|
|
| Pierre |
Dont' you still dream see in 2005-2006 a complete Stones show (1h30 is OK) without the standard back-up musicians ?
4 Stones, Daryl, Boby and Chuck...
|
|
|
| FotiniD |
quote:
Pierre wrote:
4 Stones, Daryl, Boby and Chuck...
4 Stones, Daryl, Boby and the Mac  |
|
|
| marko |
90mins would be ok.but i think it would be hard to get a good set list for that time,2hours is good,still not enough.
90mins is too short in stadiums. |
|
|
| J.J.Flash |
quote:
Pierre wrote:
Dont' you still dream see in 2005-2006 a complete Stones show (1h30 is OK) without the standard back-up musicians ?
4 Stones, Daryl, Boby and Chuck...
Are you crazy dude?!?!?! Huh!?? That's what I'm waiting since 1989......get rid of all the rest.....this way Keith is forced to play his ass off, as harder as it is meant to be played.
"Quote me Ronnie" |
|
|
| corgi37 |
If anything, they'll probably have more asses onstage.
At least i wish they'd ditch the horn section. Satisfaction is just so "Vegas" since 89. |
|
|
| FotiniD |
I think we should start a petition
I mean, come on, I like some of the backup musicians, I really do, but we just NEED the core version of the Stones. If not now, then when? |
|
|
| luxury1 |
Well, I happen to enjoy watching/listening to Bernard and Lisa. I think they work so well with Mick. And they say hi to me from the stage now... |
|
|
| marko |
We will see all,back-up people,just because they are there
to fix some of the fuck ups.Sir keef,can´t play like he used to,and thats why,this is the last tour,it doesn´t matter will they announce it so,or not."next tour" is allready 3 years,at least away. |
|
|
| glencar |
I'd settle for just dropping fecal Blondie. |
|
|
| Dan |
If they dropped all the backup musicians and played everything just a tad faster, I would be happy with 90 mins. You can tell Mick's voice tends to go anyway. |
|
|
| Angiegirl |
WHAT? Ditch Bernard? Are you CRAZY? That's the only decent thing -uh sorry, guy- to watch nowadays during an average Stones show! Stay away from my Bernie you hear!! |
|
|
| Dan |
His singing annoys me but if you like him that much, move to California where he is always performing.
|
|
|
| Angiegirl |
Plus the sun's always shining! Hmmmm.... |
|
|
| Soldatti |
Sadly they will be lost without the gang. |
|
|
| texile |
they cover the blank spaces because the stones have gotten lazier and lazier.........there are tto many people on stage and it bugs the hell out of me - do you see dylan with a caravan? in his movies maybe, but not because he needs the padded shoulders.......... |
|
|
| Honky Tonk Man |
I like Bernard and Lisa. I think they're great.
What I don’t like is Chuck and Blondie, but unfortunately, they're a necessity. Chuck pretty much fills in the gaps these days. He seems to dominate the rhythm, allowing Keith and Ronnie to work their guitars around his keyboard rhythm. If you could somehow take away the keyboard from recent Stones shows, I think it would sound a mess!
|
|
|
| Moonisup |
 |
|
|
| MidnightRambler |
Not only would they be lost but Keith would never allow it because he socializes with a lot of them while on stage. He'll walk over and stand next Lisa or Blondie--you take that away...he'd prolly get bored. They'd never get rid of them...Keith would say something like "music is something you share with your friends...." and he'd keep all of them on that stage forever.
It would def. be a mess up there. None of them want the pressure of remembering parts of songs, when to come in, where to end or chord changes. THe only one CAPABLE of doing that would be Ronnie. Mick and Keith can't handle all that responsibiliyt. THey'd forget and stuff. |
|
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]