Why Are The Stones Boring Live After 1970?

Yes, I was really referring to '69 with Mick Taylor, and for a time after, although the Ireland show is pretty good, top quality early Stones.

 

Keith was getting more into the drugs by then and did not contribute as much on Goats Head Soup and It's Only Rock 'N' Roll. Mick Jagger started to assume more control. Guys like Billy Preston were also having more of an influence on what they were doing by that time as well.

 

I also like the 1972 tour better because they had started playing more of the songs from the Sticky Fingers and Exile On Main Street albums.

 

Some Girls tour is NOT boring. I don't understand how you can consider that "boring".

 

I don't think the Stones have been "boring live" at any point of their existence. Some shows are better than others but boring? Not in their DNA.

I can't explain why I don't agree because you've not made an argument why you think they ARE boring. You posted a video - a video that doesn't sound boring to me...

 

What is "boring" or "not boring" to you?

 

Disagree with the OP. I think the recent Texas '78 and Hampton '81 DVDs both showcase great performances.

In addition, seeing them do "Get Off My Cloud" on the small extended stage right in front of me on the 2005 tour was definitely not boring!

 

Huh?

 

Then we don't agree, that's all (but not more). I find the tune boring: repetitive despite the cutting of the song by about 2 minutes, dull, nowhere. The vocal sounds like 1 note throughout, no nuance or sass, and often flat. The bridge sounds like a bar band. And Wood's whiny guitar, that same steel guitar-like sound he does 90% of the time.

Yah-Yah's is light years ahead of this, crackling with verve and energy.

 

Stones on the US Some Girls Tour was the best live performances they ever gave. Just listen to the Texas show now officially released.

Boring? No. That's great rock music. And classic stuff.

 

I don't know if I would say it was their best tour but it was one of the best with Ronnie Wood.

 

I've heard the Texas show, and just don't agree. They sound a bit faded, "desperate". I'm just being honest here, obviously they were a highly successful touring act for years but the magic had gone, IMO.

 

I saw them first live in 1969 and last in 2005. The 2005 show was outstanding. And I've seen video of the early 2012 shows and they were still hot bu t slowed down a bit, especially Keef.

 

Now that's a different point and well-taken.

 

They were never the same after Mick Taylor departed I'm sorry to say.

 

One of my buddies says the same thing but after Brian Jones left instead.

 

I think they went downhill after Mick Avory left!!!

 

It's interesting to me. I remember hearing these shows on the radio. I must have been 13-14 yrs old. Since then I've compared all rock music against these classic shows.

Only the Faces have captured my attention the same way. To each his own. I certainly respect for opinion. And it's fun to share our thoughts.

 

Funny, the OP chose to post a song that I never liked much... but that clip is pure rock n' roll. If that's boring, I don't think you like the sound of a tight little combo playing in a bar.

 

Don't totally agree. I really like the Taylor years and think he really pushed the band musically. Although I like Ron Wood too, I think he and Keith bring out the worst in each other. They're so buddy buddy on stage that as the years go by, they play less and less and just ham it up more and more. Seems like each successive tour they become more and more of a shadow of themselves.

 

It is one of the differences between Mick Taylor and Ronnie Wood. I think Ronnie is more gregarious and craves the spotlight more. Mick Taylor for the most part is more reticent and is content to stand in the background and let his sweet licks do the talking.

 

This thread is full of meaningless, inarticulate statements. I don't even know where to begin.

 

For me though all that matters is the playing.

 

That's a very good analysis. I loved the Stones at their peak (steady rise to about '71) but the contrast after is quite evident. Part of being a real fan is being honest, engaging fully wherever it takes you, and that's how I feel. I still bought all the CDs, many vids and DVDs. But being a pro touring band and a great creative band are two different things… It's not an easy road to hoe for any band, admittedly, but creatively I'd say many other bands did better for longer.

 

I expect more of the Stones than being tight and sounding like a good bar band. If you like the tune fine, but most of Love You Live just doesn't work for me, e.g. Around and Around, compared to how it sounded 12 years earlier. Maybe it's Ronnie, maybe that's what it's down to for me although at the end even with Taylor the band sounded played out (Goat's Head, It's Only Rock and Roll). I wonder if Keith's apparent drug issues in this period finally took a creative toll, this is possible too.