I know that Mick & Keef were fighting during the 80's but I never really knew exactly what happened or what it was about? Was it REAL serious or? What was it about? Who was right or wrong? Why no "Dirty Work" tour? So many questions!!!!
Thanx folks!!

mick didn't want to tour to support DW (a good call, btw) which outraged keef. the solo thing, in general, is what peeved keef - mick wanted to go it alone and keef's a team guy....basic essence of the feud.

You know what though? The more I hear about and read about the band during this time period, Wouldnt you agree that Mick made the right decision when he said something to the effect of "the band is in no shape to go on tour" for Dirty Work..?

Which I imagine was due to Charlies "problem", in-fighting with him and Keith and surly Ronnies well documented issues.

It was probably the right choice. Not for us fans, but the band.

Undercover1

edit: oops, sorry - i type way too slow. :E

i don't think many of us are in a position to question Mick's feeling that the Stones weren't in any shape to tour at the time.
what really pissed Keith off, though, was Mick doing a solo tour instead, with setlists that included so many Stones songs.
and that can't really be "explained" by Charlie having a rocky spell or by friction within the Stones.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-09-10 20:34 by with sssoul.

Quote
T&A
mick didn't want to tour to support DW (a good call, btw) .

That statement might be worth a friendly debate.

I personally like the DW album....and think that several DW
songs could've been given a steroid treatment IN CONCERT!

On the other hand, as the saying goes...absence makes the heart grow fonder.
The '89 "Reunion/Greatest Hits/Steel Wheels Tour" was perfectly
timed. The fan base was whipped into a frenzy.....sell-outs everywhere etc...

(they apparently decided to focus on the music & original arrangements too)

Had the Stones routinely toured every other year throughout the '80s....
...the same excitement & eagerness may not have been there.
And IMO probably wouldn't have been playing Stadiums into 2005-06.


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

Where did Mick tour in the '80s......Australia, Japan....any others?

Seems that avoiding the USA & UK was very deliberate. Reasons?


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

he cancelled the US leg of the tour because the ticket sales were so low.
i think we've been seeing the repercussions of that blow to his confidence ever since.

i'm not finding fault - far be it from me to judge what it takes to give that cat the confidence he needs
to go out there and do what he does, bless his face! but i do think the solo-tour thing was ...
an iffy decision, let's put it that way.

Quote
with sssoul
he cancelled the US leg of the tour because the ticket sales were so low.
i think we've been seeing the repercussions of that blow to his confidence ever since.

i'm not finding fault - far be it from me to judge what it takes to give that cat the confidence he needs
to go out there and do what he does, bless his face! but i do think the solo-tour thing was ...
an iffy decision, let's put it that way.

wow..i didn't even know they put the FEELERS out for a MJ US tour.
never heard any promotion or anything. Tickets were sold and it was canceled?

i thought that maybe he purposely avoided the US & UK so as not
to muddy the waters.....or mess with the group's status.

At least he (& keith) realized that the whole band is greater than the
sum of its parts.


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

>> Tickets were sold and it was canceled? <<

that's the way i've heard/read the saga, but if someone knows more about it i hope they'll pipe up -
i took a quick look at Rolling With the Stones to see if i could find more details for you,
but Bill doesn't say much about this timeframe.

he does note that Stones tunes made up the majority of Mick's solo setlists in Australia -
that was not a move the other Stones thought real highly of



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-09-10 22:41 by with sssoul.

Quote
T&A
mick didn't want to tour to support DW (a good call, btw) which outraged keef. the solo thing, in general, is what peeved keef - mick wanted to go it alone and keef's a team guy....basic essence of the feud.

Mick didn't want to tour behind Undercover.

I also think Keith kicking heroin had a great deal to do with it. For most of the 70's Mick ran the show while Keith was out of it. When Keith cleaned up he wanted more say so and Mick wasn't cool with this.

Plus I'm sure being together for so long wears on you, so a break was natural.

I never heard of a supposed Jagger solo tour in the U.S. with low ticket sales and a cancellation...is that really true?...and this was to promote SHE'S THE BOSS or PRIMITIVE COOL?

PECMAN

the Department of Historical Accuracy would love it if someone who knows the details would come along -
isn't it mentioned briefly in the documentary Let It Bleed? i know i've read it somewhere as well,
but the closest i can find at the moment is a reference to the European tour he had planned for october 87
but cancelled when Jeff Beck quit. which is (obviously!) not the same thing at all.

One could summarize it by saying that Mick was going thru a mid life crisis while being in the spotlight as the lead singer. I think part of him felt upstaged by the younger generation of artists. Keith on the other hand seems like he was more comfortable with where he was at.

I agree that it was a good decision though not to tour behind DW. they weren't in good shape and not getting along-could have been the end of the band.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-09-10 23:35 by ryanpow.

okay, i'm not hallucinating - it's mentioned in Bockris's Keith biography:
"Though Jagger's US tour was canceled as a result of poor sales, Keith's wasn't." no further details.
and i see now that the way that's phrased, it might not mean tickets went on sale in the US and then the tour was cancelled;
it might mean a US leg of the tour never got off the drawing board due to Primitive Cool not selling too well.

like i said it's also mentioned briefly in some documentary - maybe not Let It Bleed,
but something along those lines ... i really hope someone who knows the details will turn up and enlighten us.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-09-11 00:47 by with sssoul.

Quote
with sssoul
okay, i'm not hallucinating - it's mentioned in Bockris's Keith biography:
"Though Jagger's US tour was canceled as a result of poor sales, Keith's wasn't." no further details.
the way that's phrased, it might not mean shows were scheduled in the US and then cancelled;
it might mean a US leg of the tour never got off the drawing board due to Primitive Cool not selling too well.

like i said it's also mentioned briefly in some documentary - maybe not Let It Bleed,
but something along those lines ... i really hope someone who knows the details will turn up and enlighten us.

I'm guessing Jagger was trying to fill arenas while Keith was content with
theaters. (?)

I've seen (& I'm sure many on this forum have..) videotapes of Mick's
solo show (Austr & Japan)..... Prior to viewing, expectations are that
because it IS Mick Jagger THE LEAD SINGER FOR THE ROLLING STONES and he
IS performing many Rolling Stones songs...that even though it's with
a different band..that it would be similar (& sound similar) to a RStones
show. Nothing could be further from the truth.

It's strange how the entire vibe is different...and it really
does sound like a lesser tribute band....even w/Mick.
Again emphasizing...the whole band is greater than the
sum of its parts.

I guess that's where the magic is.

Re: MJ US Tour cancellation...I believe you.....just wasn't aware of it.


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

>> Re: MJ US Tour cancellation...I believe you.....just wasn't aware of it <<

okay thanks - i can sleep easier that way! :E
but now *i* want to know more about it, if anyone has any facts to add
(and don't forget: if you're on your bike, wear white - evening all!)

should have toured for Undercover! I would have been 16 and not having to wait another 6 f-ing years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote
with sssoul
>> Re: MJ US Tour cancellation...I believe you.....just wasn't aware of it <<

okay thanks - i can sleep easier that way! :E
but now *i* want to know more about it, if anyone has any facts to add
(and don't forget: if you're on your bike, wear white - evening all!)

by the way...what does :E mean?


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

IMAGINE THE SETLIST IN 83



Brown Sugar
All down the Line
Too Tough
Gimmie Shelter
Must be Hell
Too much Blood
Tumbling dice
Where the Boys Go
Lies
Street Fightin Man
T&A
Wanna Hold You
IORR
PIB
Sympathy
Miss You
She Was Hot
She's So Cold
Waiting on a Friend
YCAGWYW
Bitch
Start Me Up
Undercover
JJF
Satisfaction

Bockris is *not* a credible source btw. I don't believe Mick ever seriously considered undertaking a US tour. Consider: the Stones hadn't played Australia since '73, and had *never* played Japan; Mick knew there was a market there and went after it. Beyond Bockris' very suspect comment I've seen no proof that Mick considered touring the US as a solo artist.

Bockris's single sentence alone is not a lot, i agree. i'll try to find the documentary i heard it in too,
but as i recall it, it wasn't any more detailed than Bockris's sentence.
meanwhile, do you happen to know why Mick dropped the idea of touring Europe, after replacing Jeff Beck?
did market considerations have anything to do with that?

With the right promotion, I truly believe that Mick Jagger solo could attract as many people as RS concerts...

... i totally disagree, and consider it a true blessing that there have been no more attempts to test the hypothesis.

Quote
Sleepy City
With the right promotion, I truly believe that Mick Jagger solo could attract as many people as RS concerts...

not in my opinion.....and a Robert Plant Tour does not attract in the same
way that a Led Zeppelin concert would. Even Plant WITH Jimmy Page doesn't
attract the same attention as a Led Zeppelin Concert.

...and there are many other examples too.


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

An interesting question is whether the so called World War III did somehow have an effect
on the collaboration between Keith and Mick afterwards. I have a hunch (no knowledge or facts)
that Keith gave Mick a bit more room to move his own ways on Stones albums in the years
following the late 80s. On albums like Steel Wheels, Voodoo Lounge and Bridges to Babylon
I find it easier to point out Mick songs and Keith songs than on the earlier albums.

I could be wrong of course. That's what hunches usually are.

Quote
marcovandereijk
I find it easier to point out Mick songs and Keith songs than on the earlier albums.

I could be wrong of course. That's what hunches usually are.

Well it is not so difficult to tell their songs apart on the Goats Head Soup album is it not?

Quote
sweet neo con

Quote
Sleepy City
With the right promotion, I truly believe that Mick Jagger solo could attract as many people as RS concerts...

not in my opinion.....and a Robert Plant Tour does not attract in the same
way that a Led Zeppelin concert would. Even Plant WITH Jimmy Page doesn't
attract the same attention as a Led Zeppelin Concert.

...and there are many other examples too.

Its hard to think of many band members (thinking of the real mega bands) who have gone solo and then continued their "success" (however that is defined") at the same level.
Macca commercially but not critically.
Van Morrsion, Neil Young, Steve Winwood but then "their bands" were relatively short-lived
Roger Waters, no
Robbie Williams, but he seems to have gone off the rails at the moment
And of course sales arent everything - I mean Pete Gabriel's output is so much more interesting than his Genesis stuff - even if it has sold in the same quantities.

The disappointment - for me - with Micks solo material - was how unadventorous it seemed - and therefore ended up as just plain "average". I think he is capable of a lot more.

Bockris is wrong. Mick never announced a US solo tour and no tickets ever went on sale for one.

Perhaps they figured that the interest in Primitive Cool wasnt sufficient to support a tour.

More likely it was decided to tour places like Australia (no Stones shows since 1973) and Japan (no Stones shows ever to that point) where the audiences would be more likely to welcome a solo tour as better than nothing.

Quote
Sleepy City
With the right promotion, I truly believe that Mick Jagger solo could attract as many people as RS concerts...

Not a chance in hell.

>> Bockris is wrong. Mick never announced a US solo tour and no tickets ever went on sale for one.
Perhaps they figured that the interest in Primitive Cool wasnt sufficient to support a tour. <<

thanks Gazza - i was hoping you'd chime in. although it's more like me who interpreted Bockris's statement wrong -
what he wrote can mean exactly what you said: that the record sales were so low that no US tour got off the drawing board.
which i suppose is also the same reason the European tour plans were jettisoned after Jeff Beck quit.

did the Australian shows do okay ticket-sales-wise?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-09-12 19:21 by with sssoul.