Although I think the Stones are no longer relevant musically and that they're a traveling museum exhibit, I don't dispute the huge grosses they're pulling in. Plus the value for money is very good. The music sounds great, Mick is actually singing, the carnival of musicians is doing well propping up Keith and Ron... a great evening's entertainment for the whole dysfunctional family.

I'm not so sure the Have-a-Nice-Day face took away the sting from that post, Rik and made us all feel better.

HEILOOBAAS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Although I think the Stones are no longer relevant
> musically and that they're a traveling museum
> exhibit, I don't dispute the huge grosses they're
> pulling in. Plus the value for money is very
> good. The music sounds great, Mick is actually
> singing, the carnival of musicians is doing well
> propping up Keith and Ron... a great evening's
> entertainment for the whole dysfunctional family.


...and what about all those fireworks!!!!

Humbug.

I have to add that the recording of Their Satanic Majesties Request is a sure sign that they are fading away.......

if you have nothing better to do with your time than compile this list why dont you go listen to the brussels affair and pretend its 1973

OLDKR

Rocky Dijon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm not so sure the Have-a-Nice-Day face took away
> the sting from that post, Rik and made us all feel
> better.


Was that Rik's "have a nice day" look?........It didn't make me feel better either.

I am glad someone else is taking the heat this time around...lol

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

I wasn't picking on Rik, I just thought the smiley face emoticon was a slightly odd choice considering the sentences that preceded it.

sorry, this is one of those "PISS OFF" threads ...

brass olive Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No offence (but I'm sure the die-hards will take
> it) but was thinking every band eventually gets to
> a stage they are dying....in the Stones' case they
> just keep going....
>
> Anyway I've put together 5 moments that make me
> think they are gone/going....
>
> Was wondering if guys could put in your
> nominations...
>
> In no particular order (IMO):
>
> 1. Euro Licks Tour - poorly performed
> 2. Rocks Off on the Live Licks Album - terrible
> editing (no caring and unbelievable).
> 3. Jagger wearing a "madonna-esque" head
> microphone - pathetic.
> 4. Timberlake appearing on-stage with the band -
> no more to say.
> 5. Jagger/Richards songwriting skills from 2000
> onwards...
>
> ...special mentions to Ronnie Wood acting like
> Keith from 1981 onwards...
>
> thoughts?


Oh come on!!! Get the hell out of here!!!!

your gunna use poor editing on a live album as a sign? if that were true , they'd have faded away long, long ago.

Enjoy every Stones second ya can...
For when the curtain comes down we're the ones who'll all fade...



ROCKMAN

B.O. really is making a stink with this thread!

the only good thing about this thread is that it made me think of the temptations song "Fading Away".

wee bobby lennox Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 1. not aware of. but ive seen clips of them in the
> 70,s and they were sloppy. also seen clips
> recently and they were great, so you have to judge
> the whole package.

Oh c'mon, they were great in the 70s, sloppy at times (1975-78) but great. It's not the same thing not even close.

Prat.

They may be fading away...declining musical skills on Keef's part, maddening inconsistency on Ronnie's part for most of the past 25 years, the wrong bass player for their music, and way too many musicians on stage...a "traveling museum exhibit" as HEILOOBAAS puts it...but despite all of this they could be (and often are) the most compelling Rock band on the planet on the right night in the right place. I've witnessed this. But their insistence on looking almost exclusively backward and never challenging themselves or their audience (whose musical acumen and openness to new material they underestimate in my opinion) cripples them as relevant artists.

The shame of it is that they could still be musically relevant...but refuse to take the artistic risks that are necessary...and to work hard enough at creating and performing new music...ergo we get threads like this and have to suffer the idiocy of comments about Jagger wearing a head-microphone signifying the band's decline...

Their in the Sixties WTF

There isn't 5 things, only one thing. AGE

No not age Big Al, one thing is ........Keith not singing backup and doesn't play's guitar on his own song (You Got The Shiver) I mean Silver

__________________________

brass olive Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No offence (but I'm sure the die-hards will take
> it) but was thinking every band eventually gets to
> a stage they are dying....in the Stones' case they
> just keep going....
>
> Anyway I've put together 5 moments that make me
> think they are gone/going....
>
> Was wondering if guys could put in your
> nominations...
>
> In no particular order (IMO):
>
> 1. Euro Licks Tour - poorly performed

"Licks"?
well, aside from any other argument, THATS bloody well wrong for starters



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-29 02:49 by Gazza.

WTF!!!??

theyre the most respected guys on earth , how you dare!!
And what about the songwriting skills , they had bad skills on 80's , not? and ronnie did many , many songs as mj and kr couldnt do it , theyre happy , they wont care about any of those 5 signs , theyre like pharaohs , no one will stop them , just god or a murderer would do it , or are you going to tell me michael cohl will stop them? they just have to kick his ass , and then contract another manager , ridiculous thread!

wipeacdc@hotmail.com
never too old or young to rocknroll!!!!!!

I certainly would disagree with the sentiment of the thread. Its not that their fading away, but that their fans still expect them to be like they were circa 1969-81. IMO one of the signs theyve been fading away is to still continue to use the large backing band. The Who (the closest thing to a contemporary band) have proven that they no longer need a large backing band to still get the same sound they had 25 years ago. I guess I dont understand why Keith, Ron, Charlie, Mick, Chuck and Darryl cant figure out the same thing. My only guess would be because they need the backup singers, the brass, the extra guitars. This isnt meant as a dig against the stones, cause I like 'em or I wouldnt be here. But what Im trying to say is that the decline (not fading away) is evident when they need an army to help them perform songs that 5-6 people use to be able to play.

They use the backing band to give that bit of extra value for money, they spend millions on the stage , sets and crew just to give a top class performance.

I used to go and see Rory Gallagher, his set was nothing, just the band members and raw rock and roll, Brilliant, BUT he didn't charge £125 per ticket to go and see him, the Stones like to put on a show as well as the rock and roll that's one of the reasons they are great.

They were the first band to play the stadiums, isn't that ground breaking? They have done all the ground breaking creative song writing, why do they need to do it again? As far as I can see they just enjoy it and enjoy making money,so what?, I love them.

pgarof Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They were the first band to play the stadiums,
> isn't that ground breaking?


I may be wrong, but I think that "honor" falls to the Who? ;-)

mofur Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pgarof Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > They were the first band to play the stadiums,
> > isn't that ground breaking?
>
>
> I may be wrong, but I think that "honor" falls to
> the Who? ;-)

They have been ground breaking in many aspects of Music and have set a trend for lots of bands to follow, sorry i thought the Stones were the first to venture into the large stadiums, they have certainly been the first to create such massive stage sets.(am I wrong again? if so beat me with a wet piece of celery)

brass olive Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No offence (but I'm sure the die-hards will take
> it) but was thinking every band eventually gets to
> a stage they are dying....in the Stones' case they
> just keep going....
>
> Anyway I've put together 5 moments that make me
> think they are gone/going....
>
> Was wondering if guys could put in your
> nominations...
>
> In no particular order (IMO):
>
> 1. Euro Licks Tour - poorly performed
> 2. Rocks Off on the Live Licks Album - terrible
> editing (no caring and unbelievable).
> 3. Jagger wearing a "madonna-esque" head
> microphone - pathetic.
> 4. Timberlake appearing on-stage with the band -
> no more to say.
> 5. Jagger/Richards songwriting skills from 2000
> onwards...
>
> ...special mentions to Ronnie Wood acting like
> Keith from 1981 onwards...
>
> thoughts?
Xcuse me?? Offending is possible and even allowed and 100% welcome as long as it's grounded with some good motivations. But this??? Xcuse me, these are just poor opinions....sorry to say... from somebody who doesn't like to live in the 21st century and didn't attend any shows at all.
The Stones have good nights and bad nights. But on 3 out of 4 European Licks show I saw theye were very good or even on fire.
Saying they are dying because of a mic used in 1 or 2 songs...... Who gives a f*@k.

Many people joined the stones on stage. So if you don't like JT, that's allright but he's great entertainer. But anyway... who cares

Ronnie acting like Keath in 1981?? Well he saved Keith's playing on some nightsduring this tour, if that what you meant?

Songwriting skills. Some say they lost it in the 80's, some say they lost it in the 90's. You say they lost in this century. Just one album released, which had at least 8 - 10 great tracks. And it was called a classic in many important European music magazines. Of course it's all opinion and one's taste. So is yours, but don't say they lost it.

So I want better motivations to hear they're dying....

Prince Rupert

If you read the Ian Stewart interview - elsewhere on this board - some say they already lost "it" at the end of the 60's/beginning of '70's

We're ALL fadin' away man, dontcha know it ? I'm a mere 99.99 percent of the man I used to be all those years ago ... now WHERE the f*** did that missing 0.01 percent go ???