Open the show with Out of Time!  Enough people know it from hits collections that by half-way, the crowd would be singing along.

Bring back Play with Fire and Time is On my Side.

Have You Seen Your Mother, Baby?
We Love You! - with sound effects.  You could remake We Love You! today and have a club hit.

Are you too old to do Miss Amanda Jones on the B-stage?  (Some would do her anywhere.)

Yesterday's Papers
Ride On, Baby

I'm Movin' On
I Just Can't be Satisfied
Meet Me in the Bottom

Acoustic sets with:  Lady Jane, Sitting on a Fence. Dandelion, No Expectations, Back Street Girl

Be really brave: Mother's Little Helper  ("What a drag it is getting ooooold!")

A casual fan told me, "I miss the days when Mick and Keith sang into one mic.  Do they ever do that anymore?"  I think I saw it for one split-second in Shine a Light.  Do it some more.  Trot out the maracas and sing Mona, too.

I think there are tens of thousands of people who wouldn't feel cheated if half the show was wise rummaging in the vault, especially if the band bothered to get up for the game and looked like they had a good time doing it.  But you know these guys - can't learn their lines.

Play something Mick will actually dance to.  Mick - spin Miss Amanda Jones at home sometime and shake your arse.  Everybody shake your arses!

people aren't paying over $500 a tcket to hear b-sides and obscure oldies.

Cool. Another person who thinks We love you would be great live!

arent all the songs they play old?

There has been a discussion about this over on the Tell Me board.

The general consensus seems to be that the Stones have moved on from the days of 19th Nervous Breakdown etc and that they've evolved a little TOO MUCH. They are not the same band anymore and play a different kind of music. However, The Stones are only a nostalgia act and the last tour proved that, so maybe it is about time they started to delve a little deeper into their 60's back catalogue  - IF, they can pull off the "oldies" convincingly enough. I think the jury is still out on that one.

Pdog wrote on Jul 11^th, 2008 at 8:48am:

people aren't paying over $500 a tcket to hear b-sides and obscure oldies.

Again - if half the show was this, done well, the hits would carry it.  Many of my choices were singles, and everybody knows Flowers and Through the Past whether they know it or not.  "Done well," with genuine band interest, is key here.  Also - anybody paying $500 a seat will sit still for anything.  That's why there's minimal security on the B-stage bridges.

I would love to hear Jivin' Sister Fanny and Down the Road Apiece

I got to hear Down the road apiece once, Buffalo 81.

" I got to hear Down the road apiece once, Buffalo 81. "


I YEARN to hear ' Indian Girl ' live ......


.....and you's ?!


http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x2/GotToRollMe/h4-tomneedsitsobadlol.jpg

Based on the threads posted lately to be honest if they just banged on tin can and plates I'd still be there.$400 tops though!

i would like to hear bill on bass and me on guitar :wow

" i would like to hear bill on bass and me on guitar :wow  "


I would like to nibble your elbows .  

TomL wrote on Jul 11^th, 2008 at 2:06pm:

I got to hear Down the road apiece once, Buffalo 81.

Smokin' version!

andrews27 wrote on Jul 11^th, 2008 at 9:56am:

Pdog wrote on Jul 11th, 2008 at 8:48am: people aren't paying over $500 a tcket to hear b-sides and obscure oldies. Again - if half the show was this, done well, the hits would carry it.  Many of my choices were singles, and everybody knows Flowers and Through the Past whether they know it or not.  "Done well," with genuine band interest, is key here.  Also - anybody paying $500 a seat will sit still for anything.  That's why there's minimal security on the B-stage bridges.

Sounds like you're assuming 99.9% of the concert audience thinks and lives like us, we are such a small amount... Truth is, if we didn't go, us die-hards and what not around here, it would not make one bit of difference.
The one thing The Stones can do, that keeps them going, is keep people returning, while still getting first timers out to the shows. Like it or not, it's b/c they play the hits and recognizable songs, leaving room for a few surprises here and there.
I've never left a show and overheard a stranger say, I wish they played We Love You ect... I have heard folks say, I wish they played Angie. The hits don't carry the show, that is the show. I've seen ten thousand people go piss when Keith sings!!!
I'm not saying I like it, it just is what it is...

Pdog wrote on Jul 11^th, 2008 at 8:48am:

people aren't paying over $500 a tcket to hear b-sides and obscure oldies.

Thats the problem. The Stones let the tail wag the dog so that the sort of people who will pay $500 a ticket but who dont care for their music that much will keep coming back. Surely by now, everyone who's had a chance to see them has done so, and has had ample chance to hear the same hits over and over.

Acting like they only have about ten songs that people should know does them a disservice. Theyve sold over 200 million albums for fucks sake. Its revisionist bullshit for the sake of tailoring a show towards the sort of audience who have a large disposable income but whose level of interest in their music doesnt extend beyond 40 Licks. Revisionism even on the part of the band which saw Jagger at one show on the last tour semi-apologetically introduce "Sway" as "an obscurity" (even though its from an album that sold something like 6-7 million copies and is widely recognised as one of the best two or three albums they ever made)

40% of that back catalogue has never been performed live - ever. And "Out of time" (which is surely one of their best known songs) is one of them.

They managed to drop 'Satisfaction' for a decade in the 70s (save for about ten shows) and other songs like Sympathy, etc for years on end. People still kept coming back because whilst they may have left out a few great songs, the concerts were so good and the songs that replaced them were equally excellent. There are plenty of recognisable songs which can be rested/rotated and replaced by something else equally as recognisable.

Time they reclaimed their own music and pleased themselves. Theyve long ago earned the right to play what they like.

" I've never left a show and overheard a stranger say, I wish they played We Love You ect... "


See , that is where we differ ; I HAVE left a show ( Denver , 02/03 ) and overheard numerous , NUMEROUS strangers bray  , " I wish they would have played Indian Girl  " . Word .


...To Your Great Great Great GrandPappy !!!!!!!




JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJACKY FLY !!!! ™

" Thats the problem. The Stones let the tail wag the dog so that the sort of people who will pay $500 a ticket but who dont care for their music that much will keep coming back. Surely by now, everyone who's had a chance to see them has done so, and has had ample chance to hear the same hits over and over.

Acting like they only have about ten songs that people should know does them a disservice. Theyve sold over 200 million albums for fucks sake. Its revisionist bullshit for the sake of tailoring a show towards the sort of audience who have a large disposable income but whose level of interest in their music doesnt extend beyond 40 Licks. Revisionism even on the part of the band which saw Jagger at one show on the last tour semi-apologetically introduce "Sway" as "an obscurity" (even though its from an album that sold something like 6-7 million copies and is widely recognised as one of the best two or three albums they ever made)

40% of that back catalogue has never been performed live - ever. And "Out of time" (which is surely one of their best known songs) is one of them.

They managed to drop 'Satisfaction' for a decade in the 70s (save for about ten shows) and other songs like Sympathy, etc for years on end. People still kept coming back because whilst they may have left out a few great songs, the concerts were so good and the songs that replaced them were equally excellent. There are plenty of recognisable songs which can be rested/rotated and replaced by something else equally as recognisable.

Time they reclaimed their own music and pleased themselves. Theyve long ago earned the right to play what they like . "




My 'nizzle !

i think andrew 27's idea is a great idea.  last time they were in europe they pretty much played the same songs ever concert and people were bitching and moaning about.
so, here's what i think they should do.  play 8-9 oldie songs and then the 2 keith songs and then end the show with the popular warhorses.

opening the show with 'out of time' i don't thing will work.  it just sounds to doomed.  sure throw it in the mix...but not for the first song.

:wtf1

wrote on Jul 11^th, 2008 at 4:44pm:

i think andrew 27's idea is a great idea.  last time they were in europe they pretty much played the same songs ever concert and people were bitching and moaning about. so, here's what i think they should do.  play 8-9 oldie songs and then the 2 keith songs and then end the show with the popular warhorses.

er..thats exactly what they did last year.....

The only degree of unpredictability for the most part was at certain points in the first 7-8 songs. Once the intro to "Tumbling Dice" started, you could have quite comfortably predicted what the remainder of the show was going to contain.

Theres no rule that says a show has to end with a selection of warhorses and nothing else. The last hour of a Stones gig has been predictable for about 25 years.

we'll get nothing and like it.

Some Guy wrote on Jul 11^th, 2008 at 6:10pm:

we'll get nothing and like it.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e393/djbjkxua/caddyshack.jpg

The thing is, when they dropped songs like Sympathy & Satisfaction in the 70's was when they were still a relevant band, releasing new stuff every year and touring the U.S. every 3. You can afford to dump Sympathy when you have 30 new songs to choose from and the public and press still think you have something to say and offer.

They, and we, dont have that luxury anymore. They've set their shows to such a strict formula that its a habit.  I mean, you know they open with a belter, some slow, mid-tempo stuff to drop things down a bit, maybe  a rarity, Sympathy is after Keith's 2 songs as it's the pyro highlight of the show and Jagger has to change clothes, and they'll end with 1 of the big 3 (JJF, satisfaction, BS) 90% of the time. Another thing is START ME UP. The single spot light on Keef as he starts the riff, with the pyro's across the stage. Hey, do it once - cool. But all the time?

But the thing to remember is, for most of the crowd, they WANT a show. They are used to it always being bigger and better. Bigger stages. More fireworks. Razzle dazzle. Confetti. If they didnt do it, particularly a stadium show, the average "Licks" owner will whine. It is after all, supposed to be "an event". Personally, i couldnt give a shit what they play. It's the Stones, for fucks sake. But i appreciate that i havent seen them 30 times.
It's still a thrill for me, even if i have to hear Angie, because it was only 1994 when i thought i would never ever get to see the fuckers! They skipped down here for 22 years after all.

P.S. They did Angie in Sydney in 06, and truly, it was fucking awesome! And Angie is still a massively popular song down here. I hear it on GOLD FM at least 4 times a week.

I'd like to hear Route 66 and Spider and the fly

Am I wrong in thinking that each time an ABKCO era
tune is played, ABKCO receives a piece of the action
which the band may not exactly enjoy?  Could this
be a reason songs from that era are not played
with more frequency?

Nellcote wrote on Jul 12^th, 2008 at 8:00am:

Am I wrong in thinking that each time an ABKCO era tune is played, ABKCO receives a piece of the action which the band may not exactly enjoy?  Could this be a reason songs from that era are not played with more frequency?

I'm not sure if royalties are paid for live performances versus radio air play.Even so I wouldnt think that would factor into setlist selections. I'm with Corgi..its gotta be bigger and better and so they choose the safe hits.I would guess that at least 30% of a stadium crowd is seeing them for the first time so they cater to them.But true rock and roll fans love it all.If its played well they love it.FFS I even liked Love Train.....(kinda)

Pdog wrote on Jul 11^th, 2008 at 8:48am:

people aren't paying over $500 a tcket to hear b-sides and obscure oldies.

Good grief, I would! But only if Brian were there.... :(

I guess most people go to see the Stones "show". I would rather go to a Stones "concert". More {obscure} music...less "show".