I just love Mathijs for his threads. You know, you can hate him cause he comes across quite arrogant and he brutally analysis the weaknesses of the Stones today - but he knows what he's talking about and some people just can't handle that, it seems

I'm always quite worried after I read a thread from Mathijs, then I listen to a bootleg and they indeed sound horrible sometimes - but then I find myself getting all excited about a new tour and really enjoying the concerts...


Belgrade-Bucharest-Budapest-Brno

Noone hates noone, Lorenz. Everyone has the right to agree or disagree with Mathijs. Simple as that.

"Opinions are like as*holes, everybody got one, and they stink" Dirty Harry.

Vilhelm
Nordic Stones Vikings

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

Also The Stones have always been number 2 at so many things.
In the sixties they were number 2 to The
> Beatles. In the seventies it was to Led Zeppelin.
> In the eighties it was to Queen or Guns 'n
> Roses(Or whomever). There's always been a band
> that's bigger than The Stones.

Kent, that's an original way of putting it. So you're actually saying the Stones are the "Joop Zoetemelk of Rock 'n Roll".

(In case you don;t know, he was a legendary Dutch cyclist with the nickname "eeuwige tweede" - "eternal second" - for repeatedly finishing 2nd in the big races, above all The Tour de France.)

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

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

Eventually Zoetemelk won the TdF, so there's still hope for the Stones

I still want to see them one time this year. To feel the buzz, to hear the crowd sing a long, etc. But the facts are (wel my opinion than!) I can't stand to listen to one single boot from the last tour, because it is simply not good enough. It doesn't 'swing', guitars are often not in tune, no real interaction between the guitars (communication) And I believe (very strongly) that they simply don't practice (rehearse) enough. If there are hearing problems (don't think so, but you never know) that is a serious problem.
A lot is from a musicians point of view (play bass myself) and a lot is from a fan's point of view (that's why I write this)
Believe me, I have most of the boots (many originals), and those I play hapilly.
Today I listened to Everything Is Turning Into Gold. now that track embodies what a good song has to be! The groove, the swing, the guitars, the rythm, great song.

barbabang Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But the facts are (wel my opinion than!) I can't
> stand to listen to one single boot from the last
> tour, because it is simply not good enough. It
> doesn't 'swing', guitars are often not in tune, no
> real interaction between the guitars
> (communication) And I believe (very strongly) that
> they simply don't practice (rehearse) enough.

I agree 100%. The thing that bothers me the most are not bum notes or f***ed up intros, it is the almost non-existent 'real interaction between the guitars'. Some people argue that the Stones were never a band for music students, but the interaction between the guitars was always there, even at Knebworth! And Out On Bail may sound thin, but that's the actual recording, the band rocks like hell-it is one of my favourite boots. And what bothers me even more than weak solos or f***ed up intros are f***ed up chord changes, even during songs they played a million times in their career. In those moments I believe the guitar players are not really up for it anmyore - or simply bored by playing the same old greatest hits set again and again.


> Today I listened to Everything Is Turning Into
> Gold. now that track embodies what a good song has
> to be! The groove, the swing, the guitars, the
> rythm, great song.


And what a guitar interaction!


Anyway, I think we are talking about two different things. Yes, the Stones can without doubt still put on a great show that satisfies the majority of concertgoers. But they have to thank their backing orchestra for hiding all those shortcomings of their guitar players during the show. And people complained that Chuck was often so loud in the mix during recent tours and blamed this on him...do you really believe this is in Chuck's hands? When he is loud in the mix he needs to be...nuff said. But this hiding of their shortcomings does not work so well on recordings of the actual shows. That's why a lot of recent boots are simply unlistenable.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-19 02:30 by retired_dog.

mrrockandroll wrote:

(A) "sloppiness is part of their playing! And although they're playing sloppy, the feeling is still there!!! And THAT is just the thing it's all about."

Correct. And the moaning adout sloppines really surprises me, especially when it is coming from people who are dying for 1978 tour or for the 1981 version of Satisfaction...

( "Something about the Tokyo DVD: I've watched this show over and over again and I think it's a great concert man! Keith nails Jumping Jack Flash; the intro has no false notes. In LSTNT, the only thing that's a shame is the first note Keith plays; it's false; but in the rest of the songs nothing's really false. She's So Cold: the guitars are on FIRE!!! You don't see Keith play a solo that good so often anymore. Are you only stuck to pentatonics??? Because you're saying Keith starts the solo in B. I don't hear anything that doesn't sound good in the song. Sway: they nail it man!!! Mathijs, you've got so much imagination; Ron Wood doesn't look at his roadie; he just makes eye-contact with Charlie or Keith (the first time) and later on in the song with Chuck/the back up singers. Allright, Ron Wood doesn't start the solo flawless and he even has to nod to Chuck if it's solotime; but who cares... Those solo's on bootlegs from the seventies and eighties aren't flawless too!!! And then again; the feeling's still there."

Good points. Totaly agree.


ATGB: The guitar is tuned false indeed; but it's not tooo false. Most of the non-musicians in the audience probably won't have noticed it. And then again; Keith is a professional; not an amateur. He just makes the best of it; a good workman doesn't blame his tools. In those cases you can see whose a real guitarplayer/musician; he makes the song sound good with a false guitar.

And about Ron's B-Bender solo's: I think they're still great; when he does it you can here he has total control over it (due to all the years of playing). It sounds like only a man that has been playing extensively over 50 years can make it sound. Mathijs, I bet you don't even come close to it, so don't wine allright?

open-g Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> + 1 Tim - except, I'm sure Mathijs has seen &
> heard loads of more shows.
>
> Mathijs - I can hardly believe what your writing.
> You know how it is - with on and off nights.
> I'm quite sure you've been thru it aswell, there's
> loads of (little/big) things to critisize, of
> course.
> You sound so frustrated in your initial post.
> C'mon, you've been workin' crowds - you know what
> makes 'em go
> when I see Keith coming on stage - he's not
> walking - he's hovering/ floating on stage - and
> thats the big difference about you/me/the rest of
> the world --->and Keith.
> You're bored with Ron's B-bendings in Japan? go
> listen to Glasgow!
> He's been thru hard times, but he got better and
> better again.
>
> C'mon, cheer up mate.
> Summer's coming + the Rolling Stones

Sorry open-g (and everybody), I have just clarified that I mean he only saw 2 shows on this ABB tour and have edited my post thusly.

Opsss... Cancel the last part of "my" last post. "Copy" from mrrockandroll- just a mistake.

JumpingKentFlash wrote:

(A) "If I wanted great guitar playing I'd go see Stee Vai."

I say Satriani...

( "Also The Stones have always been number 2 at so many things (to the wider public, not to me. They are number 1 to me). In the sixties they were number 2 to The Beatles. In the seventies it was to Led Zeppelin. In the eighties it was to Queen or Guns 'n Roses(Or whomever). There's always been a band that's bigger than The Stones. Look at the whole picture though. The Beatles is gone, Led Zeppelin is gone, Queen is gone (Though resurected in the most sucky version ever ) etc. etc. I'm just asking: If you're number 2 all the time, and if all the number 1 bands change all the time, then aren't the number 2 but really the number 1 band? Yes they are. And that the Rolling Stones"

Of course they are #1. That's why the gloriest moment of the G'n'R touring history was when they were opening for the Stones, as support act... (1989)

God... i wrote "gloriest" instead of "most glorious"! Time to sleep, otherwise i am going to change the entire English language...

mrrockandroll Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You seem to forget that the Stones are all sixtie
> somethings by now. Be glad they're still around
> man. Respect it. Allright I know Keith and Ron
> make some mistakes, but who cares: sloppiness is
> part of their playing! And although they're
> playing sloppy, the feeling is still there!!! And
> THAT is just the thing it's all about.

There's a big difference between playing sloppy, and having no clue what to do or playing completely in the wrong key. I listened to some of the examples that Mathijs mentioned and it is indeed embarassing. If they would play around the corner in bar I wouldn't mind. But they are professionals, charge a lot for tickets and if you cannot do that even for a few hours each week, then I guess it's time to call it quits.

Mathijis---you are right and wrong. I look at the Stones as an elderly family member that is there to provide comfort and support. My Dad or Mom don't quite have the influence they once did or the even the ability to think rationally in today's world but I find strength in their mere presence. C'mon, let's not be delusional...the Stones are a charade at this point--BUT they provide us (an expensive way) to touch base with a part of our lives that is clearly meaningful to us all....So bottom line, they are an apparition, but WE still enjoy it for what it is.....

Mathijs--that post was very heart felt, very sad, and unfortunately, too close to the truth.

I listened to a couple of boots of the ABB Tour--it was not enjoyable........
Actually,--I heard one of the Beacon shows--dreadful.

I am constantly amazed at proclaimations as to how great their performance was at "fill in the blank" show. I certainly do not expect a '78 or '81 performance, that would be patently unfair--I did not think it would be too much to expect them to play as well as they did in '97 or '98, but apparently it is. I agree with Helter--dousing yourself in booze every day of your life eventually is going to catch up with you and now it has. I think Keith's arthritis is not helping anything either.

When I saw them, Keith's solo on Sympathy was embarrassing--he completely whiffed the opening riff--my girlfriend who does not play a note of guitar turned to me and said "What was that?"

This band is being carried, live at least, by Mick and Charlie.

That does not mean I do not still love the band, I just no longer love listening to the current live performances--they make me sad.

Lorenz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just love Mathijs for his threads. You know, you
> can hate him cause he comes across quite arrogant
> and he brutally analysis the weaknesses of the
> Stones today - but he knows what he's talking
> about and some people just can't handle that, it
> seems
>
> I'm always quite worried after I read a thread
> from Mathijs, then I listen to a bootleg and they
> indeed sound horrible sometimes - but then I find
> myself getting all excited about a new tour and
> really enjoying the concerts...

So do I except I rarely listen to bootlegs ;-)

i put on the Tokyo dvd after reading Mathijs's account of his hair-raising experiences - thanks!
yeah it was a mess at times up there! whether the things that sent Mathijs fleeing in alarm - aieee! -
ruin the whole show for someone is (obviously!) a different question. but either way,
it's just someone's review of part of a bootleg, not Judgement Day. i mean (with all due respect!)
so Mathijs is disgusted with another bootleg - so what?? it ain't the first time.
Mathijs knows i value his insights and all - and i enjoyed the detail and humour in this review,
and i had fun watching the show again. LoFL: "lord have mercy" indeed!
(that's after She's So Cold, though, not LSTNT)

>> my girlfriend who does not play a note of guitar <<

gosh - a girl who doesn't play noticed something?! what is the world coming to :E



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-19 10:39 by with sssoul.

open-g Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
[...]
Blast it on a stereo at a party or in a crowded
pub and you'll have a different hearing
expierience.

...and while it's blasting away do some
multitasking things aswell...

>>> explain to your wife <<<

:-)))))))))

Sorry can't help, but this is so easy to visualize...

Jelle

Charlie seems to be playing better than he ever has. Mick J still seems to put on quite a show though his vocal skills seem to have diminished a bit recently.

Keith's performance seems to depend on the song. I must admit that for me the Chuck Berry riffing grates after a while. Keith does have a tendency to bend notes out of key as well. Plus his singing is pretty awful now. I have wondered whether Keith's ears are shot from years of performing or whether he can't hear himself play.

Well, as for Ronnie, he just shouldn't attempt songs like Sway. I have to wonder how he feels about playing songs that he clearly struggles with.

Do you think the stones themselves listen to some recordings and realize that they should do better or do you think they just play the next gig, take the money and run?
As I said before, I enjoy the concerts and I haven't got a musical ear but I clearly remeber that the solo of SFTD in Amsterdam was terrible. Surely Keith couldn't be satisfied with that, could he?
Can't wait for the tour details: Rome, Brussels, London, Düsseldorf, Nijmegen, (Barcelona if cheap flights)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-19 12:52 by Harm.

Listening to bootlegs is probably like reading about a great meal. Not the same as actually having it.

Bjornulf

True, BV, but you can judge from a bootleg, concert video, or a live cd that the band isn't playing that good anymore and i think that is the point mathijs is amking. Now, everybody, and i think that is everybody on this board can have a great night at a stones even if they have a totally off night and play like crap.

Cheers,
Wuudy

it actually documents the recording and yes mp3's you can pick put the wrong notes and when someone plays out of key. the recording does not lie,whereas the show itself can mask the playing because you have the visual experience to key on and all the glitter and backup singers and huge stage.

I enjoy listening to Brussels Affair

do the stones ever listen to their own bootlegs? You can say what you want about keith, but i believe that he has a good musical ear when he`s not on stage...i wonder what he would have to say for himself listening to those boots.

I agree that they sounded sloppy in 1981, but nowadays the guitarist don`t play as many notes as they just to do back then. So the sloppiness has indeed increased

ome peet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> do the stones ever listen to their own bootlegs?

Keith used to play soundboard tapes the night after the shows. I don't know whether he's still doing this but I think he was still doing it on the B2B tour.

<The least that I expect when I pay 150eur is that they play sober. How can you play well when you are not?>

You can't attend a Stones-concert and expect them to turn up sober? That's the post of the day

BV made a good point. I've NEVER heard a Stones performance that you could put out unedited on an official release. NEVER in 30 years.

At best they're ramshackle and sloppy...but magical. At worst, [when both guitar players are as pissed as preverbial newts] they can be truly horrendous.
But it's ALWAYS been the case. It's not just a symptom of their age, nor evident only in recent performances.
You want out of tune ? Listen to some early 70s boots [or Hyde Park !]. Half of the standard tuned guitar work on Exile is out of tune too !
I agree that some concerts fall short of what should be considered an acceptable standard of musical performance ...and I agree that ctiticism is justified in these cases. I don't, however, accept that the band has "lost it" just yet. They maybe need to "find it" a bit more often !

I think the sad part abou tshows/boots these days - is HOW it's crappy. It's not manic-drug induced freny to-hell-with-it fire, it's my-god-they-can't-even-pull-off-a-decent-full-show-anymore-cuz-they're-senile-now kind of thing.

Remember, BTB was 10 years ago - they were 10 years younger. And in my opinion - the last tour without "Oh my GOD what the @#$% was THAT induced-by-aging" moments.

Koen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Eventually Zoetemelk won the TdF, so there's still
> hope for the Stones

Great, so the best is still to come!!

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

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

I went to Argentina and saw all their five shows there in 1998. Great shows. Fantastic shows. Among my best experiences. Then they released No Security. With two songs from those shows in Argentina. In order to find out which of the five shows were the source for these two songs, I was listening through complete tapes of each and every one of these five shows. I was surprised by how many errors and mess-up they had in the show technically. Show number four of these fine was the only one that was technically quite good. So with overdubs and some extra mixing, plus shortening the songs by a minute or so, this was the basis for No Security. But still all of the 250,000 people who walked out of these shows, including me, were happy with the shows, not just happy, they were freaked out, and I don't see any reason why they should have stopped touring in 1990. They should never stop touring. Not until nobody is willing to come. So far there is no sign of smaller crowds. In fact there are hardly any other bands worldwide, that are able to fill up a stadium and please so many people worldwide. May be U2, may be Metallica, that's about it.

Bjornulf