Rolling Stones

[grumpyhack]

The problem is that they're greedy b**tards. They don't need to work and only do it these days for loads of money.

Better to get a band that enjoys playing.

Bill Wyman's Rhythm Kings put on a great show and Bill can pull a great collection of mates who do it for love not money.

Beverley Skeet, their singer is stunning. She used to be a backing singer for the Eurythmics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMYNfgjL1co

[NeilVJ]

According to a few of the papers Keith's book looks like killing any hopes of a comeback

[eFestivals]

According to a few of the papers Keith's book looks like killing any hopes of a comeback

I'd guess they're the papers without the serialisation rights to his book, trying to gain sales off the back of it with their own made-up stories.

A tour next year looks likely, as long as Ronnie is sober enough.

[The Nal]

A tour next year looks likely, as long as Ronnie is sober enough.

[sifi]

I've only read the serialisation of the book, but there wasn't anything that really jumped out as being tour-threatening. Not like Mick sleeping with Keith's girlfriend, and then Keith sleeping with Mick's girlfriend to get back at him.

I can see it happening. An earlyish Glasto performance on the tour is probabaly just about the best publicity the band could get to help shift tickets, and the Coldplay rumours sound like a plan-b dependent on whether or not the Stones play.

But that's just me making things up to fit in with what I want, rather than any actual information.

[The Nal]

I can see it happening. An earlyish Glasto performance on the tour is probabaly just about the best publicity the band could get to help shift tickets, and the Coldplay rumours sound like a plan-b dependent on whether or not the Stones play.

[sifi]

Unfortunately, I don't think they'd do anything so "visible" as Glastonbury that early into the tour. And they defo don't need it to sell tickets, every time they go on tour they break records, biggest touring band in the world, in revenue terms anyway.

Edited October 25, 2010 by sifimaster

[eFestivals]

Unfortunately, I don't think they'd do anything so "visible" as Glastonbury that early into the tour.

if what I believe was lined up for this year is all true, then that's defo not the case.

[The Nal]

Even though they are meant to be half the band they once were, and certainly there was a marked drop off in performance on the occassions I've seen them in 1990 and 2004, there is still something about the cow bells kicking in at the start of Honky Tonk Women at Glasto that would be simply amazing.

[zeppelin]

Wait. I'm confused. Are we talking about them as a possibility now then?

God, imagine

Pyramid:

U2

The Rolling Stones

Prince

I do love daydreaming...

[The Nal]

I heard they're releasing Ladies and Gentleman.. finally. Watch that

[In transit]

I hope They Don't get the stones.

Imagine the expectation the next year with U2 Stones and Prince being the head liners the year before.

There would be outrage in 2013 when they have to not cut back but have considerably smaller bands

[MattL80]

I thought that Some Girls was excellent and Black & Blue wasn't bad either - they were both late 70's.

[grumpyhack]

Their tours stopped being much to do with music and/or rock n roll, and became circus's.

[The Nal]

they haven't relied on musicianship for 30 years. I know Keith isn't up to it anymore, Ronnie can be good, but not in The Stones, and Mick turned into a caricature yonks ago...

[CaledonianGonzo]

Last time out of the traps, Mick and Charlie both performed very well. Mick in particular was singing not bad at all, especially when you compare him to "halcyon days" shows in the late '70s/early '80s.

If he lays off the booze, Ronnie is also in not too shabby form.

For most of the A Bigger Bang tour, however, Keith was in a bad way and it reflected in his playing. He spent a lot of the tour on heavy meds after pretty serious brain surgery and seemed to be drinking far too much as well. Couple that with the arthritis in his hands - seriously, check out his fingers in the Andrew Marr interview - and it's no wonder that it was too ragged at times. Something that has also recently come to light is that his wife was battling cancer at the time, which probably also caused his mind to be elsewhere.

But that he even managed to play at all was something of a miracle. I saw them a number of times and was never less than thoroughly entertained, even if the odd riff or start of Brown Sugar went askew.

Whether Keith's any better now is anyone's guess, but the fact that there's a marked difference between L&GTRS and Shine A Light (even besides the fact that they were filmed the best part of 40 years apart) shouldn't surprise anyone. he seems sober in his recent interviews, at any rate.

They can pull off a headline festival slot, though.

Their Isle of Wight set has many detractors, but I'd say that was as much to do with not really playing crowdpleasers for the first half of the show (Love In Vain, Ain't Too Proud To Beg, Can't You Hear Me Knocking, I Wanna Hold You, Slipping Away, etc.) as opposed to stuff like Paint It, Black. Once they broke into the more familiar material, they went down a storm.

[exile]

People who say the Stones have lost it since 1972 are speaking rubbish. They are, arguably, tighter and better musically on stage now than they were when they were all wasted in the '70s. I think they would take Glastonbury by storm and really hope they play.

To the person who said that Ronnie almost passed out after two songs last week - that is bollocks. I was at the 10.30 gig and he was brilliant all the way through (even drinking Coca Cola). He seemed on top form.

[The Nal]

People who say the Stones have lost it since 1972 are speaking rubbish. They are, arguably, tighter and better musically on stage now than they were when they were all wasted in the '70s.

[CaledonianGonzo]

They just go through the motions now though. They've been a parody of themselves for 35 years!

[The Nal]

How would you address this? Given the band with its current membership, how should they reverse the decline?

Song selection? Venue choice? Mick Jagger dancing less? Keith occasionally being a bit tighter? No fireworks at the end?

Or is the 'they're a parody of themselves' viewpoint as much to do with your expectations of them and their history as it is to do with any concievable reality that they can offer right now, almost 50 years into their careers. The only way they could prevent the 'they're too old/no longer relevant/safe' complaints is by not playing live at all. And where would that leave us?

I'd never have seen them live, otherwise, and my collected gig history would be all the poorer for it.

[strummer77]

They just go through the motions now though. They've been a parody of themselves for 35 years!

[The Nal]

On the video on the last page, Jagger did seem to be singing like Jermaine from Flight of the Conchords.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Ive no issue with acts playing until they drop, and I love a good Jagger dance. Problem is, they fax it in, its sad but true. Im a huge Stones fan and have seen every bit of footage they’ve ever released nearly. For some reason, around the mid 70s, Keef totally checked out and Mick started singing as if he was joking about his own voice.

It’s the lack of effort that lets them down.

[The Nal]

and I don't think anyone really wants perfection from Keith Richards - do they?

Edited October 27, 2010 by The Nal

[CaledonianGonzo]

Well - you'll hear no arguments from me about the return of either Mick Taylor or Bill Wyman for a few gigs.

Though if they came out playing 'Back to Zero' or 'Winning Ugly', the Pyramid Stage would see a bigger exodus than Gorillaz.