Quote
schillid
Philly 81
first show...

Yes!

It's certainly an entertaining show to listen to because it's so sloppy, and Ronnie going on about his lost ring. Tops was a disaster, and Satisfaction was deliciously horrible!

I'm not sure but I remember one show from 81 where during Let it Bleed they couldn't find the bridge (James Brown call your office!) and it just kept going and going . . . and going.

I thought the Earls Court 76 gig I attended was pretty awful at the time , but since then I have heard various boots that sound pretty good now compared to some of the last tour, but then again there is usually something worth listening to on most shows.
I have at least 10 of the 81 tour shows and they stand up pretty good if a bit repetative in setlist terms.

Friends who were there said that they thought Chicago/Soldier Field '06 was pretty weak. There was a sort of feeling like, this whole thing (Chicago outdoors in October) is just a terrible idea...

I have not heard the visual or audio on that one, though

SARSstock was really bad.

Helsinki 2007 was horrible experience.

I've heard a boot from Edmonton 97 - I wouldn't want to hear it again.

[thepowergoats.com]

Quote
RollingStonesFan

Quote
Happy24

Quote
mr edward

Quote
RollingStonesFan
The second part of the show in Werchter 2007 was rellay bad...and Paint It Black out of it was a desaster!

And so was Satisfaction. That concert was the first time I was dissapointed at a Stones gig.

Interesting - the videos of SMU and IGC from this show are really great. But it is true that I read some bad reviews of this how before... So it is probably a great work of Hammilton (director)

Well, during the first hour of the show I though: "This must be the greatest Stones-concert ever!" Start Me Up, Shattered...really everything was great. The band was much better than in 2006 in Europe.
BUT then came Keiths part and we saw that he was totaly drunken. His part was very bad and so was the rest of the show. You could feel, how Mick was angry but he couldn't rescue the show.

Unless you were close enough to smell his breath, you cant really say that you can see that he was totally drunk. Its been well established in the last year or so that Keith is on anti seizure medication. If anything, his erraticism since his accident is more likely to be medically linked than caused solely by excess alcohol.

Quote
Turning To Gold
Friends who were there said that they thought Chicago/Soldier Field '06 was pretty weak. There was a sort of feeling like, this whole thing (Chicago outdoors in October) is just a terrible idea...

I have not heard the visual or audio on that one, though

I know quite a few people (on Rocks Off) who were at the show, and most of them were quite upset about how bad a condition Keith was in - in some cases they wouldnt even post it on the board but only mentioned it by e-mail - although some thought it was more to do with the freezing temperature and his resultant lack of mobility than anything else. There was also much alarm about his condition after the opening show of that leg in Foxboro. He was in a pretty sorry state for the first few weeks of that leg, but things certainly picked up for him as the tour progressed (maybe because they werent playing in freezing temperatures by the time they got to places like Austin!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-08-16 01:29 by Gazza.

I wasn't at the '78 JKF show, but I've always liked the boot of it.
However, I was at the first Anaheim show and thought it was a bit off,
but then I got the boot of that and it sounded better than I remember.
I've had that happen to me when I've played gigs.
It sounds great on stage, but lousy on tape and vice versa.

The 3rd London O2 show.

Their greed is what made the Chicago 06 show in October so bad. And that truly is a shame.

If Keith was so screwed up from the meds doesn't that make you wonder why they didn't just move the tour back 6 months? That video - what was he doing? I mean, other than the obvious.

I know it was pushed back but if his behaviour was from the meds and not alcohol then someone really screwed up.

He was fine at many shows, though. I guess its a day to day thing...

plus you cant move a European stadium tour back 6 months, Summer is the only time you can play those size of venues.

Insurance reasons would have had a lot to do with rescheduling those shows.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-08-15 23:25 by Gazza.

You would think that the health of someone might be more important than cramming people into a stadium. They could have just done arenas.

Its all about the 'guarantees', skipstone.

Not too many promoters are going to take a risk on an arena show at the amount of money the Stones are asking.

LOGIE wrote: "Knebworth 1976 was such a huge let down."

Totally agree, despite the fact that Knebworth '76 was my first Stones concert ever...

Also, a notable number of gigs from 1975-1978 years are on the lowest positions of my list. Judging by the Stones standards, of course (just mean that i never have attend a really bad Stones concert. Even the weakest Stones gigs i have attended were atleast decent. Atleast...)

How can you NOT like the Altamont show?? It's so fvkking good, despite the accidents and hells angel macho "look, ive got a tiny dick" shit.
The Stones totally rock!

I could care less for almost all shows after 1982 (and believe me, i have seen a lot of shows after 82....)
Groningen 99...Den Haag 98...Giants stadium 97..ahoy rotterdam 2003...terrible shows, and the list goes on.

Quote
Silver Dagger
Is Hampton really that good?

~*YEAH!*~

>> What are the highlights? <<

LoFL! in addition to one famously spectacular Keith Moment, you mean?
it's the rock & roll show that has everything and then some. just get it, real quick

>> What are the best shows on DVD from 81 onwards. I have ... <<

a couple that spring immediately to mind are Atlantic City 89 and Saitama 06.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-08-16 00:27 by with sssoul.

Quote
gimme_shelter
I could care less for almost all shows after 1982 (and believe me, i have seen a lot of shows after 82....)
Groningen 99...Den Haag 98...Giants stadium 97..ahoy rotterdam 2003...terrible shows, and the list goes on.

If its not a daft question - if the post 1982 shows are so consistently mediocre or even 'terrible', why do you keep going to so many?

Most shows I've seen (first ones in 89) were pretty good. It became more 'hit and miss' from 2002 on. The Licks tour had good shows (for me Ahoy, Rotterdam and Prague, Dublin) and mediocre ones

A mediocre one was Vredenburg (Utrecht) for me. Keith was so so, and they played there with the wrong backline (was more a stadium set up than a club set up)
It still had its moments! (Hand Of Fate, Dance, That's How strong My Love Is, Can't You Hear Me Knocking)

Groningen 1999, was not good at all for me (very much automatic pilot)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-08-16 01:13 by barbabang.

Interesting that as well as the Jones & (post '69) Taylor eras, no-one's chosen anything from the Steel Wheels/Urban Jungle or Voodoo Lounge Tours.

Well Keith certainly laid a big egg during SFTD at the Miami Voodoo show that was a PPV! But overall that show was OK - certainly not as good as any of the Bridges things I've seen and heard.

One thing about the Voodoo tour - they seemed to be into really presenting the songs in a better way. For instance, Beast Of Burden was, to me, horribly done in 1981. 1994's version was much better.

Although Doo Doo Doo Doo Doo Doo etc...and Love Is Strong were horrible that tour.

Quote
skipstone

One thing about the Voodoo tour - they seemed to be into really presenting the songs in a better way.

I think this started with the 1989-1990 tours. That's when (for example) they restored the bridge & double-time ending to YCAGWYW.

<<...and Cleveland '78 would be better off to be completely forgotten>>

I think Cleveland '78 definetely has it's moments...the second half of the concert rocks imo...especially Tumbling Dice and Sweet Little Sixteen.

Most everything from 1978 and 81.

Quote
jamesfdouglas
I've heard a boot from Edmonton 97 - I wouldn't want to hear it again.

Was it "Canada Dry" that you heard?? How can you not like that version of "Out Of Control" ?? (Unless for some reason you don't like Out of Control.)

Quote
Zack

Quote
schillid
Philly 81
first show...

Yes!

It's certainly an entertaining show to listen to because it's so sloppy, and Ronnie going on about his lost ring. Tops was a disaster, and Satisfaction was deliciously horrible!

I'm not sure but I remember one show from 81 where during Let it Bleed they couldn't find the bridge (James Brown call your office!) and it just kept going and going . . . and going.

It was probably Phoenix,maybe Philly.

Quote
Turning To Gold
Friends who were there said that they thought Chicago/Soldier Field '06 was pretty weak. There was a sort of feeling like, this whole thing (Chicago outdoors in October) is just a terrible idea...

I have not heard the visual or audio on that one, though

There's a clip of "Under My Thumb" from this show in the "Shine A Light" film.

18 songs is unacceptable at this decade's ticket prices but,the Stones score points here for braving the low temperature instead of postponing or calling off the show.

They gain even more points for performing "She Was Hot" in concert for the first time ever.I can't hate any show where they bring out a song never played previously for a change of pace.

Quote
sweetcharmedlife
The 3rd London O2 show.

No way.Everyone said this was a solid show.It was definitely not their worst show ever.

I was at Philly '78 and I still think it sucked