georgeV Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> it will be interesting to see what they deliver in
> London given they played there last year and there
> are 3 shows in one week.
>
> To Mick's credit, given the mistakes being made on
> stage, I would stay with the songs they know too.
> He is the one out there saving theoir ass every
> night.



Not sure about that. Mick blew the occasional cue at the 2 shows I saw in June. No one's perfect.

Except Charlie, of course.

sweet neo con Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > I'm sure Mick is afraid that if it's not wall to
> wall warhorses....the
> stadium attendance will suffer.


At the risk of stating the obvious, the song selection has no affect on the ticket sales. When you buy a ticket, youre generally oblivious to what songs are going to be played.

gazza..that's true for the most part (in the beginning of the tour)...but
there are "part-time stones fans" that go because they know
they will play brown sugar, satisfaction etc.....and want wall to wall
warhorses....for the party atmosphere. they get pissed or go for beer
during the deeper cuts that IORRers long to hear.

So...my point...if the "part-timers" read the reviews (or word-of-mouth) from the
first few shows (or see a setlist) and they don't recognize a large percentage
of the songs....they won't go.

What percentage of the crowd is?:

A. "hard-core" fans
B. fairly big fans
C. rock music (general) fans
D. the circus is in town/event fans
E. i'm wealthy...I'll take a client...I like satisfaction.
F. let's go for the party
G. free ticket? sure i'll go.
H. newbies brought by their parents
etc...etc...etc..

I think the warhorses are important to all but the first 2 groups.
Just an opinion....and I think they might be the difference between
stadium & arena shows.

* i think Paul McCartney has been successful at significantly overhauling his
setlists from tour to tour...right?


IORR............but I like it!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-08-01 01:05 by sweet neo con.

Hey guys, remember during rehearsals in June Bjornulf told us to expect some surprises at the 2nd and 3rd London shows (O2 Arena). I'm willing to bet the Stones will mix it up pretty good for the 3 London shows......I wish I could be there....

sweet neo con Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> gazza..that's true for the most part (in the
> beginning of the tour)...but
> there are "part-time stones fans" that go because
> they know
> they will play brown sugar, satisfaction
> etc.....and want wall to wall
> warhorses....for the party atmosphere. they get
> pissed or go for beer
> during the deeper cuts that IORRers long to hear.

I distinctly remember when they announced the No Security tour in late 1998, they mentioned that they were going to drop some of the better known songs and dig out some songs they hadnt played before. This was also the first tour where they had the high ticket prices (earlier in the tour they were $65. Tickets for this tour ranged from $40 to over $300, with an average of $110)

They sold out every show. I dont recall any reviews which griped because they dropped Satisfaction and Miss you. In fact, I read a few where they were praised for finally doing so.

Not only were the audiences satisfied, but they came back in similar numbers when the Stones toured again three years later. So, it obviously didnt matter.

This "people wont stand for it if they dont play songs x,y and z" is for the most part a myth. I can understand that in places like Bucharest, but not in markets where they play all the time and in fact several times in one tour. Most people are mature enough to understand that a) theyre not going to play every one of their best known songs and b) if they dont, they have enough other great songs to take their place.

This myth is something that has only really been perpetraded by the Stones post-40 Licks, when it seems theyve developed some kind of 'revisionist' mentality as to their audience. When I saw them for the first time in '82, there was no IORR, no Sympathy, no Street Fighting Man, no Gimme Shelter, no Midnight Rambler - and no one cared. They still were able to play 24 other songs which brought the house down.

I'd love to know how Mick figures they managed to sell 250 million records in the first 40 years of their career if he thinks the people who buy their music only know about 10 songs and will lose interest or not come back if they dont drop or rotate some of them.

If their audience has changed in the last few years (and to a degree it has, as theyve whored themselves to the more lucrative corporate market) then maybe thats part of the reason why Mick has, to his creative detriment, become less ambitious. To a degree thats understandable even if its a bad thing, but there really is no reason why they couldnt ditch a randomly selected two or three of those "must play" ten songs each night and replace them , not with 'deeper cuts' but other well known songs that could easily take their place and get the same recognition

By doing so, you still get your requisite number of songs that everyone knows.

I still maintain that the number of people who wont go to a show in case they dont play 'Satisfaction' is outstripped by the number of people who wont go because they know with mind-numbing certainty that they WILL play it and several other such songs that theyve seen many times before, and for less money. When you ask people who dont go anymore to see the Stones their reason for not going back, its invariably (in my experience) a case of them viewing it as being the same songs every tour, only for much higher money each time.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-08-01 02:07 by Gazza.

that's right, gazza, which i why i said this is what the stones want you to believe...and yes they have helped to perpetuate the myth. the truth is something people just don't wanna acknowledge.....

I really liked the Oalkand licks show, but I talked to someone who was there too and she said she was disappointed because they didn't play enough hits. But then again I talked to someone who was at the SF show and he said he was disappointed because it was all greatest hits. I think they've gotta aim somewhere in the middle. Im all for changing up the set list but I like it on a tour when the #1 and #2 song are always that same. I think theres a certian magic in that. but thats just me.

>sweet neo con Wrote:

So...my point...if the "part-timers" read the reviews (or word-of-mouth) from the
first few shows (or see a setlist) and they don't recognize a large percentage
of the songs....they won't go.

What percentage of the crowd is?:

A. "hard-core" fans
B. fairly big fans
C. rock music (general) fans
D. the circus is in town/event fans
E. i'm wealthy...I'll take a client...I like satisfaction.
F. let's go for the party
G. free ticket? sure i'll go.
H. newbies brought by their parents
etc...etc...etc..

I think the warhorses are important to all but the first 2 groups.
Just an opinion....and I think they might be the difference between
stadium & arena shows.








Stadium and arenas are effectively the same on this tour. Its the same show.

why are Stones audiences portrayed (by the band and now by other fans who excuse this myth) as being so different to those of other acts? Are they really THAT intolerant and ignorant of the band's history? I dont see that list of audience 'groups' significantly influencing what other artists with a long recording history choose to play - Dylan, Bowie, Springsteen, Young, Prince

They play what they like and their audience follows. At this stage of their career, everyones had their chance to see those songs plenty of times. Thats the way to do it IMO. Leave the Vegas-style greatest hits crap to Streisand and Celine Dion.

the Stones are better than that, and that lowest-common denominator pandering shit should be beneath them.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-08-01 14:29 by Gazza.

Ah.. If we only could get Under my Thumb, Monkey Man, Sway, Can't you hear me knocking, Gimme Shelter and Little T&A in Oslo, I'd never ask for more..

Would be more than satisfied..

- mjOL

Yeah where the hell is SFM?............The one warhorse we want to hear and tehy don't play it.

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

T&A Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> that's right, gazza, which i why i said this is
> what the stones want you to believe...and yes they
> have helped to perpetuate the myth. the truth is
> something people just don't wanna acknowledge.....

Which is that A) they're lazy, they don't want to take the time to learn other songs and certain members of the band aren't up to playing a wide variety of stuff, it's all they can do to get thru the warhorses without mistakes and some days they can't even pull that off.

Sad but true. But it's still a hell of a show, and they do still manage to throw in some variety, a She's So Cold here, a Love Is Strong there, some interesting covers from time to time, etc. I hope they put some fresh material in their show on the next tour, I wouldn't mind if they played the same 20 songs every night if 8-10 of them were ones they'd never played before.

"It wasn't my fault ... liquors drunkened me!" Homer Simpson

"When you ask people who dont go anymore to see the Stones their reason for not going back, its invariably (in my experience) a case of them viewing it as being the same songs every tour"

Same thing with my friends and others I have discussed the Stones with, most of whom are not nutty Stones fans like us. So we are not the only ones who want variety.

It also doesn't help that we get songs like You Got Me Rocking every tour since its been released. More like laziness rather than feeling the need to play a song just for the big audience.

Mick decided to stop playing Street Fighting Man at some point before this tour, and I forgot the reason that was around at the time.

Gazza....I think for the most part we agree but i'll try to clarify...

re: reference to the No Security Tour.......that was an ARENA tour.
THey can sell out arenas with absolutely no problem...no matter what
they play (hits or deep cuts)... no argument there.

i was trying to give my theory/opinion about stadium shows.

whereas an arenas hold 15,000 to 20,000 people.....stadiums
hold 50,000 to 80,000...right? And according to anecdotal
evidence on this forum....there have been lots of empty seats (half full stadiums etc)

obvious factors might be... (in no particular order):
1) the band / performance
2) the ticket prices
3) the music / setlists
4) tour frequency (every 2-3 yrs vs 8 yr gap)
5) the venue
6) repeat hard-core "customers"
etc etc etc....

When I mentioned a "difference between arenas & stadiums" in a previous post
I was NOT talking about the specific setlists differences....I was saying
the first 20,000-25,000 to an arena OR stadium show are automatic. It's the
other 30,000-40,000 needed to fill a stadium that are expecting to know every song
and make a party out of it....especially now that they are touring so frequently.
This is why Mick always talks about the "must-dos" for stadium shows. They've
often differentiated playing in stadiums/arenas/small theaters & clubs.

At this point...their arena & stadium setlists are very similar.
And obviously as a fan of all Stones music..I'd LOVE to see
a few warhorse dropped in favor of lesser-played tunes...I LOVED
the No Securty setlists and would like to see them dig even deeper...
..but Mick's rationale for continuing to be a STADIUM BAND is that
it's all about the big hits, the spectacle...and the party atmosphere...
so they do what they need to do to appeal to the additional 30-40,000 to
fill a stadium.

Personally...even though I loved '89 "comeback tour" for it's
setlist and the huge spectacle.....and the Voodoo Lounge tour
for it's less commonly played songs...and the B2B stadium show for
it's B-stage......................I would have no problem with
the Stones becoming an arena band (exclusively) and digging deeper into
their archives for the 20,000 that are lucky enough to get a ticket
and the 10-15,000 that will be banging on the doors to get in .


IORR............but I like it!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-08-01 19:41 by sweet neo con.

Chuck was in Canada last night sitting in with ABB

[jambands.com]

.....and they played "Jessica" (the Chuck instrumental)...now that's beautiful....

The first couple months of every tour are always the most eclectic, set list wise. Fresh out of rehearsals...newer songs still on their minds and fingers....but then habit and repetitiveness comes in and as more time passes...the more they forget about all those songs the rehearsed.

They need to rejuvenate the set list every 4 or 5 months. Look at when they returned to US in the fall in Boston. '06..the new stuff we got

Monkey Man
Sway
Sweet Virginia
Live With Me
Ain't Too Proud to Beg
Little T&A
Under My Thumb


But then...again as time passed by...those songs dissapeared and the comfortable...not riskful set lists came back.


No Security was a great tour also...great intentions but even the rare songs by the tour's end had become stale. Again, the first couple months were great and fresh...later the "umph" was gone....

Shorten the warhorses, if not take out 2 or 3, revise and overhaul the set lists every couple months..and shorten the tour length.

Justin I used to have the same theory about going to shows early in the tour, so I got tickets for both Fenway shows and the set list was identical, except for maybe a song. Than a week later caught two more shows, same exact set lists with nothing changed, maybe one song but thats it. To make it worse it was also almost the same set list as when I saw them open their Licks tour. It really turned off a lot of my friends. I found it hard to defend the Stones to my friends. To be honest I am surprised Keith lets this happen, he usually has a good sense of what's cool or what to do for the fans.

Hound Dog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Justin I used to have the same theory about going
> to shows early in the tour, so I got tickets for
> both Fenway shows and the set list was identical,
> except for maybe a song. Than a week later caught
> two more shows, same exact set lists with nothing
> changed, maybe one song but thats it. To make it
> worse it was also almost the same set list as when
> I saw them open their Licks tour. It really turned
> off a lot of my friends. I found it hard to defend
> the Stones to my friends. To be honest I am
> surprised Keith lets this happen, he usually has a
> good sense of what's cool or what to do for the
> fans.



I guess it's hit or miss at times, but generally over the span of the first 3-4 months, I would assume the choice of songs are more different than the LAST 3-4 months of the tour.

Yeah, I'd thing Keith would be aware of such things. I'd like to think that with the intensity of the internet and the messageboards, our displeasures and complaints are getting through to the band. I think the band knew of our boredome with the setlists by the time they wanted to come back to Boston in '06. They were now visiting cities the second time this leg and knew they had to come prepared with new songs. After that first night...we were all shocked with the set lists and word got to Chuck Leavall that he was pleased about our reviews of the show. So....once in a while they look to us as the pulse of the fans.

But generally, the boys get low, low marks in my book when it comes to diversifying their set lists...

.....hey guys, check out the Helsinki thread....they have a pretty diverse set list so far.....

Also don't forget when the Stones played at the Hollywood Bowl they were bashed by the press for always playing the same songs, then the next night they mixed it up pretty well. So they are aware.

They've generally done that when theyve played back to back shows in the same city. I think Hollywood Bowl had 8 changes, which is a record for successive shows in the same venue. Twickenham last year had about seven changes. Some of them enforced due to Mick's throat. They'll also look at what they played before when they make a return visit to the same city later in the tour (a good sign for London)

jabhead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chuck was in Canada last night sitting in with
> ABB
>

Wow and back in Helsinki today/night, losing 6 or 7 hours along the way. Real jet-setter that Chuckie is.

Must have been a cool Allmans' show with Chuck and Susan Tedeschi sitting-in.

Karl

angee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mick decided to stop playing Street Fighting Man
> at some point before this tour, and I forgot the
> reason that was around at the time.


Perhaps because Keith kept losing his way when playing it? It was a sorry state-of-affairs when I saw him screw it up badly TWICE in one week (Toronto '02).

Budapest:

We had another huge crowd…I’d guess at least 60,000. And while the set list is still not very adventurous, the band played well and the audience gave us their approval.

Brno:

He gave me his thoughts on the previous show as promised, making some good points. It was not surprising to hear him say that the keyboards were way low in the mix except for two or three times when there was a feature…such as Ruby Tuesday and my solo on Honky Tonk. It’s frustrating to hear this, but I get it all the time from people that come to our gigs. He also complained that the bass was low in the mix in general, and put forth a few other specific comments. None of them were things I’ve not heard before, so no real surprises.

he show went fine, but perhaps a notch or two below the last few.

(I agree about that.)

Warsaw

Officials from Poland’s Foreign Ministry said there were 51 people on board the bus. French media was reporting that between 50-60 people were on board. So someone in authority had spoken to Michael Cohl and had requested that we not play “Sympathy…” as it had some connotations about death and they asked us to respect the period of mourning they were observing. Of course we complied and took it out of the set. It still wound up being a fairly standard offering…

Setlist whining

..and while I understand Mick’s feelings that when we play these places that we never or rarely have played before we should play a lot of well known songs, I and many other members of the band are growing weary of the repetitive presentations.


Belgrade-Bucharest-Budapest-Brno

Lorenz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

Chuck: I and many other members of the band are growing weary of the repetitive presentations.


As much as I dislike his role in the overall sound since 1989...I must
admit that he wants more risk and speaks out loud that he is bored -
and that´s a reason to finally like him - a bit

Yep, true, but in the end he´s an employee and that´s all. I don´t think that there are any surprises in the london shows, maybe they´re the last time, but not intended to be

Baboon Bro Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
The Polish hadnt
> seen'em
> since 1967 for an instance...

ahem - they played Chorzow in 1998 on Bridges To Babylon Tour.

Hmm... sad to hear Chuck feels put out about the keys in the mix, but at the end of the day, it's the Stones' show, not his. Agree about the bass, though, from what I've heard.

Easily the most interesting part of the blog so far would have to have been playing Can't Always Get in B accidentally... they know what they're doing, those guys.

>> they know what they're doing, those guys <<

smile: i take it by "they" you mean someone other than whoever put the capo on the wrong fret -
unless that was just someone's way of keepin everyone on their toes :E

as for the bass sound ... that must depend a lot on where you are. i've been very nicely bruised by the bass many times.