somewhere in there are The Rolling Stones. Overload on backing musicians!

?

Have you seen the picture? Too many backing musicians mate!

ok

Come on, don't be picky, they're only outnumbered by a factor of two.

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

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

Greg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Come on, don't be picky, they're only outnumbered
> by a factor of two.

LOL

Greg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Come on, don't be picky, they're only outnumbered
> by a factor of two.

That's true :-)

So you would rather have it like with U2. A tape with all the sound they don't make with real people on stage?

Bjornulf

What I'd like to know is where the picture actually comes from...
Which concert ?

[doctorstonesblog.blogspot.com]

Thank God they have the backing musicians. HTW and BS without the horns? Or horns on tape...? No way! And if you've been to the shows this summer, you'll know how important both the musicians and the singers are.

Doc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What I'd like to know is where the picture actually comes from...
> Which concert ?

Dodger Stadium last year.
[www.iorr.org]

gstone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thank God they have the backing musicians. HTW and
> BS without the horns?

HTW without horns? yes please!

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

bv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So you would rather have it like with U2. A tape
> with all the sound they don't make with real
> people on stage?

No, what has U2 got to do with anything? Check out 'You Gotta Move' DVD by Aerosmith. Still sound as good as they did in the 70's and WITHOUT unessesary backing singers etc.. and before anyone says 'Go and express my views on an Aerosmith board', I am a Stones fan who does see the need for all these clowns onstage!

Well, quite an army...I would fire 5 of them.

hey, the "Paul Kersey" I know would gun down a few of the offenders with no questions asked.

You're just now noticing this?

vocals, guitar, guitar, bass, drums and keys. The rest is just overload.

I was thinking of some sort of No Blondie Player Guitar sign with a picture of him with a red slash through it, but .... it would seem rude. Or, one with Chuck in a tight stretchy shirt that said, "No Stretchy Shirts, Chuck." Luckily, I'm not a sign-holding kind of fan, and no offense to any sign holding fans!

The main picture on the front of IORR is priceless.. Lisa Fischer (I presume) with some band way in the background! LOL

Whats the big deal? The Stones, A few backup singers, a horn singer and a piano player? All sounds rock n roll to me?

no Michael Davis = no Stones !!

TooTough Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, quite an army...I would fire 5 of them.
>
> [www.iorr.org]


Lol.

bv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So you would rather have it like with U2. A tape
> with all the sound they don't make with real
> people on stage?


You mean like Sympathy For The Devil?

Yes. Exactly. Sympathy For The Devil have a sampled bongo track running. But still it is very little sampling and playback with the Stones. Still, even on Sympathy, it is not extensive sampling running. Everybody who went to the Frankfurt show this month knows how important Keith and Charlie and the rest of the band is to that song, or any other song. When they stop playing the song is with no power.

I have wathed U2 live several times. There are just Bono, The Edge and the drummer on stage, more or less, and every song have the sound from the records. Samling of course. A German newspaper could confirm the fact that the Stones are NOT a playback band. They printed such a story and had to deny it in public.

Bjornulf

I'm not complaining about the stones being a 'sampled band' as you say, because I know they aren't. I cannot get my head round why they need to have all these people onstage with them? If you like the stones live sound modern day fine! The picture on the front page of IORR says everything I hate about the band modern day. I remember a recent version of Satisfaction where you have Lisa Fischer shrieking about half way thru. What in all honesty is that all about??

They don't NEED them, they simply like the music better WITH them rather than not.

It's almost always been this way. Compared to the past, they have added only 3 bu singers, and some extra guitar on some numbers.

As for the BU singers, we have to blame the aging audience, it does not get its lungs out as it did in the past!

C

I understand what you are saying Liddas. It's difficult for me to see. I can't get into the current regime however I understand that lots of people can. I yearn for stuff from the vaults to be released but don't think this is going to happen unless they quit?

Paul Kersey Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The main picture on the front of IORR is
> priceless.. Lisa Fischer (I presume) with some
> band way in the background! LOL


that's not lisa fischer - it's ann moura, singing a duet with mick

This is all hilarious. The old Stones, or the new Stones...but wait, today they ALL ARE the OLD Stones.

Matters not to me, and forgive me for quoting Billy Joel:

"Everybody's talking about the new sound but it's still rock n' roll to me".

oooook wat pic