Thief in the Night - How many Let it Bleed songs were played between 1969/1970

American Tour 7/11/69 approx. 20 concerts with set list of 12/14 songs

Midnight Rambler played 20 times
Love in Vain played 19 times
Live with Me played 16 times
Gimme Shelter was introduced into set 30/11/69 and played twice.

all before the album was released 5/12/69

They 'Stones' certainly new how to promote albums in these days.

Have to agree that ABB is a good album with 4 really good strong songs on it and another 5 reasonable ones -pity they left off ' Under the Radar'
The 'Stones are all over 60 years age and their fanbase still bought 2.5m copies of their new material which is a fantastic achievement for a band whose lifespan is now 45 years in the rock and roll world in both live concert and the recording business.
Just thought with all the promotion of a world tour/Rio free concert that it would have sold at least 4.0m copies but as you have pointed out times certainly have changed.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-11-24 01:23 by stones40.

stones40 is dead right, the Stones songwriting did nosedive after Some Girls so did the effectiveness of many of the songs arrangements. True, their output may have been a little patchy at times during earlier periods yet the Stones could still be relied upon to show flashes of magic, even if more intermittently. Tattoo You was good because many of the songs came from an earlier period, but from Undercover onwards it has been downhill all the way. Very poor songs generally, although at times good ideas which have remained sketchy and underdeveloped and lacking in sufficient depth has been the story of everything they've done post Tattoo You.

Edward Twining Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> stones40 is dead right, the Stones songwriting did
> nosedive after Some Girls so did the effectiveness
> of many of the songs arrangements. True, their
> output may have been a little patchy at times
> during earlier periods yet the Stones could still
> be relied upon to show flashes of magic, even if
> more intermittently. Tattoo You was good because
> many of the songs came from an earlier period, but
> from Undercover onwards it has been downhill all
> the way. Very poor songs generally, although at
> times good ideas which have remained sketchy and
> underdeveloped and lacking in sufficient depth has
> been the story of everything they've done post
> Tattoo You.

Nosedive? A bunch of nonsense. You are obviously biased since you seem to not like ANY of their newer stuff so I don't think your assessment is really reliable. If their later day songwriting is nosediving then tons of bands would love that kind of a nosedive.

I think there are a lot of little big reasons. I have a feeling that The Stone's older songs have taken on such a size and such a huge place and almost mythic status for themselves that people want to know about them a lot, doesn’t matter if they even think that The Stones can still write good songs. In their mind nothing will beat those older ones. But I think The Stones have lead themselves to that position. They are now seen as a touring band only, by the people who are not huge fans. People think "When will The Stones go out on tour again?" Whereas with other acts it's "When will they do another album?" And that's understandable; after all, if they do in fact come out with another leg for the ABB Tour in '08, it will be 3 years after the last new album and with a 6 month of rest period. Which other band does that? Nobody does that, they stop touring and go write new stuff, or take some time off and then go write new stuff. The Stones stop touring, take some time off and then go back touring. No wonder they are seen as a touring band. One could think that U2 could become like this too because of the size and also because of the somewhat mythic status and attention that every new tour of them gets. They are also seen as a touring band, but they most probably won't be seen as just that because in every interview they do while promoting a new album and a tour they are always talking about the new album and how special the new songs are for them and how much they treasure having new songs on tour. And it’s not just bullsh!t from them because when U2 or Springsteen (who can still have number 1 albums) do a tour, they have 7 to 10 new songs played EVERY NIGHT alongside to the older ones (which both bands, by the way, try and give a fresh arrangement to). That makes a huge difference. Even while on tour they're still promoting their new album, s they should, after all that tour is out to support the new album not the older songs. The Stones play 1 to 3 new songs and in many concerts only 1 new song and every now and then not even 1. U2 and Springsteen neeever do that. If they did they know that they would be seen as a touring and greatest hits band only.I think The Stones put a good deal of attention and effort on making a new album and even promoting it on interviews (even though it’s overshadowed by the new tour) but they put zero effort on promoting it live. That attitude makes a world of difference I think.

stones40 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Midnight Rambler played 20 times
> Love in Vain played 19 times
> Gimme Shelter was introduced into set 30/11/69 and played twice.

A bit more than that, I'd say
USA 1969:

Midnight - 24 times
Love In Vain - 24 times
Gimme Shelter - 6 times - Nov 7th/9th-both/11th/30th/Dec6th



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-11-25 18:42 by Erik_Snow.

Let's not forget that Gimme Shelter was only played once during the 1970 tour making the '69/'70/'71 grand total seven performances.

As we all know,Let It Bleed was not played in concert until 1981,YCAGWYW aside from the Rock & Roll Circus,was not played until 1972.Monkey Man was not played on stage until 1994,and You Got The Silver was played in concert for the first time in 1999.If you want to count Country Honk,it was played once (for a few seconds) in 1976.

So,as I was pointing out,only three Let It Bleed songs were played with any regularity between 1969,1970,and 1971.Only four of the Let It Bleed songs were performed at all during that era.Gimme Shelter - 7 out of 55 shows '69 through '71.

What it comes down to is that the Stones have never been in a rush to play as much brand new material as they probably should.

Ok, if you're into mathematics, Theif In The Night: 3 Let It Bleed songs make 33 1/3 per cent of the record. Concerts then were much shorter, so 3 wouldn't be such a low number anyway. But: ABB has 16 tracks plus the 2 of the 2nd ABB release which certainly was part of the Bigger Bang world tour promo campaign, too, makes 18. Did the band rehearse (not to speak of play) 6 songs of ABB?...

>> Did the band rehearse (not to speak of play) 6 songs of ABB? <<

Infamy, This Place Is Empty, Back of My Hand, Rain Fall Down, Rough Justice, Oh No Not You Again
and Streets of Love were all played multiple times in concert; It Won't Take Long twice. that's half the album.

someone around here crunched the numbers a few months ago and it turned out that
the album they played the most tracks from on the ABB tour was - i'll be darned - ABB.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-11-26 14:58 by with sssoul.

You would expect that considering the sheer numbers of albums theyve released, in fairness.

Pretty reasonable to expect more songs per show from their current release than from any release from 35-40 years ago.

I think 'It Wont Take Long' was played twice, actually. Hollywood Bowl and another show around that time (cue erikjjf or someone as I cant be arsed looking it up....)

>> You would expect that considering the sheer numbers of albums theyve released, in fairness. <<

didn't say you wouldn't expect it - i was responding to what seems to be JJHM's implication
that they didn't play even six ABB tracks in concert.

and yeah, It Won't Take Long was played at the Hollywood Bowl II and San Diego. i'll correct that. thanks :E

I should have written something like "33 1/3 per cent of the current studio album played regularly in the set". Come on, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEANT!
Actually, the 1970 European tour must be the tour of the premieres. Besides Let It Bleed they had up-to-now-never-on-album extras like Let It Rock (yes yes, except in Franco fascist-Spain) and Roll Over Beethoven (ok, we have one James Brown number) plus the no-release-date-yet You Gotta Move, Dead Flowers and Brown Sugar. If you count in the Beggars Banquet songs they only had one (in figures: 1) 'warhorse' - for all those Londoners who attended the NME Pollwinners' Concert.

>> Come on, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEANT! <<

no one here knows what you mean if it's not what you write - and don't yell, it doesn't help.
before the Fiji Incident the usual was 4 ABB numbers per show, i believe (ie 25% of the album).
i too am sorry they didn't feel like playing more of it, but let's not exaggerate:
20-25% of the album per show in 05-06, and 50% of it played overall, isn't that dramatic.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-11-27 00:26 by with sssoul.

The Stones wasn't too keen on playing material from A Bigger Bang. That's a fact.
Bruce Springsteen on the other hand, played 9 songs from his latest album last night in Madrid, Spain.
The Boss kicks ass as always and he's not into them static setlists for sure. Guitarist Steve Van Zandt doesn't f uck up riffs and isn't drunk on stage either. LOL!!!.

The Stones Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Stones wasn't too keen on playing material
> from A Bigger Bang. That's a fact.
> Bruce Springsteen on the other hand, played 9
> songs from his latest album last night in Madrid,
> Spain.
> The Boss kicks ass as always and he's not into
> them static setlists for sure. Guitarist Steve Van
> Zandt doesn't f uck up riffs and isn't drunk on
> stage either. LOL!!!.

We already dispelled the myth that Magic outsold ABB so what does Springsteen playing more new songs than The Stones have to do with anything? Your argument would make sense if Magic sold more than ABB but alas it didn't.

And who cares if Van Zandt doesn't screw up riffs if the riffs are crap to begin with (relatively speaking compared to Keith's riffs).

FrankM the Stones haven't recorded any classic songs for close on three decades now.

2 million + albums in two years is pretty good for anyone. It's pretty obvious that they do still sell. A Bigger Bang is an interesting album with some quality songs. However, it could have done without 4/5 songs. The reason it didn't sell more is because it didn't have any hit singles. Songs like "Biggest Mistake" and "Rain Fall Down" had potential but radio stations won't play them because, unlike U2 and Bruce Springsteen, nobody cares.
Either you play your new material proudly alongside your older stuff or you accept your fate as a performing monkey.

iamthedj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Either you play your new material proudly
> alongside your older stuff or you accept your fate
> as a performing monkey.

Now, that's an interesting and quite fitting statement.......

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think 'It Wont Take Long' was played twice,
> actually. Hollywood Bowl and another show around
> that time (cue erikjjf or someone as I cant be
> arsed looking it up....)


I think it was one time in Hollywood and one time in Philly (Petco Park if I remember i correctly). The version of it from Virtual Ticket is pretty good. I remember the other one being quite hoorendeous.

JumpingKentFlash

iamthedj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Either you play your new material proudly
> alongside your older stuff or you accept your fate
> as a performing monkey.


... Or you play what you feel like.

JumpingKentFlash

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:

> ... Or you play what you feel like.



I've heard Mick say on numerous occasions stuff like:

You've got to challenge an audiance with new material / We want to make this music grow up / It's very easy not to experiment / I'm writing all the time / You've got to Keep moving or you're finished.

If so prove yourself. What have you to lose. Your place in history is cemented no matter what. Challenge yourself!

They don't exist to please a lame brain like you iamthedj. The only performing monkey is you when you are on this forum.

And by the way if more people care about new Springsteen stuff then how come he sold less albums? Nitwit.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-11-28 00:39 by FrankM.

Edward Twining Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FrankM the Stones haven't recorded any classic
> songs for close on three decades now.

Well what do you mean by a "classic song". A song that would appear on a list of the five hundred greatest songs of all time? Well by that definition their last classic would be SMU but it''s normal for great artists to have the lion's share or even all of their classic/all time great songs in their first twenty years or so. When was the last "classic" Neil Young song recorded? What about Macca? Dylan? Springsteen?

You can say you like the newer Dylan/Springsteen etc. stuff just as I like much of the modern Stones stuff but have any of them released classics like SMU, Thunder Road in ages?

"Lyin' awake in a cold, cold sweat. Am I overdrawn, am I going in debt?
It gets worse, the older that you get. No escape from the state of confusion I'm in.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-11-28 00:53 by FrankM.

I bought my new copy of Their Satanic Majesties Request to replace ny old copy now I will go buy Between the Buttons.
That's 2 new Stones album purchases in a month!
I am doing my part.

NumberOneStonesFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I bought my new copy of Their Satanic Majesties
> Request to replace ny old copy now I will go buy
> Between the Buttons.
> That's 2 new Stones album purchases in a month!
> I am doing my part.
>
>


Some people is doing their job too with the Rolled Gold compilation, about 22,000 in two weeks only in UK.

Why Don't Stones Albums Sell Anymore?

Because they haven't been remastered in 13 F*CKING years!!!

Drew

Frank M quit being such a bitch. Far from being a nay-sayer of the bands I believe they've recorded some absolute classics in the last 20 years that easily stands up to their earlier output and far surpasses Dylan, Springsteen, McCartney et al.

Slipping Away
Almost Hear You Sigh
Out Of Tears
Love Is Strong
The Worst
Out Of Control
Already Over Me
Thief In The Night
Losing My Touch
Laugh, I Almost Died

All great songs in my humble opinion. And yet they are never or rarely played and given a chance to be recognised. If this opinion makes me a "nit-wit" so be it!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-11-28 12:46 by iamthedj.

iamthedj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Frank M quit being such a bitch. Far from being a
> nay-sayer of the bands I believe they've recorded
> some absolute classics in the last 20 years that
> easily stands up to their earlier output and far
> surpasses Dylan, Springsteen, McCartney et al.
>
> Slipping Away
> Almost Hear You Sigh
> Out Of Tears
> Love Is Strong
> The Worst
> Out Of Control
> Already Over Me
> Thief In The Night
> Losing My Touch
> Laugh, I Almost Died
>
> All great songs in my humble opinion. And yet
> they are never or rarely played and given a chance
> to be recognised. If this opinion makes me a
> "nit-wit" so be it!


Yes, but see what happens if they take up one of these great tunes my friend (You know I like you dude). The Worst was played at the beginning of the tour. We got comments like "Oh he shouldn't play that one" or "Why doesn't he play Coming Down Again?". When Keith plays "Slipping Away" we get "He plays it too much". When Out Of Control was played in the latter part of the set at the concerts in 2005 we heard "It's a big momentum killer" (Which I REALLY don't understand. I'd kill to hear that one again live). Oddly enough Love Is Strong is always welcome though (And I did see a kick-ass version of it in Brno - Hell yeah that rocked big time).

JumpingKentFlash

iamthedj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Frank M quit being such a bitch. Far from being a
> nay-sayer of the bands I believe they've recorded
> some absolute classics in the last 20 years that
> easily stands up to their earlier output and far
> surpasses Dylan, Springsteen, McCartney et al.
>
> Slipping Away
> Almost Hear You Sigh
> Out Of Tears
> Love Is Strong
> The Worst
> Out Of Control
> Already Over Me
> Thief In The Night
> Losing My Touch
> Laugh, I Almost Died
>
> All great songs in my humble opinion. And yet
> they are never or rarely played and given a chance
> to be recognised. If this opinion makes me a
> "nit-wit" so be it!

Well then say that next time and you will get no comment from me but that's not exactly what you said in your earlier post. There's a difference between saying what you said in this post and calling them performing monkeys dingaling.

I notice iamthedj picks nearly all ballads as the best Stones songs of more recent years. I wouldn't be that generous personally.

Jeeezzz...them Eagles boyz can really shift some units - 463.300 in their fifth week.Aaarrggg...this will only convince them that they have to continue ;-)

Incidentally, the numbers are the same as Britney's first week - who is now in 30th place in her fifth week...one step lower than Plant/Krauss in their sixth week!!! Maybe their is a God after all? ;-)

...and Bruce is finally outselling ABB in his ninth week! The Stones only shifted 55.900 ....Bruce sold 60.100. Another 100 weeks like this and he might - possibly - reach the sales of ABB ;-)