OILY_DIPSTICK Wrote:
...well I thought it did in SDF.


well put me in a corner and call me a dunce, but what in the hell is a "SDF?" Sympathy Devil For? Street Dancing Fan? ...someone please help me out....

Stade De France?

..okay, thanks....

get in that corner.......Paris....SDF.... the penny finally drops.

.....I get it now...

:-))

....smile....

No smiling! This is a sad thread, damnit!

"It's just some friends of mine and they're busting down the door"

Quel surprise - this site's controller has now replaced the unflattering (realistic) pic of Keith on his site's homepage with one that is slightly less unflattering.

This threads a perfect example of how someone writes an honest review (if not abit melodramatic) then all the dumb ass 'doom and gloomers' come out with some of the most hair brained bullshit available.
I'd love to see some of their reaction to the last couple of shows considering a large chunk of the posts on here had written the Stones and KR of!

the subject in question, isn't as black and white, as that ablett

-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-19 13:27 by Adrian-L.

-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-19 13:26 by Adrian-L.

I'm not so sure. Shakey start to an opening tour. Shows improving as we go along. Not the first time thats happemed eh? But I would expect some sort of deterioration eventually in the Stones especially KR? Whats it been... 44 years?

so on this premise, we can expect, near-fautless KR playing/singing
(as reported here,in some quarters, from Lyon)
for the remaining dates on this tour.

...i do so, hope that you're right, ablett

Adrian, its the Stones Pal. You and I wouldn't expect that. But I also don't expect KR iminent death as predicted by some here.....

ablett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Adrian, its the Stones Pal. You and I wouldn't
> expect that. But I also don't expect KR iminent
> death as predicted by some here.....

correct dude.
i suspect there will be a continuing cycle, of some hot/some not-so-hot shows,
depending, largely on Keiths 'condition' (whatever that may be, down to)
on any given show-day.

exactly m8. I'm not saying all is perfect but everything doesn't have to be so negative. You've put it exactly.....

Turd,

I just read your post. Late as I am, I have to say: You nailed it "intellectually" and you touched our hearts at the same time.

Still, it's just an expression of what you experienced in a certain moment in time. But many others, like me at Nijmegen, have seen those moments too. So, however this turns out in the end (and I'm sure we ALL hope for the best), it's really comforting to know that you can be a fan and a thinking person at the same time. To love every one of the boys, doesn't mean one has to blind out reality.

Cheers!

this is truly saddening, and (finally) to be expected. i have argued that as a recording entity, the stones long ago ceased being a relevant force (not due to lack of chops, but simply due to criminal studio values and song-writing laziness...their raw ability and criminal studio release idiocy was only yet again proven to me after listening to the "bigger bang" bootleg...with a few revisions, released just like that, it would have been hailed as a soaring return to studio relevancy..instead they release a don was-neutered yawn). the last released album of theirs that i find necessary for my collection is steel wheels...good god, that's 1990...

now keith is a pantomiming phatasm of himself. it was bad enough when ronnie was a useless liability, but without keith, the entire propostition becomes a legacy-damaging parody on stage. granted, perhaps mick is still a cryogenics-defying, six-sigma anamoly onstage...but that isn't enough to justify yet *another* leg of *another* tour. the avarice..or is it just the narcotic of tour-life(?)...it has to be put to rest.

they either take their time and release a defiant, unprocessed album and do a smaller-arena/club tour, or they just hang it the @#$%& up. enough of these
acoustically atrocious stadium money-grabs that pass for "concerts".

You nailed it, Beauforde.

Sadly Mick looks like he could keep on kicking ass for another decade. The man is simply unstoppable. Unfortunately he's not exactly the cuddliest, most soulful guy out there, and not even his gifts can keep the Stones rolling.

I mean, c'mon...how much longer can the Rolling @#$%& Stones, a GUITAR BAND, continue without two high-functioning guitarists?

I firmly believe that if Keith stopped imbibing too much before shows, stopped all the goddamn posing and mugging, and stopped competing with Mick for crowd adoration, that he could still hold it down rhythmically (unless he truly is losing it mentally).

He and Ronnie should just hunker down in front of Charlie with Darryl, and tear it up. The best part of Four Flicks was during MR at the MSG show...watching the four of them, concentrating intently and just laying down that killer groove while Mick worked the crowd. It was beyond beautiful. EVERY song, every show should be like that.

Mick is the FRONTMAN! Let him front...just play the goddamn guitar. That IS what Keith used to do, isn't it?

...well, some of ya 'can't' notice, but there is an elephant in the living room

,,, what is being wittness'd is the leakage of drug use, , ,

I for one will treasure every single upcoming show, even though I won't be there, I will follow the setlist and get the bootlegs that usually surface eventually. We don't realize how blessed we are that they are still touring, and that we still get new shows!

Most of the people at these shows don't really notice Keith's mess-ups I'm sure, because they are not hardcore fans like us who tend to notice everything. They mostly pay attention to Mick, who is still in top form. Even if Keith can only hold a basic rhythm and can't really do solos anymore, I want to see them go on, because when it finally is over, we will all be very sad for lack of new material and shows, whether those shows are excellent or just average when Keith wasn't exactly "on."

I love the Stones and pray for their health and continued productivity both in the studio and live!!

Beauforde Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> this is truly saddening, and (finally) to be
> expected. i have argued that as a recording
> entity, the stones long ago ceased being a
> relevant force (not due to lack of chops, but
> simply due to criminal studio values and
> song-writing laziness...their raw ability and
> criminal studio release idiocy was only yet again
> proven to me after listening to the "bigger bang"
> bootleg...with a few revisions, released just like
> that, it would have been hailed as a soaring
> return to studio relevancy..instead they release a
> don was-neutered yawn). the last released album of
> theirs that i find necessary for my collection is
> steel wheels...good god, that's 1990...
>
> now keith is a pantomiming phatasm of himself. it
> was bad enough when ronnie was a useless
> liability, but without keith, the entire
> propostition becomes a legacy-damaging parody on
> stage. granted, perhaps mick is still a
> cryogenics-defying, six-sigma anamoly
> onstage...but that isn't enough to justify yet
> *another* leg of *another* tour. the avarice..or
> is it just the narcotic of tour-life(?)...it has
> to be put to rest.
>
> they either take their time and release a defiant,
> unprocessed album and do a smaller-arena/club
> tour, or they just hang it the @#$%& up. enough of
> these
> acoustically atrocious stadium money-grabs that
> pass for "concerts".


Please be serious. A Bigger Bang was (And is) very good. It's a shame that you don't like it.
About touring: It's only natural. Can't you see the Beatles connection here? OK: Me explain. In the Hyde Park DVD you see Mick talking about the differences with the Beatles (Beatles power was studio, whereas the Stones' is live). The Beatles quit touring. Concentrated on the studio. The Stones are winding down their album releases. Concentrating on live shows. Are you telling me that it's OK for The Beatles to do what they felt like, but it ain't OK for The Stones?

JumpingKentFlash

I wouldn't bother JKF. Beauforde is just another naysayer. to start with "this is truly saddening, and (finally) to be expected." lets you know the direction were gonna go. Have none of the recent reviews made any difference? I'd also like to know what recent gig Beauforde has been to?

ablett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wouldn't bother JKF. Beauforde is just another
> naysayer. to start with "this is truly saddening,
> and (finally) to be expected." lets you know the
> direction were gonna go. Have none of the recent
> reviews made any difference? I'd also like to know
> what recent gig Beauforde has been to?


I'm just trying to take such a discussion seriously mate. If Beauforde feels like this, and I completely disagree, I'd like to know where he gets his opinions from.

JumpingKentFlash

"enough of these acoustically atrocious stadium money-grabs that pass for "concerts".

Need you know anymore?

But it would be interesting to find out where this view comes from....

ablett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "enough of these acoustically atrocious stadium
> money-grabs that pass for "concerts".
>
> Need you know anymore?

Not really. You're right.


> But it would be interesting to find out where this
> view comes from....

Indeed. I hope he writes answer.

JumpingKentFlash

Let's face it, the Stones are the Jag's band. Always have been. For a brief time in the 70's it was Keith's band. Some nights they hit the notes and some nights they don't. I HAVE BEEN LUCKY TO SEE 'EM ON GOOD NIGHTS EXCEPT FOR ANGEL STADIUM '78. So enjoy the shows, hope that you get to see a good and let it go at that. Because when the whip comes down, no one is going to fill THOSE shoes. I just hope that the Human Riff will break out with Coming Down Again.