Anybody going to see The Stones this fall?

[Ram1]

Just wondering.

[Ram1]

Just wondering.

[dakota]

I saw the Steel Wheels tour at the L.A. coliseum in '89. My opinion about the Stones in concert is that they appear to perform alot of their classic songs half-ass. Now it's 13 years later and one can be almost certain that there show wouldn't be any better. Especially considering that these guys are about has old as someone can look and feel and still go out on stage and play rock-n-roll. I hear the tickets are going for $300....$100....and $50. You won't see me there wasting my money on crappy renditions of their songs!.

[dakota]

I saw the Steel Wheels tour at the L.A. coliseum in '89. My opinion about the Stones in concert is that they appear to perform alot of their classic songs half-ass. Now it's 13 years later and one can be almost certain that there show wouldn't be any better. Especially considering that these guys are about has old as someone can look and feel and still go out on stage and play rock-n-roll. I hear the tickets are going for $300....$100....and $50. You won't see me there wasting my money on crappy renditions of their songs!.

[dakota]

I saw the Steel Wheels tour at the L.A. coliseum in '89. My opinion about the Stones in concert is that they appear to perform alot of their classic songs half-ass. Now it's 13 years later and one can be almost certain that there show wouldn't be any better. Especially considering that these guys are about has old as someone can look and feel and still go out on stage and play rock-n-roll. I hear the tickets are going for $300....$100....and $50. You won't see me there wasting my money on crappy renditions of their songs!.

[dakota]

I saw the Steel Wheels tour at the L.A. coliseum in '89. My opinion about the Stones in concert is that they appear to perform alot of their classic songs half-ass. Now it's 13 years later and one can be almost certain that there show wouldn't be any better. Especially considering that these guys are about has old as someone can look and feel and still go out on stage and play rock-n-roll. I hear the tickets are going for $300....$100....and $50. You won't see me there wasting my money on crappy renditions of their songs!.

[Ram1]

Airdog, great stories. You've definitely seen some history, buddy!!

Dakota: I haven't seen the Stones live myself, but I can definitely understand what you're saying. I've seen clips of the Stones on tv from their last couple tours, and you're right, most of the classics sound awful. Or as you put it, "half-ass." It sounded pretty generic. I don't think you'll be seeing me at the shows either. I just wanted to get some other people's opinions anyway. I wish I would have seen the Stones back in the 60s or 70s like Airdog. Now, THOSE shows looked and sounded good! (At least from what I've seen on film.)

[dakota]

What gets me is that when the Stones attempt to recreate in concert a lavishly recorded song, a song that is recorded and arranged in such a way that if it is perform with different arrangements or the speed of the song is varied it loses something, its loses the feeling, the emotion, the great melody.
The part that I don't get is that when the Stones are on stage. They have not only the 4 musicians from the core band but in addition they have side players (keyboardist,backing singers,horn players). Why would it be so difficult for the Stones to be able to make a songs like "Under my thumb or Lets spend the night together" sound closer to the album?.

[Ram1]

Good point. And very interesting. Every time I see film of a modern day Stones concert, they're backed by like the National Symphony Orchestra. (Well, not quite, but it makes my point sound better.) But seriously, they have this huge horn section, backup singers, etc. Just take the stage and rock man! Macca put on the best concert of my life a couple weeks ago, and he didn't need all that s**t.

[dakota]

Paul has only five guys in his band this tour and he can reproduce on stage many songs that sound has good as the CD!. And also Paul's band can supply their own backing vocals unlike the Stones who resort to specialized backup singers. What's the problem here?...A margin in talent?!?!