Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Classic Rock and Roll at it's Best


Recommended Posts

I've never seen them live, but know several people who have over the years. The comments range from "awesome" to "awful". Guess it depends on the mood they were in that night. Personally, I can take them or leave them. I like some of their stuff, but others, not so much. I think the early Stones were a lot better than the "current" Stones. IMHO anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, I've never been into the Stones, I've never seen them live, but I heard a few live albums from them back in the 70's and they were awful, but seeing video footage of them at Glastonbury and their Hyde Park concert, they look like they've been rejuvenated.

 

 

Ian

Link to post
Share on other sites

Beggars Banquet, Let it Bleed and Sticky Fingers are 3 of my favourite albums by any band, but that's pretty much the only Stones stuff I like at all. Bit strange that its so clearly defined for me, but that's the truth of it.

 

Live - great to see some nice old guitars being played and Mick is still quite a front man, and one who has learned to control what he does vocally to what he is still capable of, which is quite a skill for the aging muso.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They were a great "Studio" band..I saw them on the Some Girls tour and had a very hard time trying to figure out what song they were playing...it was that bad...I have seen around 300 concerts over the past 40 years and they rank right at the top as my biggest disappointment...still like their music but have never went back to see them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

I saw them in '81 or '82 on the Tattoo You and they were terrible and I will never pay to see them again. I have seen videos of them of recent years and all I can say is I am not impressed. It is 3 original Rolling Stones, Ronnie Wood and a cast of supporting musicians.

 

 

Damn straight. I saw them last year over in New Jersey and they were'nt tight at all. And there's no more backing vocals from the rest of the band any more, lazy buggers just play the music and a bunch of female backing singers take up the duty. Sounds terrible. And Jagger just spends three hours strutting up and down not even singing the songs properly. Boring! They're running like a wheel with loose nuts. They have become what they probably originaly hated years ago, one trick pony's. Give it up fellas, retire.

 

n.b. My sister went and saw them here in Adelaide the other week and spent three hours being bored to death. And further more, she paid nearly $900 for the privilage! I think they're just doing it for the money MO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy the slick professionalism of the Stones today...

 

And very much enjoy their ability to play the hugest concerts on the planet (Rio etc)...

 

They have IMO kept a simple concept going profitably for several decades

 

The spectacle, live presence and energy is the best in the world

 

And most importantly there is wit and humour all the time

 

Charlie W drives things in an original and subtle way

 

IMO every detail is worth studying...showmanship, clothes, pace...

 

V

 

:-({|=

Link to post
Share on other sites

$900 to see those old duffers? You'd think their Depends sponsorship would have allowed them to drop the ticket prices some.

 

You'd think they'd drop the price a lot. She paid AU$853 X 4, one for herself, one for hubby, and two for the daughters.

The girls loved it, she hated it, and hubby was just bored witless.

I think ZigZag said it best when he said "They are a great band that usually sounds awful live."

I hold with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are unique in that not another act can get on stage and play a song that they wrote in 1964 followed by a number 1 hit written in 1982 followed by a song written released and sold 2 years ago. I've been playing 42 years and my first repertoire had Stones songs. My best friend Eddy in 77 or so told me to listen to Midnight Rambler and it changed my life. I saw them in 78 at the superdome in New Orleans after a night of puking because I was a stupid kid who drank too much slo gin. They started with All Down the Line and I had just rehydrated. It was phenomenal. Again in 89 and 2003 and I would have seen the 50th anniversary had the flight to New Jersey not been cancelled. What's my point? They have defined the concept of Rock and Roll band on so many levels. Why the hell would somebody pay $800 U.S. or any other currency to see them? Because anything is worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. And there are a lot who will do it.

I am going to have a nice glass of California wine, put on the headphones and listen to Midnight Rambler right now, loudly.

Enjoy😃👍

The OP was classic rock and roll at its best. Classic and current too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only album with Mick Taylor I think is sub-par is It's Only Rock And Roll. It has a few good songs with my favorite beingTime Waits For No One. And one thing I have always said is yes I know people put Exile on a pedestal and worship it as a rock monolith, but it would have been a much better album if it was no a double LP.

 

Hello FZ Fan!

 

I agree with You again!

 

Also worth mentioning that the Mick Taylor-era albums sound way better than any other they have released. Sound quality, the arrangements...they sound like a completely different band! A great blues-rock band, opposed to an over-rated garage band, as they tend to sound because of their sloppiness.

 

Outside of Mick Taylor-era, the only album that is nearly as good as these, is the "Steel Wheels". Since then...meh.

 

Cheers... Bence

Link to post
Share on other sites

umm, Bence - Beggars Banquet.

 

Other than that I agree completely and with FZ Fan too.

Let it Bleed and Sticky Fingers were brilliant and the next couple were not bad. The only one after MT that I quite liked was Some Girls.

 

Hello Scales!

 

"Some girls" has a couple of great tunes - without doubt, but I - personally - can't stand the way it sounds.

 

Strange, how big impact Mick Taylor had on the band. He was way above them as a musician. Probably, that's what made the rest of the guys perform better (and maybe they got tired of it too soon, and rather fired Him :D).

 

Cheers... Bence

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...