Possibly...but both bands were somewhat one dimensional in their infancy...no different than most garage bands of today...mostly covers, etc...however the Beatles gradually became more sophisticated in the studio...and essentially abandoned live performances after the Shea stadium debacle... even if they were to continue...their material was too advanced to perform live for the era..."pop" or not...I thought the Beatles peaked while a psychedelic band. |
Beatles were a great live band early on. They quit playing live as they became more "pop" and less rock and roll-oriented. I think the early Beatles could hold their own against the early Stones live. Stones are naturally bluesier, Beatles more pop, that's all. |
Have to agree with earlier post...live Stones does reveal the limitations of Jagger as a vocalist...however his performance does make up.for some or all depending on the night....this is not Pavarotti! Stones would wipe the floor with the Beatles live tho...IMHO |
It's kind of funny,music,groups are all about the timing. Early Stones stuff I don't care for as well as the later stuff but,Sticky Fingers,Black and Blue,and Some Girls were it for me. Loved those albums. Those were great times. |
"unprecedented quality...Beatles came close"
I'm reminded of a mural-like cartoon titled "Tragical History Tour" in an old National Lampoon mag. One part of it shows John Lennon standing with his hands on his hips saying "Mick always f***ing imitated us." Standing right behind him is Mick Jagger, in the exact same pose, saying "Mick always f***ing imitated us."
The Beatles are the Beatles and the Stones are the Stones. I love them both. Each had their strengths. But IMO there's no question as to who the greater artists and innovators were. |
They're a little too old now to learn a new trade, you know, real estate or selling used cars. They're like a Timex watch, they take a lickin' and keep on tickin'. You go girl! |
I don't blame the Stones...its the public that supports this once vital band...and I'm a huge fan from 68-72...one helluva run...unprecedented quality...Beatles came close |
Stop it. Makes me wanna scream. Mans inhumanity to man. Sooo ugly. Stop. What have you accomplished? Lets criticize that. Non-stop. To no end. Ugh. |
Yes, Charlie Watts has amazing stamina--check out the Scorsese film from a few years back, "Shine A Light." |
Time to prop Keith up like a scarecrow and have Mick lip sync...at least Charlie can still make a beat |
They're running low on cash again, are they? Suckers. |
To paraphrase The Duke in "Big Jake" (you wonder-tots know who the "Duke" is, don'tcha?):
"If you won't respect your elders at least respect your betters". |
|
"What a drag it is getting old..." |
"Rolling Stones Tour 2015"
"BIG YAWN" (:^O |
|
Just checked out some of the 'Platinum' level seats...iirc, my spouse and I could secure wonderful seats for just under $10k...plus $5 processing fee.
I think we'll probably just suspend our disbelief with our home rig -- haha! :-) |
You guys are merciless -- hehe ;-) |
While on a roll (:-)) I ran across the song list for the Stones tour. The highlights are:
Let's Spend the Afternoon Together
Grandmother's Little Helper
Gimme Homeless Shelter
Start My Pacemaker Up
Have You Seen Your Grandmother, Standing in the Shadow?
Almost Out of Time
Break your Hips |
|
I've carried a fear of singing, "Let's Spend the Night Together," at the nursing home. Boomers had quite a run of power, and us-centric arrogance, but it's in eclipse, even as Mick's prance and sneer represents denial of its passing.
"Do not go gentle..." and all that.
As an event, it would probably be memorable, but as a recreation of past glory there's some sadness about it, even though Keith's playing is timeless. |
There's also the tricky issue of handling all the walkers, oxygen tanks and colostomy kits as well as rounding up babysitters for the grandkids. |
I heard from a good source that the logistics of this tour almost didn't allow it to happen. They needed to make sure they would be able to get thier social security checks over to them while they are on tour. No easy task. No interest in seeing them in the 70s much less in thier seventies. |
Saw the Stones in Chicago, summer of 2013. Had great seats 2 rows from the tongue. Never stopped smiling. Energy from the band and crowd was contagious. Best cover band I ever seen. |
Yup, '66, just like Rte. 66. Here's the tour dates and locations.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rolling_Stones_American_Tour_1966 |
Okay, I think that was the "Aftermath" tour. '66 sounds right (I figured it was '66 or '67). I think I paid $5.50 for my ticket in Houston. Several times then-minimum wage, but a pittance compared to today's prices. |
Whoops, it was the Standells. Dirty Water. |
Geoffkait, I forgot about the Swinging Blue Jeans. First time I saw the Stones the openers were the Standells (Dirty Water) and the McCoys (Hang on Sloopy). I liked the former, didn't care for the latter. |
Some great responses - Mapman, Gpgr4blu -- thank you. It's funny, how I'm much more appreciative of some artists, now,
than I was in my junior high, high school, and college years.
The Stones would be in this subset along with Queen, Led Zeppelin, The Who, and Pink Floyd. |
|
Complete waste of time! You get a pity pass if your a baby boomer and want to revisit the past. Just have the courage and honesty to admit the performance level is mediocre at best. |
I saw them in DC at the Coliseum in 66, might a been 65. The swinging blue jeans opened for them. Hitch hiked up from school. At that point a Stones concert was like a non stop riot. |
Smallest venue of the Stones 2015 outdoor tour:
Milwaukee - Marcus Amphitheater,
Lakefront setting
24,000 capacity
And made for music.
Could be the best show on the tour. |
"Mick talks the songs"
That is the part that ruins it for me. Would rather hear the original studio versions on my system. |
I saw Stones Some Girls Tour at JFK stadium years ago. Sound quality was very poor plus I almost got trampled in a riot outside beforehand.
I mostly avoid large outdoor venues with high ticket prices, although I broke teh rule for paul McCartney at Fedex Field in DC a few years back and scored seats in the stadiums sweet spot dead center 1 section back and that was quite good.
The newer Pro Sports venues in general seem to have very good quality sound systems in them that can work well if you have good seats for that. So its not as bad as it used to be. If you care about sound quality at such an event, be very selective about teh venue and seating location though. |
Here is a url for an unreleased acoustic version of Wild Horses from the upcoming deluxe version of Sticky Fingers:
https://youtu.be/SQTHB4jM-KQ |
I've seen the Stones with each of their 3 rhythm guitarists and the sound has never been good--twice indoors, once outdoors. IMO the big venue shows are more trouble than the expense or bother is worth. |
if you like them and have never seen and can handle the ticket price then you should go.
One must be careful where they buy their tickets these days. I bought tix yesterday for a concert. The prices for the tix via sites that came up on top of teh google search were 2-4 times the prices of buying via teh channel advertised in teh email we received from teh venue about the event. |
Contemplating going...never seen them before.
They're opening in San Diego.
For comparison, we have GREAT seats for Steely Dan at Humphrey's for about $200/tix, later this April. :-) |
Huge Stones fan, but stopped going to their tours about a decade ago when I paid $350/ticket b.o. price to see them "mail it in " at Madison Square Garden (except for a great version of "Love Train". Mick talks the songs and runs around, Charlie smirks his knowing smirk (acknowledging that he is the luckiest guy on the planet to still be doing this with the other dinosaurs and getting paid so much to do it) and Keith, well, he's still Keith and can still get it done as can Ronnie. But as one who saw the Stones live in the 70s, 80s and 90s, their concerts pale in comparison to the old days. In fact, it only makes me sad to see them. Now, would I pay a huge sum just to be in their presence? As they say on shark tank ---"I'm out" |
Mick's voice is gone, no range. Monotone Mick. Should give it a rest. |
Mother's Little Helpers probably help with all the stage jogging. |
Yep an EXPENSIVE nostalgia act.
I've had my share so will pass.
They can still put on a good show in many ways though for those still interested enough.
I can go see many local bands that are also good do Chuck Berry or whatever so not much appeal to pay big bucks in a crappy sounding venue to hear The Stones do it.
Been there done that.
For those who are fans and have never seen, more power to ya. |
I love the Stones. The problem I have with this tour is the ticket prices. The cheap seats for the privilege of seeing them in the same venue GA. Tech plays football are $160. The prime tickets are going in a package for $2000. I have seen them several times and have always been impressed by how tight they are as a group and I also am a huge Chuck Leavell fan. Maybe I am just getting old, but this go around, I think that I might just check out the deluxe "Sticky Fingers" offering which includes a live show from the 70's and reminisce about younger days. |
I haven't seen them in a loong time, and aging rockers can look silly, but...
I'll give them another shot if the local concert timing works for me. I'd agree that the songwriting hasn't been great for +/-40 years, but, for me, that misses the point. The Stones could do two hours of Chuck Berry and be great, if they're on their game. IMO, Keith is as good a rhythm player as there is and Ron Wood's a compelling lead guitarist. The rhythm section gets after it and, well, Mick is Mick.
If they don't phone it in (no guarantees there), a Rolling Stones show is a great thing. No new songs needed for that. |
70+ year old guys acting like young rock and rollers still. Yea, Mick, The Stage Jogger! |
They are an expensive nostalgia act at this point. I give them credit for keeping it together at all for so long though.
Their act does not age well. 70+ year old guys acting like young rock and rollers still. Lots of great songs in their catalog to draw on though. NEver cared much for Mick Jagger singing live though.
Still lots of people looking to say they saw The Stones live though so I imagine their tours will continue to do quite well. Been there done that though myself.
I will still go see The Moody Blues every year or so. Have seen them many times over the years most recently about a year back. Their act has aged quite well. They were never your prototypical rock and rollers, more philosphers that sing about things that people of all ages might still relate to. Plus they can rock out still quite well when needed. |
I hung in longer than you guys,for me steel wheels was where I got off. Tattoo You,Emotional Rescue from their later years delivered in my book but I saw The Bridges to Babylon tour and was disapointed. Now if they tour stripped down just them four and a key board player I probably would consider it. |
A bigger bang which I'm pretty sure is their last album has some very good songs on it, Let Me Down Slow being one of them. A classic. Let it roll. |
I thought Sticky Fingers was pretty much it for them. I had Exile and, a few tracks aside, thought it was mediocre. The rest of the world disagrees, I know. |
