ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
On the Road World Tour 2002 - 2003

Hotel Plaza - Paris October 1977 - Some Girls Sessions Round I
Pathé Marconi Studios Boulogne Billancourt
Annie Leibovitz
[Ch1: Sike-ay-delic 60's] [Random Sike-ay-delia] [Ch3: British Invasion]



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:


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

Topic: 40 licks.... Return to archive
07-21-02 06:28 PM
Mathijs Just bought the new box set of the Sex Pistols, with a 50 page booklet and disc full of different takes and a live show.

Just bought a box set of the Clash, full of rarities, beautifully made.

Just bought the BBC sessions of Led Zep and Bowie.

Just bought Folsom Prison Blues of Cash -complete show.

Just bought the bootleg series of Dylan.

Just bought The Anthology Series 1, 2 and 3 of the Beatles.


Fuck them. This is completely ignoring all your fans, the people who made you millionaires, the people who made you famous.

Go tour without a new album. Go be the same as the Eagles. Continue making a fool of yourselves with your Greatest Hits show. I will not be attending.


07-21-02 06:33 PM
Mr T shit - like no band ever put out a greatest hits album & toured not needing to plug an album.

do album's & tours always have to go together? I'd just prefer they came when the band felt the time is right & ready to give 110% percent. After 40 years, wouldn't you be tired of having to do an album with every tour? Maybe they just wanna go on the road
07-21-02 07:21 PM
T&A Won't be the same without you (actually, it will). I will be there as early and often as possible. What a drag - I have to watch the Rolling Fucking Stones play the from the greatest drove of rock and roll recordings ever laid to wax. I must be a glutton for punishment!!!
07-21-02 10:15 PM
Boomhauer Well, at one time I did feel the way Mathijs does. But I quickly got over it because I believe this isn't the end. I think they will release a box set sometime next year, but when next year I do not know.

Also, they will probably do a studio album (I hope). I don't really believe that double album rumor, but it would be cool if they could make one (i.e. like "The Wall").

BTW, I still think that some of those songs (maybe all) on GITD were turned down by Keith for a new Stones album. Keith probably told Mick to F$*K off with his stuff.
07-21-02 10:23 PM
gypsy wrote:
Piss and moan, piss and moan! It really gets old...go vent elsewhere! And, by the way, I think "40 Licks" is a kick ass name for their album!

actually, gyps, he can vent here if he wants. Mathijs has high expectations like alot of other serious fans here. everyone's opinion counts and the difference of opinion makes for an interesting discussion. btw, me and my compadres have the moderation under control here, thankyouverymuch.that said, i agree with you on the title. i too like the name 40 licks. kinda kinky. very stonesly
07-21-02 10:31 PM
Sir Stonesalot Damn this is getting old.

If you all don't mind...I'll just sit in his seats for him.

Thanks in advance.

And I still think they stopped short on that album's better as "40 Licks Of Anita's Clit".

Everybody likes head right? So what's not to like about my title?

I'd even give my consent for it's use to the band for the low, low price of a mere 10 all access passes for the entire tour....and an autographed copy of the set....and 40 licks of Luciana Morad's clit.
07-21-02 10:46 PM
Jaxx >>40 licks of Luciana Morad's clit.

somehow i can't picture you eating garbage....

07-22-02 08:21 AM
Scot Rocks Well, maybe it's because im young and have never seen the Stones before, that I don't really mind that much what they play, I mean I will be seeing the friggin Stones!!, something which i will never forget, however for the fans that may have seen them before this may be a bit of a let down but not really for me.

Btw 40 licks...

should be the title, leaving the rest to everyones imagination


07-22-02 08:42 AM
TT Deep in your hearts of stone you know that Mathijs is right!
07-22-02 09:46 AM
Ruskafarian I TOTALLY agree with Mathijs - they're not putting what they could be.

I mean, anyone see "Being Mick"? (I'm sure everyone has.) Remember that part when he walks into the room with ALL THE BOXES OF RECORDED MATERIAL from the past? PHUK, that's what I want to hear - not the same shit, over and over and over and over and over again. I mean, they catalogue of songs they have out now is AMAZING. BUT!!!! We all the know that all there are GREAT unreleased songs. Maybe they could pull of another Stripped. Call it "Stripped Again". Stripped was a good album, but how many people here would like to here the Stones re-record (in a studio, NOT LIVE) Jumpin' Jack Flash? Or Midnight Rambler? THAT would be trully mastering the sound quality on those tracks.

I know, I know... Whiners: "Buuut they're claaaassics, they're great they way there aaaare...." Well sure they are. But what's wrong with hearing the Stones re-record those tracks? No one says anyone HAS to accept it. I just think that would be SO MUCH BETTER than hearing the same old songs in a different order. Phuk, Mathijs has a REALLY GOOD POINT.
07-22-02 10:29 AM
T&A I do not agree. Let's face it - long-time Stones fans, although we like new product, don't really salivate at hearing the new tunes on tour so much as we do hearing some of the old chestnuts polished off for new airings. From what we're hearing on early reports from camp - Winter, Have You Seen Your Mother, Stray Cat, Empty Heart, Torn & Frayed - this tour figures to be another excellent one from our heroes. So we only get to hear a couple of new what? In '99 (arguably their best tour in 20 years) only Saint and OOC were left in the setlist from B2B and it didn't detract one bit.
07-22-02 10:35 AM
hayo I totally agree with you Mathijs. Couldn't have said it better myself I think. Just bought the new Bowie album, lim.edition and beautifully packaged
with an extra bonus cd aswell. Bought the new TheThe boxed set with an extra cd aswell. Might go for the 30 th anniversary edtion of ziggy stardust aswell...
But I might just go one time to see to Stones in Holland. the jury is stil out...


07-22-02 10:52 AM
voodoopug Mathijis,

You offer very insightful and educated information about the stones on many occassions. But every once and a while, you go on a trip where you think the stones owe you personally for their success and fortune. Personally, I dont care if you buy the greatest hits set or not.

It is time though, that you learned that a greatest hit set is not released for the benefit of fans like us who have all the releases, yet it is for the casual fan who likes many songs, but not enough of them to buy the entire library. All succesfull artists do this.

The stones owe you nothing! You work very had to earn our respect, but you whine and complain too much to earn mine. As I had mentioned to you in the past, if you feel you must complain and whine to deaf ears....I am sure there is a Beatles or Elton John page that would love to have your knowledge and input.

But until you get off your high horse and realize that the stones owe you nothing....."Know your Role and Shut your Hole!"

-Johnny G
07-22-02 11:17 AM
jb Majthis has been totally negative since the announcement of the tour...For a guy who has spent considerable time and money on his stones site, it is strange that he now harbors such resentment towards the band.
07-22-02 12:05 PM
Ruskafarian T&A: I don't think Mathijs has a problem with what's going to be played live... I think his biggest concern is what they're going to be selling on this "new" release. They're selling nothing new at all. I do agree with you on how the new material isn't usually good - I (me, this is my opinion) didn't like Bridges To Babylon at all, with the exception of maybe 3-4 songs. The debate here is the fact that the Stones are NOT catering AT ALL to their long time dedicated fans who own most of the material already. That's what I think Mathijs is trying to say. I agree with him, why not put out some thing no one has ever heard (all those bands doing BBC sessions...) - it doesn't have be brand new... If we all like the old stuff so much, then wouldn't we all like if they released a record of all the songs from the 60s and 70s that never made it to any of the albums?

voodoopug: Isn't that what this board is about? Stating opinions? If you don't like his opinions, you're totally entitled to debate - but don't tell him to leave. If you don't want to debate, let him speak. er, type.
You say, "It is time though, that you learned that a greatest hit set is not released for the benefit of fans like us who have all the releases, yet it is for the casual fan who likes many songs, but not enough of them to buy the entire library. All succesfull artists do this."
Hot Rocks.
Sucking In The 70s.
The Singles Years (that 3CD boxed set, which I've heard is nothing special)
Jump Back.
Now, 40 Licks.
Is there a band who has more "greatest hits" albums than the Stones? And the worst part is, look all the track lists from those previous releases - how many songs on those albums repeat on each one...

jb: Weren't you kicked off this board? Or didn't you say that you were leaving or something like that...?
[Edited by Ruskafarian]
07-22-02 12:30 PM
Lazy Bones
Ruskafarian wrote:
The Stones are NOT catering AT ALL to their long time dedicated fans who own most of the material already.
jb: Weren't you kicked off this board? Or didn't you say that you were leaving or something like that...?

I really don't know why this new package is such a big, surprising disappointment for some people. The Stones have never really catered to there "long time dedicated fans". First off, the Stones' albums sales haven't been booming in years so why would they release a set of rarities and dimenish the average buyer of Stones material who thirst for the Hot Rocks - why do you think Jump Back is being pulled for this release? Secondly, a "hits" package will include just that - hits. Not previously unreleased material or remixes.
The complaints should reflect the style of release and not it's content. We all need to remember there's a tour on the horizon, with many people seeing them for the first time. I believe, as always, the majority of the set will be Hot Rocks songs - this package will reflect the average set. Look through their catalogue and count the live and "hits" albums.

I, as many, if not all of you, would love a Grateful Dead, "Golden Road" style of release with 10 discs filled with live, outtakes and previously unreleased material. That day may come, but not hand-in-hand with a tour.

Btw, jb wasn't kicked off the board, he was warned and he's doing just fine! So don't get him going!
07-22-02 12:53 PM
Ruskafarian Alright, sorry about any future "jb-issues" I may have started - I was just noting, that's all.

Lazy, you're absolutley right - I was just defending Mathijs and using the opportunity to state my own opinions, which really do concur with his. I am sick and tired of seeing them make money of Jumping Jack Flash/Start Me Up/Satisfaction, without having done anything special. I mean, how can I idolize business men? I like these guys because they're artists, not money-suckers.
07-22-02 12:53 PM
complicated It is very sad to hear such criticism of the rolling stones but we are all entilted to our opinions.
maybe they are not in a position to release 50 number one hits in a row right now, i mean they have been in the hit machine meat grinder for 40 years...why can't they "come out" in back of nuthin'?? I think after all of the tunes, joy and excitement they have given they are entitled to decide what they wanna do this year. Besides, this tour is a treat, they were just out a few years ago.

sorry some of us feel burned.

I could be wrong but I swear they are coming to cheer us up (if you know what I mean)!
07-22-02 01:16 PM
T&A What I understand is that Mathjis is boycotting the tour because of no new album product. This makes no sense to me. The two things are not really connected. In '99 they toured behind a live album. Did he boycott that tour too? (I dunno, maybe he did). The Stones are a great live band. They know it - we all know. That's why they are touring. Keith has always said he'd rather get the boys in the studio after they have been on the road - and that's the plan, obviously. Clearly, albums like DW & SW suffered because of the lack of road-time to get the machine oiled. It's been 3 years and so it makes perfectly good sense to me to wait until they are really ready to hit the studio.

As for the box-set - it's clear from many insider reports that that project will see the light of day in the next year or so.

So - in my mind - we have the BEST of ALL WORLDS. An exciting new tour with a box-set and a studio (some say it'll be a 2cd set) in the works. Why would any fan complain?!!!!
07-22-02 01:22 PM
Lazy Bones
complicated wrote:
It is very sad to hear such criticism of the rolling stones

I don't think the criticism you're hearing is about the Rolling Stones - it's about the marketing of the Rolling Stones.
07-22-02 02:19 PM
complicated yes, it is all about marketing...a necessary evil

the stones created a new kind of marketing 40 years ago
(along with others)
and they invented the "tour" as we know it

i don't care if they come out naked and toot in a green bean can...i'm goin' until they stop!
07-22-02 02:35 PM
Jaxx i am in the "i'll take what i can get" camp. i don't care about a "product" backing a tour. not every band tours with a new album. the grateful dead--the ultimate "jam band" comes to mind.

i am just thrilled to have the privledge (and the bucks)to witness yet another live show from the greatest rock n roll band. i enjoy their new material as well as the old material. i have enjoyed watching their sound morph over the years. nothing is more boring to me than a band that year in and year out produces the same "sound". it seems natural that as they age their music would mellow somewhat.

i predict more blues augemented by funk and to satisfy charlie's needs some JAZZ. at this point i welcome ANYTHING with open arms...

btw, the ban list here is quite short. everyone is warned first and most warnings occur through the Private Messaging System. blatant spamming, flooding and flaming is prohibited and most folks find it easy to stay away from kind of posts. what i don't appreciate is the constant needling of some of our members. i have done my best to delete those snide comments. please, lets do our best not to provoke. the next bad day could be yours....
[Edited by Jaxx]
07-22-02 06:51 PM
Gazza I dont have a problem with them releasing what will be the most comprehensive compilation theyve done to date - a) because its a suitable anniversary and b) because this is the first time theyve been able to put one out spanning their entire career. In that sense,its long overdue - there SHOULD be a DEFINITIVE Stones which sells millions and brings them a new audience.. A couple of new/ previously unreleased songs on a compilation is par for the course now anyway (Madonna,Springsteen,Dylan etc..)

However,personally speaking I think they should have recorded a new album. Its been five fucking years. previously the longest gap between studio albums has been the 4 years and 10 months between Steel Wheels and Voodoo Lounge - and that wasnt SO bad because in THAT period, the band did a 115 date world tour,put two new studio songs on a live album and all of them released solo albums (this time Keith has released NO new material in any form since 1997)

I doubt theyve run out of ideas. They had ample time to put one together. The compilation could have waited a few months. By touring behind a hits package,it makes them look exclusively like a nostalgia act. As a long time fan,I think thats a backward step. When theyre finished theres ample time for nostalgia.

That marketing decision might be fine to some,but I think they can still make relevant and very worthy NEW music. I actually thought BTB was a terrific album. In that sense,its a missed opportunity. A hits album and a boxed set can wait,theres no imemdiate rush on something like that.

I dont agree that they toured in '99 to support a live album. The Stones release a live album from every tour - that album would have come out anyway regardless of the No Security tour (had the UK shows not been postponed for one year,they might not have toured in '99 at all..) The European '99 shows were called Bridges To babylon,not No Security. They basically just revamped the format of the tour to suit an arena set up for the US 99 leg.

As for the boxed sets Mathijs mentioned,accusing the Stones of cashing in may be true to a point but using the Sex Pistols as a comparison....Holy Christ. A band that made ONE bonafide studio album releasing a boxed set 25 years later must be the ultimate cash in - a band of 50 year old PUNKS on a reunion tour (again!) is even more hideous.

Personally I dont think The Beatles creatively merited 6 discs of "Anthologies" either for a band who only recorded for 7 years. Whilst they released a marvellous legacy of work, they hardly had enough quality "leftovers" in the can to merit such a comprehensive collection. Interesting for hardcore fans who have everything - sure - but quality wise a single 2-disc set of that stuff would have been sufficient. I'd call that "flogging a dead horse" (to quote another old Sex Pistols "cash in" album title )
07-22-02 08:45 PM
KeepRigid "I doubt theyve run out of ideas. They had ample time to put one together. The compilation could have waited a few months. By touring behind a hits package,it makes them look exclusively like a nostalgia act. As a long time fan,I think thats a backward step. When theyre finished theres ample time for nostalgia."

I agree with this, and I would also STRONGLY prefer a new studio album this year over a hits package- but I think they're just planning for a long haul and a little market saturation.

The greatest hits will likely sell better than a new studio album (to today's audiences) and help generate more hoopla early on for the tour.

If they are wanting to save something for release during the tour, a new studio album would be the more logical choice, as it would renew more interest from the media than a greatest hits would at that point.

Still, if the new single is a hit (per early reports suggesting it's their best in some time), it would be nice to see them capitalize by releasing the studio album earlier, perhaps with the single included.

People, I have my own lawyer. I know what the fuck I'm talking about.
07-22-02 09:28 PM
sly I don't think 40 Licks is gonna do as well as Beatles1 or some of the other famous acts greatest hits albums, unless "Don't Stop" is a huuuge hit and gets tons of airplay and mtv coverage. Lets face it, 14-25 age range controls what is and isn't a hit. How else can you explain Britney and N' lip Sync? The only reason Aerosmith is still so popular is Mtv. They shove them down the viewers throats. You've got 15 yr olds watching Ozzy on the tube and they don't even know Black Sabbath songs, but they'll go to Ozzfest because mtv says so. Hopefully, mtv will promote the stones and not make fun of there age. Maybe since they show so much rap they'll mention the fact Dre used one of their songs. Bottom line, as sad as it is Mtv controls what is and isn't popular
07-23-02 03:00 PM
TT >- long-time Stones fans, although we like new product, don't really salivate at hearing the new tunes on tour so much as we do hearing some of the old chestnuts polished off for new airings. <

Saint of me and Out of Control (two NEW tracks then) blew me away on every of the 12 BtB shows. That was fucking awesome. New songs got such a response. Only comrarable to Start me up on the 81/82 tour.
07-24-02 09:52 PM
gotdablouse Well put Mathijs and Gazza, they're marketing themselves as a nostalagia act and that's f&(*$ wrong and unnecessary. In the same way that Virgin totally misread the market with Mick's GITD last year, once again they are misreading the market with that f$&*^ Best of. Everyone at the press conference was when is the new album coming I just said, we'll be recording 4 or 5 songs, etc...Get a clue guys !
I for one will not be attending either although I pride myself with being THE biggest fan...after Mathijs of course !
07-24-02 10:38 PM
Boomhauer We all want a new album, but why should we freakin' cry about it? How in the hell do we know that maybe they will release one but they are just trying to make it a good one? I say tour and record and release something during the tour; get some of the mojo back.

Be prepared for the kick in the ass from the Stones.....
07-24-02 11:01 PM
Sir Stonesalot Uhhhh..huh huh..huh said ass. Huh huh...huh huh...huh huh....

On June 16, 2001 the hit counter of the WET page was inserted here, it had 174,489 hits. Now the hit counter is for both the page and the board. The hit counter of the ITW board had 1,127,645 hits when it was closed and the Coolboard didn't have hit counter but was on line only two months and a half.
Rolling Stones tour 2002 - Rolling Stones World Tour - Rolling Stones on the road