ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board

Fer
WEBRADIO CHANNELS:
[Ch1: Bill German's Stones Zone] [Ch2: British Invasion] [Ch3: Sike-ay-delic 60's] [Ch4: Random Sike-ay-delia]

[THE WET PAGE] [IORR NEWS] [IORR TOUR SCHEDULE 2003] [LICKS TOUR EN ESPA�OL] [SETLISTS 1962-2003] [THE A/V ROOM] [THE ART GALLERY] [MICK JAGGER] [KEITHFUCIUS] [CHARLIE WATTS ] [RON WOOD] [BRIAN JONES] [MICK TAYLOR] [BILL WYMAN] [IAN STEWART ] [NICKY HOPKINS] [MERRY CLAYTON] [IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN] [BERNARD FOWLER] [LISA FISCHER] [DARRYL JONES] [BOBBY KEYS] [JAMES PHELGE] [CHUCK LEAVELL] [LINKS] [PHOTOS] [MAGAZINE COVERS] [MUSIC COVERS ] [JIMI HENDRIX] [BOOTLEGS] [TEMPLE] [GUESTBOOK] [ADMIN]

[CHAT ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [RESTROOMS]

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED) inside.
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: Stones promise to make Mumbai rock harder Return to archive
04-07-03 12:50 AM
VoodooChileInWOnderl Stones promise to make Mumbai rock harder

ANI[ SUNDAY, APRIL 06, 2003 10:07:48 PM ]

MUMBAI: After rocking fans in Bangalore, the sixty-plus members of the "Rolling Stones" are all set to enthrall fans in Mumbai, where they will perform on Monday.



Preparations are on in full swing at the city's oldest stadium Brabourne.



Jake Berry, the Rollins Stones' production manager, promised a high-voltage show in Mumbai. "This is our second show in India. Two days ago seems like a week ago. We actually played a show in Bangalore and we were very happy with the security team and what they did in that show. If it is as good as the last show, Rolling Stones and our security people will be very happy with the arrangements," he

said.



Berry said special sets have been shipped in from Belgium to make it a much more spectacular event than the Bangalore show. "I hope it would be dry, we had to ship in some stages from Europe, so we have a different stage here with a different shape. In Bangalore we were little squarer and here we decided to make it a bit arty for you people of Mumbai, a class one," said Berry.



The group is travelling with a 150-strong entourage and more than 200 tonnes of equipment.



Both Indian shows were advanced by a week following a health scare due to the deadly Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome that has so far killed more than 80 people worldwide, mainly in Asia.



After Mumbai, they are scheduled to perform in Bangkok on April 10, two days earlier than planned.



The group that likes to call itself the "world's greatest rock 'n roll band" has just completed the first half of its "40 Licks World Tour" with 50 sell-out gigs in the United States and eight in Australia.



Government restrictions and a weak economy made major rock groups a distant dream for Indians in the 1960s and 1970s, when the Stones were in their prime.
04-07-03 05:39 AM
luxury1 They do not call themselves "the greatest rock and roll band in the world." Wish these journalists would get it right, makes them seem pompous, and we know otherwise.
04-07-03 07:29 AM
Mother baby
quote:
luxury1 wrote:
They do not call themselves "the greatest rock and roll band in the world."



Well, who came up with it? "They" starting using it right after the Beatles broke up...kind of a punctuation mark after that whole "Stones vs. Beatles" thing, if I'm not mistaken. At any rate I always credited someone in the marketing department Brilliant marketing jingle really...right up there with "Things Go Better With Coke" or "We Bring Good Things To Life". The words "The Greatest Rock & Roll Band in the World" pertaining to the Rolling Stones have become embedded in our collective subconcious. That's what marketing is all about


[Edited by Mother baby]
04-07-03 07:42 AM
TheSavageYoungXyzzy It was first used, against their official request, I think (and they probably loved it anyway but had to deny it officially), during the '69 tour, so it wasn't a "Stones vs. Beatles" thing. The Beatles were still around technically if not in actuality (officially the last sessions labeled 'Beatles sessions' were in January of 1970, without John Lennon - the last time the four of them were in a studio together was in August that year, I think). But it stuck somehow, and as a result people've been saying they call themselves the greatest ever since.

I hope they give a good show. No complaints about War Horses setlists - almost all of these people attending haven't heard the songs live before!

-tSYX --- It's no capital crime...
04-07-03 07:52 AM
Mother baby
quote:
TheSavageYoungXyzzy wrote:
It was first used, against their official request, I think (and they probably loved it anyway but had to deny it officially), during the '69 tour....



But couldn't thay have vetoed it? They didn't protest all that loudly. Besides...it's true!!!!!!!!!
04-07-03 08:47 AM
Maxlugar The Beatles must have shit their little faggy pants when they saw The Rolling Stones in 1969.

There was just no way they could keep up with THAT.

MACKY!
04-07-03 09:14 AM
throbby The way I see it in 1969 they were the greatest "live" rock and roll band in the world. Name one group at the time who could match the Stones in both song selection and visceral impact while performing live. The Who and Zeppelin come to mind, but considering the above aspects they couldn't better the Stones, and they sure as hell didn't have a Mick Jagger fronting them. As for the Beatles, watch Gimme Shelter and then watch the Beatles rooftop concert. Max you are so right.
04-07-03 09:36 AM
luxury1 I thought someone at Rolling Stone magazine came up with that tag during the '75 tour? Calling Bill Wyman to confirm........
04-07-03 09:47 AM
Mother baby
quote:
throbby wrote:
Name one group at the time who could match the Stones in both song selection and visceral impact while performing live.



match/Live? Jimi Hendrix. Or at least a close second.
04-07-03 09:59 AM
TheSavageYoungXyzzy I'm going to have to put on Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out and compare it with Live At Leeds (and even the Townshend-Nolte tapes of Woodstock), but I think The Who win out in that era. The Stones don't surpass 'em until '73 when the Quadrophenia tour broke down and the Stones blasted the hell out of Exile. It's scary how much better The Who were as a live band in comparison to the studio. They didn't do anything really worthwhile in the studio until Who's Next. (No, I don't like The Who Sell Out - it's a nice idea poorly implemented with stuff like the horrid "Rael", "Silas Stingy" and "I Can't Reach You" tacked on like concrete shoes to the hapless swimmer with the fishes - only "Armenia City In The Sky", "Tattoo" and "I Can See For Miles" really float, although "Mary Anne With The Shaky Hand" makes a good effort. The ads, however, do kick ass.)

In terms of an-all around band in '69, yeah, the Stones were the greatest rock'n'roll band in the world. The Beatles weren't touring and what they released that year wasn't really rock'n'roll, The Who put out Tommy, but the studio version ain't that interesting. Jimi Hendrix was indeed guitar god 101 that year, but he loses out to The Who live because he didn't have John Enthwhistle and Keith Moon behind him. The Stones, on the other hand, had a crazy filthily raw blues-rock live run with Mick Taylor and, in the studio, Let It Bleed, on which there isn't a bad track.

-tSYX --- Well we all need someone we can feed on...
04-07-03 10:14 AM
throbby Mother Baby, good call on Hendrix. Hendrix, The Who, Zeppelin, I love 'em all. I just think the Stones were an incredible live band in '69, and I'm thinking that their power live was not fully captured on Ya Ya's. Did anyone on the board see the Stones in '69.
[Edited by throbby]

Visits since January 9, 2003 - 10:46 PM EST
Licks World Tour 2002 - 2003