a boring warhorse run in the last third.
Not playing anything new except "Rough Justice" and "ONNYA" at many shows.
A tour kick off without any surprises.
Placing warhorses on the B-stage and permanently reducing the number of songs (not the number of "Start Me Up"s and "IORR"s).

I'm from Halifax, and I was at the concert yesterday. There were close to 50,000 fans to welcome the Rolling Stones to our city. It was pouring down rain for most of the time. By the time "Sir Mick and the boys" arrived on stage most of us were soaked to the bone wet.

Hearing those first trickles of the notes from Paint It Black to the end of the setlist for Brown Sugar made the entire wait worth it. Even though the setlist was made up of songs old and new....and considering the amount of rain that was falling from the heavens....and the age some of us are getting to be.... I was absolutely thrilled to see them and take in every note and sound that they were making. After all it was the moment most of us at the concert had waited for during the entire day! Wet or not...we sang with them...danced with them...and raised our hands in joy.....at the great fortune our city had in having them.

The conditions for this concert were not ideal even the wind started to blow a bit....and on it went. The band got every bit as soaked as the fans when the B stage made its trip out to the middle of the audience....and on they played...and one we cheered them! I was at the show with some friends and family...and we all agreed that it was a thrill to be part of it.

Seeing the title of this thread made me feel a little sad. I have seen the Stones 2 other times during this tour. Not in my own city. But for the folks in Halifax. I can say we loved having "the boys" here in our city, and the setlist for us was one some of us may only ever hear live once!

I can understand that for folks that have been to a number of concerts perhaps the frustration of the setlist not being "changed up" much.

Happy to see the Rolling Stones anytime....cheers from Halifax.

Oh boy, another thread about setlists. So here I go again. Given what I know about Chuck Leavell, when he drew up the list, he was operating under certain presumptions. One, he knows Jagger will have the mindset this is a place they've never played before, the proximity to Moncton notwithstanding. So, they went with the more standard songs. No use in even suggesting a setlist like Boston's, because it will never pass muster with Jagger. Two, Keith's songs from Boston very likely stayed in because he made it known that's what he wants to do now. If Keith had decided he was going to sing Silly Love Songs and The Twist that's what would have happened. One only maybe, possibly, gently suggests to Keith songs for him. And three, with apologies to those who criticize the setlists, Jagger doesn't give one damn about what you think of the setlist if you didn't pay to get in to see the show. In other words, if you weren't in the rain in Halifax, and you can hear him say it, piss off if you don't like what they played. And please, no flaming me for that, I'm just repeating what undoubtedly is Jagger's take on it.

As for the rain, it very much had everything to do with just 18 songs. I've been to one Stones show where it was like a monsoon, San Diego 1997. I was awestruck at their ability to slough off the rain for two hours and play like madmen. "If you have to sit in it, the least we can do is play in it", said Jagger. For me, it underscored why this band, in their late 50's at that point, still endured. Carlos Santana opened that show, and he never left the protection of the overhang. Jagger spent two hours performing in the driving rain (which by the way, put to rest A LOT of rumors about his hair). With all this said, I don't see how anyone can blame them for cutting one song. I for one was grateful that night in 1997 to be able to get out ofthe rain that much sooner.

So just be ready for patterns like this on the last leg of the tour. If they've been there before, you'll get a varied setlist. Leavell can look them all up on his hard drive. If this is a new stop, expect much like what Halifax got. Jagger is more concerned about pleasing first timers than old timers. YCAGWYW.

Hail, hail, nsr159, for the report from someone who was there.

Long John Stoner, I agree with everything you said.
Except one thing, the San Diego show was in 1998.

Beast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hail, hail, nsr159, for the report from someone
> who was there.


I second that!!

"Long John Stoner, I agree with everything you said.
Except one thing, the San Diego show was in 1998."


Whoops, I stand corrected.

Your momma stinks!

Likely she does. I doubt she's showered yet today.

Honestly, who really gives a damn about them setlists. When I go to a Stones show I wanna party, enjoy the music, drink lots of beer, smoke some pot and after a concert I usually try to sleep with as many cute girls as possible. Oh yeah!!!MEZ

and Ay ay baby it hurts

Manhattan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Honestly, who really gives a damn about them
> setlists. When I go to a Stones show I wanna
> party, enjoy the music, drink lots of beer, smoke
> some pot and after a concert I usually try to
> sleep with as many cute girls as possible. Oh
> yeah!!!MEZ
>
> and Ay ay baby it hurts


I love your way of life. That's how it should be...

JumpingKentFlash

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> One of the big problem with the setlist
> discussions is that it's never the music (I.e. How
> they played it, and how it went) that's in the
> foregound here. It's always about why they played
> these songs, and not some other songs.

So we can only discuss if the Stones themselves suCked apart from what song they played. I see.
To me, they never suCked during a show (apart from the fact that they can't do a solo anymore). So you think Brown Sugar (or other songs) differs a lot from show to show? When I read the reviews, they are all great.

The Halifax set list was better than the Foxboro set list.

YCAGWYW would have been a wash with Midnight Rambler had it been played. LSTNT is a wash with Under My Thumb.Miss You is better than Ain't Too Proud to Beg. Bitch is a wash with Sweet Virginia. IORR blows away Live With Me. Anything beats Sway, even Oh No, Not You Again, which sucks pretty badly.

Actually, reading YCAGWYW on the plexiglass before the show would have been more exciting than hearing Sway played during the show.

"make up your mind, 'cause I gotta go"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-09-24 21:07 by BOBM.

but the didn't do YCAGWYW - still a wash, Bob?

Tod, see my edited posting. Hope all is well with you.

"make up your mind, 'cause I gotta go"

all is fine with me - I enjoy seeing others whine a bit.....

Hanns Rainsch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, I don't like the setlist. Period.
> Playing only 18 (I guess the show had a
> 1978-length) songs, mostly big hits that have been
> performed for years, in front of an audience that
> payed several hundred dollars is close to a
> rip-off.
> I'm sure people were mostly happy after the show,
> but they could have been more happy with 21
> instead of 18 songs.
> This whole tour sucks, every step in the right
> direction is followed by 1 step backwards.
> During nearly 100 shows, the Stones proudly
> ignored their huge back catalogue, not to speak of
> their latest album.
> The biggest lows:
> Kicking out "Out Of Control" after Seattle last
> year and creating a boring warhorse run in the
> last third.
> Not playing anything new except "Rough Justice"
> and "ONNYA" at many shows.
> A tour kick off without any surprises.
> Placing warhorses on the B-stage and permanently
> reducing the number of songs (not the number of
> "Start Me Up"s and "IORR"s).



Genau. Das Problem ist nur, dass unser Gejammere Freund Jagger scheißegal ist. Der will nur das Geld und jedes Mal mehr für immer weniger Gegenleistung. Der Anfang vom Ende, wenn man so will. Vielleicht ist das auch besser so, irgendwann aufzuhören, wenn man seine eigene Arbeit der letzten 20-30 (!) Jahre völlig aus den Augen verloren hat. Trotzdem: Boston 9/06 war (fast) ein tolles Tracklist, es hätten nur drei Songs gefehlt aus der "Neuzeit". Aber selbst so etwas erscheint nur noch in oft bespielten Megastädten möglich - schade.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-09-25 00:40 by beast of burgk.

Just got back from Halifax.

Considering the rain and muck this was a great show. Most of the people had never seen the Stones and were blown away. This was my 4th time on this tour and I can't believe how they are still blowing the crowd away.

Reading the set list means nothing. Seeing the show means everything!

I was there. It was a great setlist unless you don't like 'You Got the Silver', 'Little T&A', 'Monkey Man', etc. Nice not to hear just the big songs. Halifax was the best rock show I've seen ever in terms of audience participation. You'd think it was Sao Paulo or Montevideo. Lots of interaction.

Mick and Keith pretty much stayed out in the rain though they could have stayed back under the canopies. That's class and great showmanship. Again I was awed at the professionalism and class of it all. We are so lucky the Stones are still doing what they do best - playing the best songs in the world.