What's New Pussycat?
Tom Jones and his friend (1965).
Tom Jones and his friend (1965).
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Cool rock n roll photos
- Thread starter Chad-Chicago
- Start date
Yes. 2 reasons: 1) Charlie is gone. 2) Keith looks ridiculous dressed like that. The Stones were badass for a long time but not anymore.
Mostly the later - tinged with the thought of this is sorta like when you need to be laying down your motorcycle...you can decide that it's time and do it and have a chance of walking away... or stay on and risk that not so good ending.
That they can pack the house with multiple generations is nothing short of amazing.
Stones were impressive in Nashville for all three hours, thirty-four minutes of it, and Nissan Stadium rocked with an outstanding high-energy show. I'm not even what you'd call a big Rolling Stones fan, but I'd say they were on their game and did their thing very, very well.
Van Halen recording at Sunset Sound studio in 1978.
That's impressive. I saw them in '78 and they played for a little over an hour.
They certainly had no shortage of stamina or enthusiasm. Being Nashville, maybe they should have done 'Far Away Eyes' like they did in 2015. I think there's a pedal steel player right around the corner who would have done it for scale and swag.
Did they really play that long? Everything I've seen on the 'net suggests they're playing a little over two hours on this tour (still impressive at their age, certainly). The setlists showing up typically have 19 songs, and the show length is listed at 2 hours and 5-10 minutes. 3 hours and 34 minutes would be more than 11 minutes per song, and I don't think the Stones have gone prog!
The Rolling Stones Concert Setlists
Carl Perkins, Roy Orbison, Johnny Cash, and Jerry Lee Lewis for a televised 1977 Christmas special. (Elvis had died on Aug. 16 of that year.)
Did they really play that long? Everything I've seen on the 'net suggests they're playing a little over two hours on this tour (still impressive at their age, certainly). The setlists showing up typically have 19 songs, and the show length is listed at 2 hours and 5-10 minutes. 3 hours and 34 minutes would be more than 11 minutes per song, and I don't think the Stones have gone prog!
The Rolling Stones Concert Setlists
You are 100% correct. I looked at the wrong number. Stones played a little over two hours. Oops.
They're still badass because, as YT clips have shown, they're still delivering the goods live. I see nothing sad about it. Charlie was the oldest, and, in spite of all the jokes about Keith's drug consumption/iron constitution, the odds were that he was going to go sooner than later. He had the health problems way before the tour, and Jordan was already in place. I've seen plenty "vintage" bands, even years back, put in all sorts of pathetic performances. And Keith doesn't, and has never had to, care about if anyone thinks he looks ridiculous. He's Keith Richards.
Agree, Keith is the prototype for rock stardom. He doesn't give a toss what anybody judges that he should do or not do, or how he should look or not look.
He does what he wants to do and has been so massively successful doing that, that it's ridiculous for anybody to question his choices in his life.
I think Charlie went out as well as anybody, he was also extremely lucky as well to have lived the life he did, he was still playing with his best mates (and still married to his wife) until the very end...good for him.
A drummer that stood apart from so many drummers in rock and blues bands, I think he was fantastic.
Sampling is a good way to help keep his music alive. Prior JB was considered the Godfather of soul music.
Invalid Link Removed
