[www.uncut.co.uk]

Green Lady Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OK, here goes…
>
>


Great photos Green Lady! Love the one of Charlie.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-13 10:32 by BarRoomQueen.

great reviews and photos from Greenlady and Pauly, thanks for sharing

Great pictures guys.......better than the Channel 4 coverage in fact!!

I was so busy doing battle with new camera software last night I forgot to say thanks to paulywaul for a fantastic review and some great pictures. I love the one of the B-stage setting out on its voyage.

Green Lady Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was so busy doing battle with new camera
> software last night I forgot to say thanks to
> paulywaul for a fantastic review and some great
> pictures. I love the one of the B-stage setting
> out on its voyage.

... and I love the closeup of Charlie & the plexiglass

[community.isleofwightfestival.com]

Well...

"The Stones were correct, nothing more, nothing less. Yes, Jagger is a fantastic singer and showman. Love Charlie. But Keith Richards and Ron Wood didn't play, they have always harms in the air, playing very rarely. Keith has to stop singing, his set was purely boring.

What would be a Stones show today with only the music and without all this technology, ligths, additionnal musicians, keyboard and brass section ?

It was a sideshow."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-13 11:56 by pascal.lapp.

"What would be a Stones show today with only the music and without all this technology, ligths, additionnal musicians, keyboard and brass section ? "


as its is today! Fantastic!

pascal.lapp Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [community.isleofwightfestival.com]
> 64154/ShowThread.aspx
>
> Well...
>
> The Stones were correct, nothing more, nothing
> less. Yes, Jagger is a fantastic singer and
> showman. Love Charlie. But Keith Richards and Ron
> Wood didn't play, they have always harms in the
> air, playing very rarely. Keith has to stop
> singing, his set was purely boring.
>
> What would be a Stones show today with only the
> music and without all this technology, ligths,
> additionnal musicians, keyboard and brass section
> ?
>
> It was a sideshow.


<<< For me personally The Stones were the best festival band I've seen. Understand that others don't agree. It's all about individual tastes and preferences. End of story! >>>

Those words are from the FIRST POST on that thread on the IOW festival message board ... kind of says it all really, does it not ? You're quite entitled to your view, I personally disagree with it and I also think it's a minority one.

pascal.lapp Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> What would be a Stones show today with only the
> music and without all this technology, ligths,
> additionnal musicians, keyboard and brass section ?

an intriguing question - and one we do not know the answer to, as they don't
have the balls to try it out, for a paying audience.

Thanks everybody for the time & effort and the great reviews and pictures.

If only they would lower the prices for tickets, cant wait for 02 concerts and was hoping to go to paris or almeria but money too tight to mention.

"an intriguing question - and one we do not know the answer to, as they don't
have the balls to try it out, for a paying audience."

The recent press conference and the Bigger Bang Launch. Wasn't the SuperBowl also lacking the usual backing etc?

ablett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "an intriguing question - and one we do not know
> the answer to, as they don't
> have the balls to try it out, for a paying
> audience."
>
> The recent press conference and the Bigger Bang
> Launch. Wasn't the SuperBowl also lacking the
> usual backing etc?


press conference was hardly a paying audience,
and as for the Superbowl,
who and what do you suppose, were hidden from view,
under the stage?

Out the wrong side of the bed this morning Adrian????

Paying or not the Stones played live at both Press Conferences with out a light show or backing?

And the Superbowl was pretty well the core band.

So are you honestly suggesting the Stones can't cut it without the touring machines they have now used for nearly 20 years?

ablett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> So are you honestly suggesting the Stones can't
> cut it without the touring machines they have now
> used for nearly 20 years?

I honestly do not know the answer ,dude, no one really does, we've never been
given the opportunity to find out.

My heart wishes they could cut it without all the bells and whistles,
but my head tells me otherwise.

Rolling Stones is not U2: Rolling Stones can easily deliver without the touring machines etc.
As soon as they have the chance to do it (and I'm sure it will happen sooner or later) they'll show you!

They are the best! I wish I'd been @ IOW, and I wish them to do a low-charged festival tour in Europe! It would be a triumph! Younger audience, more rocking atmosphere... they'll also be entitled to perform shorter sets, which might be a benefit for them at this stage of the game.

Adrian-L Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I honestly do not know the answer ,dude, no one
> really does, we've never been
> given the opportunity to find out.
>
> My heart wishes they could cut it without all the
> bells and whistles,
> but my head tells me otherwise.


Adrian my friend: They did it from 1962 to 1982. Lots of opportunities to see it without the "bells and whistles" as you call it.

JumpingKentFlash

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Adrian my friend: They did it from 1962 to 1982.
> Lots of opportunities to see it without the "bells
> and whistles" as you call it.

We know that dude.
the question raised, was whether they could pull it off, in the present/future.

And in the Stripped project they did it terrific.

Adrian-L Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We know that dude.
> the question raised, was whether they could pull
> it off, in the present/future.


They kind of did at the 2005 press conference. (That has also been said before hasn't it? I really must start reading the whole topic soon).

JumpingKentFlash

Kent - are you going to be in Paris this weekend?

Adrian-L Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kent - are you going to be in Paris this weekend?


You're making me cry here. No I'm not able to go there. It was planned originally, but then Baboon Bro made a great offer to go to Brno and I had to take it. See you in London hopefully.

JumpingKentFlash

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
See you in London hopefully.

Ok...London it is... and less of the 'hopefully'.

Adrian-L Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> See you in London hopefully.
>
> Ok...London it is... and less of the 'hopefully'.


It depends on Baboon's capability behind the wheel

Adrian-L Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok...London it is... and less of the 'hopefully'.


The "hopefully" comes from me not having a ticket or a plane ticket for the show yet. Can't buy it until August.
I'll frickin' swim there and punch down the guards if I have to. I WANT TO BE AT THE O2 ARENA FOR THE AUG. 26TH GIG!!!!!!

JumpingKentFlash

stickydion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gazza wrote:
>
>
> stickydion Wrote:
> > > I didn't see fans supporting these silly prices,
>
> > here. The only exeption i can remember is
> "glimmer
> > twin 81". So, don't be so sarcastic...
> >
>
>
> Really? I've seen plenty of it."
>
> Then help my memory, Gazza!



I'm not such a sad case that I'm going to store hundreds of posts on the subject but as theres a 'search' function on this site, no doubt entering keywords like 'ticket prices' should enable you, if you so desire, to find scores of posts over the years justifying them accompanied by such buzzwords like "market forces", "they charge what the market can afford", "they wont always be around", "but its worth it" and other such guff.

or, relatedly, you can simply search "steven" or "bv"

*and i'm just like that bird - singing just for you*

Thanks for the fantastic photors, greenlady - great to see more and more reviews and pics froma historic weekend

Ablett - re: the 'core band' discussion

the Stones used backing musicians on the Superbowl. You can clearly hear the backing vocals. They were just hidden offstage for visual effect. The Werchter rehearsals were just that - a rehearsal in front of a few journalists, which wasnt even broadcast.

Juilliard showed how explosive they can be with just a core band. For me, that was the best version of Brown Sugar I've heard them play since about 1973. Breathtaking. just a 3-song set though (as were the Werchter and Superbowl sets). They obviously feel that the variety of material for a two hour show requires extra musicians and/or that they cant hack it for that length of time without the extra help. The increasing amount of guitar playing that Chaplin does on guitar in relation to previous tours would indicate the latter is the case. Personally, it doesnt bother me that much - if thats what it takes to put a Stones show together in 2007, so be it.

Written to perfection again master Gazz!

I hate to sound negative ..but seemed like a short set the world's greatest R&R band.