Juiced In NJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you don't like the band the way it is now don't
> go see them anymore!
> I thought the backups were pretty minimal last
> night anyway. If any of you whiners get stuck with
> tickets for MSG don't worry - just send them to
> me. I know lots of real Stones fans that would
> love to have them.


I'm a real fan not a yes-man. Real Stones fans in the 60s and 70s and 80s were not yes men and that made them improve. If they made a bad album or poor show they couldnt ignore it. Besides I dont know why a real fan has to pay this much for a museum show. Some of the songs they play are very good though. I like some versions but I really missed the Keith of 1981 when I saw this clip.

i don't know,it's very insecure and what's annoying is that Keith obviously can't sing and play the guitar at the same time!btw is there a recording of You got the silver from that concert?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-09-29 15:53 by llaushin.

Yep, check this: [www.iorr.org]

As often I'm swim against the stream.
Doesnt sound too awful to me.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-10-01 22:15 by Baboon Bro.

I've seen this combination twice now, and I think You Got the Silver is fantastic, while Little T&A is awful. YGTS is everything you want from the Stones, dark, smoky, barebones. Esp. the beginning with just Ronnie on Slide while Keith sings. LT&A sounds like a Vegas bar band -- I have heard better version from Stones tribute bands.

Well it's the first try in 25 years....Sway didn't sound too good the first times either. And She's So Cold was stumbling on it's nose at the first 81 shows.....Tits and ass will rise again!

I hope that's true. One positive thing I can say about the horns and bg vocals version of LT&A -- it's better than the disco version of Love Me Do that McCartney did on his 89-90 tour.

>I'm a real fan not a yes-man. Real Stones fans in the 60s and 70s and 80s were not >yes men and that made them improve. If they made a bad album or poor show they >couldnt ignore it. Besides I dont know why a real fan has to pay this much for a >museum show. Some of the songs they play are very good though. I like some >versions but I really missed the Keith of 1981 when I saw this clip.


Fans made the Stones improve in the 60s 70s and 80s?

If anything was different with the Stones when they 'returned' in 1989 it was the loss of their 'yeah, we're the Stones so @#$%& off' attitude on stage. They used to kick out a show and leave the fans begging for more. No posing and camera shots. They made you feel lucky to see them and that they were gracing you with their presence.

Their shows in the 70s (especially 75-78, and incuding many in 72 and 73) couldn't exactly be called tight. The Stones were known for being sloppy on stage (though not as bad as Zeppelin) and they pretty much responded with a 'take what you get attitude' publicly. The same can be said for 81 and 82 -- listen to those soundbaords that are coming out now - plenty of missed changes, bum notes and wrong-key solos.

Even Mick Taylor has said (when I interviewed him in 1998) that the band sounds much better these days because they are tighter and better musicians, and their songs actually start and end in the same tempo!

Don't get me wrong, I love the out-of-conrtol-train-wreck-about-to-happen style they used to play in. But I don't think you can honestly say the Stones dramatically altered or changed their studio or live output because of these 'bad' albums you refer to (which?) or sub par performances due to fan reactions.

J

I really loved YGTS and T&A in Louisville.

Keith is embarassing here ,,, as he was when i saw him do this last week at giants stadium. stick to the guitar playing, and leave the singing to Mick

My take on Little T&A in Louisville was that it was ragged, a little shakey, and - oh yeah - fun! I was just so jazzed to hear Keith "rock eet up now" w/one of my all-time faves I could have cared less if it wasn't note-perfect.

As for the horns? I swear some of you bitch just to bitch. The horns barely play on the song. A little 3-note riff as the song returns to the D chord. Big flippin' deal. And the backing vocals? Noone had a problem with them when they were on the song on Tattoo You. Oh yeah, right - that was Keith doing them. Well I am sorry to report that he has but one mouth and one throat, so if there's gonna be BGV someone else has to do them.


Anyway, it my only complaint - and this is a minor one - is the breakdown at the end. Instead of digging a little on that riff Keith was too busy cutting solos w/Ronnie. But then again complaining about Keith soloing too much on a song is kind of blasphemous, so I will stop there : )

Not good and a far cry from the rocking version we got back in 1981-1982. The horns and backing vocals kill this version, but hey, at least it's not "Infamy" or "Wanna Hold You".

Way better than the sucking studio version and the awful 1982/2 live versions. Still it's not a good song.

JumpingKentFlash

Hm. I think the version is cool, Ronnie cooks on guitar!


Belgrade-Bucharest-Budapest-Brno