In 1994 Clapton did a very successful 'blues cover only 'tour. Robert Johnson, Howlin'Wolf, Freddie King, etc. All his heroes were covered. No hits at all on the approx. 24 song setlist. Incl. 3x s.o. gigs at MSG.
Rest of the tour was played in arena's with a 15/20,000 capacity. Even 2x MLG/Toronoto + 2x McN Areana/Denver

Do you think the Stones could attrack such an andience with a 'blues covers only' or 'unknown Stones songs only' - or combination (I would prefer that) tour?
Or do they really depend on their greatest hits those days to fill up areana's?

Opinions please

With a maxi single or even an album to proove to the general public that they can pull it off/to familiarize this general public with this 'forgotten' side of the Stones: yes the can fill up the arena's!

Would be a great thing of course, but I doubt Mick will take the risk of doing such a stripped down thing.

Jelle

Yes, of course they can. A lot of people'd be interested. I'm sure with a good marketing work (Cohl).Sure!

Yes, they can do it! Deep down inside, even the seemingly most uncritical Stones admirers hope that the Stones will do something different sooner or later, something unexpected, something refreshing. And when I speak with them, it is unbelievable how often just 'casual' Stones fans mention that they are bored with the Stones doing basically the same over and over again since many years now. I guess there are many general rock fans out there who would go to see the Stones again if only they would do something different.

Maybe they'd need a good promo album with great blues covers.

Yes, after this mega world tour it's time for this kind of gigs in arenas. I'm waiting for it!

Maybe not the audiences they're used to - but oh, if only they would, it would be a great tour...

Roadrunner
Diddley Daddy
Cops and Robbers
Bright Lights Big City
Looking Tired
Honest I Do
King Bee
Still A Fool
Rolling Stones Blues (Muddy Waters)
Goin' Home
+ M.Waters, Jimmy Reed, Elmore James, Howlin' Wolf
+ good reggea stuff
What a great experience could be!!!!

Why would they need to play blues *covers*? Surely they have enough good blues songs in their catalog that they should be able to put on a whole show. And I am more interested in hearing those - given that many have been playing sparingly, if at all - than a bunch of covers.

well, nobody seem to doubt my question that they will fill up areans. Whether it's with a 'unknown' or blues cover set list or a mix of both.

Than why don't they do it? Isn't it boring for them to play all those warhorses, with hardly any different arrangement, over and over?
Or is it for the money they prefer the stadiums?
Or is it musically too much for Ronnie and Keith to 'get out of the box' and try something different finally?

They are lazy.
Don't want to risk.
They prefer stadium shows.
Need a new promo album for that.
Jagger is not interested.
Maybe Cohl is not interested!

I didn't know that about Clapton, very cool! Aerosmith, of course, made a blues cover album and did a tour behind the album. They also played there greatest hits but it was still an awesome idea IMO.

I would love it if they played a "Blues only" tour with covers and of course all there great blues tunes they wrote. I don't really see it happening though i'm afraid...

Cheers,
Wuudy

Wuudy, recently I am listening to a great soundboard from Clapton from that tour. The audience loves it - The Forum 3-11-94 / Mid Valley records

Wuudy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I didn't know that about Clapton, very cool!
> Aerosmith, of course, made a blues cover album and
> did a tour behind the album. They also played
> there greatest hits but it was still an awesome
> idea IMO.
>
> I would love it if they played a "Blues only" tour
> with covers and of course all there great blues
> tunes they wrote. I don't really see it happening
> though i'm afraid...


Well, if Aerosmith used the idea already that's the reason for the Stones NOT to to do it. The Stones following the poor man's Stones? No way!

Anyway, the difference between Aerosmith in on hand and The Stones and Clapton on the other is that first-mentioned has never been a blues band really, but a second-generation rock band who get the idea of blues by second-hand (through the Stones and Clapton, etc.). For them digging the old blues standard catalog is really digging the history of which they don't have any first-hand experience. They could as easily to make an album of jazz classics or western&country or Indian music album, if you know what I mean. But as far as Clapton and the Stones are concerned playing the blues is like going back home from where they once started. It's music which inspired them to play in the first place.

Principally I don't see the reason why The Stones - the first real white blues band ever and perhaps its biggest message-bringer still to date - wouldn't do that, but I don't think Jagger & Cohl would find that idea fruitful... Perhaps it might bring them too much memories from the time that Brian Jones was the leader of band...

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-22 12:40 by Doxa.

Unfortunately, Keith and Ronnie's guitar playing is too impredictable for that these days.

I would certainly be up for a blues tour, with greatest hits set....I have wished this for years...End up their career, they way they started out....

JR

This will probably happen only in my dreams but I would love to attend a gig with the following setlist:


-Around and around (provided keith patches up with C Berry)
-Love is strong
-Midnight rambler
-Shake your hips
-Confessin the blues
-Mannish boy
-Stop breaking down
-She said yeah
- Satisfaction
-I wanna be your man (Keith)
- You got the silver (Keith)
-Tumbling dice
-Stray cat blues
- Prodigal son (acoustic set)
- you gotta move (acoustic set)
-The storm
-Ventilator blues
-Little red rooster
- Fingerprint file
-Honky tonk women
-Brown sugar

Besides the Storm ,stop breaking down and shake your hips (rehearsed for the 72 tour) all these songs have already been played live before and none of them requires fantastic guitar skills .
Most of them involves harp and slide guitars (lets do some justice to Ronnie ,he's rather good at it ).
I've kept some warhorses (unavoidable) but never more than two in a row ( as opposed to the second part of the gigs during the ABB tour which was most of the time made only of warhorses).

What do you think bout that?

They need to start moving in that direction--maybe do an extended blues set in the middle of the next tour--so they can start SITTING DOWN as they play.

Face it, these Peter Pans are actually old men, Instead of concentrating on all the running and jumping around, they should focus on their playing.

If they can make that transition, they will be touring for us a lot longer, rather than suddenly retire because they can't put up the front of being hyperactive Stones anymore.

The fans need to let go of their fantasies, and let these guys roll a little slower.

1962 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They are lazy.
> Don't want to risk.
> They prefer stadium shows.
> Need a new promo album for that.
> Jagger is not interested.
> Maybe Cohl is not interested!


Yikes. That attitude makes me look like a myopic fanboy! I woundn't go that far! They'd have an audience now matter what - or HOW they play. Whether I or any other occasional skeptics feel about their performance. Hey... I doubted the 2007 tour - but here it is. And I've always said - if they re-think their show - it'd be worthwhile.

I still stick by this - they can't keep doing what they've been doing - but this doesn't mean AT ALL that they should end. I think a revamp would be great, and just might happen...

the hard core fans don't care about Jagger running around and singing JJF for the 888th time.
Give us 'Just wanna see his face' sung in a chair

"Just Wanna"... yes.

But a chair???

May I say that the couple of gigs I saw from Clapton's blues tour (was it the From the Cradle tour?) stand there with the most boring concerts I've EVER seen.

Eric was literally blown away by Clarence Gatemouth Brown opening set. The "real" thing is still something else.

As far as attracting audiences, I have no doubt that if the Stones ever did such a tour it would be a complete sold out.

I hope they never do it. The stones are what they are not because they played a bunch of blues standards but because they added their own way of seeing things. I want to see the addition.

C

They probably could esp if they played in places like the Ryman Auditorium [in Nashville] and other smaller venues.

Liddas, the Stones are not adding anyting recently

kees Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liddas, the Stones are not adding anyting recently

Not true.

We may discuss for ever if what they do now is good or bad, but sure there is a long way between ABB and Exile!

C

I don't know really

The Rolling Stones doing a blues show? Bad idea. It is amazing to me how enduring is the image of the band. The image is mythic. The band is not a blues band and whatever it has done in the blues genre that bears any authenticity was done with guitarists who are no longer in the band. The number of people who would enjoy that type show would number a few thousand. The rest of the 60,000 people in the stadium would be justifiably bored stiff. So would the band. I can't see them ever wanting to do that. They thrive on audience approval and maintaining their image. Whatever blues they occasionally play is part of maintaining that image. In large doses it would hardly be convincing.

i wouldnt like the stones to do only blues songs.

part of what makes the stones great is variety, and they have many songs of different variety to always maintain an interesting concert but with plenty songs to fall back on.

i would like to see them get rid of old warhorses and overrated stuff, like start me up, its only rock and roll, satisfaction and you got me rocking and replace it with less known songs from different era,s.

the 1965-67 era is one that i feel has been neglected by the stones and one that defined thier image.