Conference mr1pst::music

    re : -1
    
    Show him a picture of Mick Jagger.......
    
    8^}

    <<<show him a picture of mick jagger............
    
    that goes on my top 10 putdown lines of all time ;-)

cuz he can't sing, his lips are 4 times the size they should be,
and he's got enough money to buy Paris....  but it's not for sale...

    
    Guy could french kiss a moose.
    
    

    FWIW, he's 50 today.
    
    Paul

    
    Yes, he is 50 today. I was wondering why my CHEZ 106 was playing
    Rolling Stones all day long today. "A tribute to the man and his
    talents", they just said.
    
    He is a grandpa too.
    
    Lale
    

    
    	RE: .4
    
    	And if Barry Manilow were into hard drugs he could inhale Peru.
    
    	8^)
    
    	[Haven't heard the Joan Rivers album in a long time, but I
    	 remember that one.  8^)]
    
    							GTI

    
    I heard they played last night. Anyone know who played bass?
    
    John
    

        Also here in Brasil, many FMs played Mick's and RS's songs;
         My own cd players got addicted to 'Brown Sugar' yesterday...
    
          happy Birth, Jagger.
    
        Do.,

    Yeah, yeah. Mick's ugly, Ron's ugly, Keith's ugly, Charlie's ugly. So 
    what? If rock was based on beauty, you'd all be listening to me.
    
    Ugly or not, the Stones are still at the top of the heap after 
    more than *30* years.
    
    Edd

    
    What heap?  I've seen them live ~'82?  What a disappointment.
    
    /ab

    >> RE: Keith's ugly
    
    Keith's not so ugly...for a guy that's been dead for 20 years.
    
    |*}

re .12

Should have seen them in '89.  They really put on a spectacle...

Tim

re: 11.

Cote, with what you know about Rock, we could put on a postage
stamp, and send it to Brighton Mass....

:)

    re: .12, .14
    
    Gotta agree with Tim.  I saw them for the first time in '89 and they
    were so much better than I thought they could be... probably the best
    rock & roll show I've ever seen, and I'm only a moderate fan.
    
    							M

    re: last few
    
    Funny how all those Southern bands like Lyrnyrd Skynyrd, the Allman
    Bros. and Molly Hatchett never come in for this sort of crap. But of 
    course, they're such well-groomed, pretty boys...who'd have the
    courage?
    
    Still, now I understand the reason for all these bands like Duran
    Duran, Bros, Spandau Ballet. Whoever said the music's the important
    thing?
    
    
    

    
    	Took the ferry to Chappaquidick 2 weeks ago.  Seriously huge
    	yacht with a great lookin' helicopter on it sitting in the
    	bay.  Stopped to take a picture and a guy comes by and says
    	"pretty sick, isn't it?  What a boat!!  It's Jagger's".
    
    	The thing was huge!
    

    > Cote, with what you know about Rock...
    
    Quiet, Pelkey, or I'll tell everyone about the little handcrank on
    the back of your guitar...
    
    Edd

    RE .17: 
    Duran Duran have a new album out & a tour. I don't know if they're all
    the original lineup. In the 30 sec. or so clip I saw, they appeared to
    have aged (?) well. I'll check back in another 20 years or so.
    The Stones never had any "cosmetic appeal" to lose (once Brian faked
    his own death after murdering Keith [a viscous rumor] ;-).
    
    Paul     

    FWIW, Lale, I showed my 7-year-old a picture of Mick from the 60's and
    she said..."GROSS"!!!!!  But, as we all know only too well, he's been
    taking that ugly puss to the bank for a lotta years!  I liked quite a
    few of their songs, but NEVER could stand their stage antics.
    
    If your daughter is anything like mine, though, she LOVES that damn
    song!!!  (After almost 30 years, it's getting kind of OLD with me).
    
    Regards,
    
    Mr. Satisfaction
    

    As far as ugliness goes, look at it this way.  Mick Jagger is 50, and
    he's thin and still has all his hair.  Take a good look around.  How
    many men do you know who are over 35, nevermind over 50, and are still
    thin and still have all their hair??
    
    Believe me, as a 43 yr. old woman, I say there is definitely something
    to be said for a 50 yr. old man, who is thin and has all his hair. 
    From what I can tell, most men over 35 are overweight and bald, and in
    case nobody ever noticed neither one of those attributes is a really
    big turn-on, especially when the guy in question has a boring
    profession, to boot, such as software engineer.
    
    I think Keith Richards is attractive, as well.  He's interesting
    looking.  Plus, he dresses stylishly *and* he's thin with all his hair,
    too!  So, his Ron Wood.  I'll admit that Bill Wyman is homely, but he
    just married a good looking woman.  Charlie Watts is nothing to write
    home about but he's apparently been very happily married for years. 
    He's still married to the woman he was with before they got famous, so
    he must be doing something right!  Also, I saw them in concert back in
    1965 and Brian Jones was very cute.  He had gorgeous blonde hair.
    
    Anyway, I've always thought that Mick Jagger was one of the sexiest men
    on earth.  I love the way he moves when he's performing.  I, also,
    think he has a good singing voice.  I really like his recent solo
    album.  They put on a great show in Foxboro a few years ago, too. 
    Unfortunately, I have heard that he's usually rude to his fans.
    
    Lorna
    

    
    re: .22
    Well, I think that wraps that little issue up.
    
    Now, anyone want to discuss the music?
    
    

    re .23, well, I said I like Jagger's recent solo album.  What do you
    think of it?
    
    

    
    re: .24
    My comment certainly wasn't aimed at your note (.22), but rather at all
    those that seem to have a chip on their shoulder because those "rhythm
    & blues enthusiasts from London, England" happen to have found fame and
    fortune in the music bizness.
    
    Sure, I don't go a bomb on post-1980 Stones either (I haven't heard
    Jagger's latest by the way). But I think Out Of Our Heads, Aftermath,
    Hot Rocks, Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers and Exile On Maine 
    Street are all ***** albums. As a guitarist, no one can deny that Keef is 
    somewhat limited. But he still plays  mean rhythm guitar and *nobody* does 
    the Chuck Berry bit quite as well as him. Same goes for Jagger's voice
    - pretty mediocre, but he does a more that passable imitation of just
    about every U.S. soul/R&B singer that ever lived.
    
    Now, back to discussing Mick's lips and Keith's leopardskin boots...
    
    DOm
    
        

    > (Mick Jagger is) usually rude to his fans.
    
    But hey, he's thin, has all his hair and isn't a software engineer.
    
    Edd (38, overweight, balding, S/W engineer)

    
    RE: .22
    
    Talk about your ridiculous generalizations. I'm sure that if I entered
    a note stating that the vast majority of women over 35 are fat, ugly 
    and have sagging breasts with boring dead-end lives, I would have the 
    note deleted by the moderator (if not hauled up before personel for 
    not "valuing differences"). As my 35th is coming up in a few months, 
    I guess I'd better get busy and put on 40 pounds, shave my head and 
    keep my boring job!! (PS... I doubt that Brian Jones is still cute 
    and has all of his hair, although he probably is quite thin)
    
    Back to the subject of music...
    
    I have it on good authority (folks that worked the '89 Stones tour) 
    that most of Keith's solo's were performed backstage by a "real"
    guitarist. Also, most of the harmony vocals were done backstage 
    by folks that could sing!! This probably accounts for them sounding
    so good...
    
    /Billy_K
    

    re .26, .27, ha-ha.  what do you care what my opinion of most men is
    anyway?  Geez, what's the world coming to when an average looking, 43
    yr. old, divorced woman, with no admirers, can't even be allowed a
    little bitterness?  :-)
    
    For that matter, why is it okay to say someone has an ugly face and
    make fun of his big lips?  I doubt anyone asked him before he was born
    how big he wanted his lips to be.  Why pick on me.  I'm not the first
    person here to call someone ugly.  First Mick Jagger was called ugly,
    and I simply wanted to point out that he is, at least, thin and has all
    his hair, which doesn't seem to be the case with many men his age.
    
    Lorna
    

    re .26, so are you saying that you're nice to your fans?  :-)
    
    Take heart, I'm sure you make at least 3 times my pay.   :-)
    
    Lorna (43, thin, penniless secretary, but has hair)
    

    > re .26, so are you saying that you're nice to your fans?  :-)
    
    You ain't lived until you've seen a bunch of satisfied software
    groupies staggering outta my hotel room after a big trade-show...
    
    Just the mere mention of my sub-routines will cause pandemonium...
    
    Edd

    RE:27  WOW, and all the time I thought Keith was a *real* guitarist.
    Just goes to show ya...

    
    Wasn't it rumored that Mick bit off the end of his tongue in an
    accident?  He *does* sing like it.  I'd rather be fat, bald and
    there is only one other appendage I treasure more than my tongue.
    
    ;-)
    
    /ab

    RE: .32
    
    >>> and all the time I thought Keith was a *real* guitarist
                                         
    I think the operative word here is "was" ...
    
    
    >>> best damned rhythm guitarist alive
    
    Really??? I hadn't heard that Larry Carlton, Denny Diaz, Steve Morse
    and several hundred other great guitarist had died suddenly ;^)
    
    
    /Billy_K
    

    Re: .27
    
    Actually most of the harmony vocals on the 89 tour were done by people
    *onstage*, like Bernard Fowler for one.  I recall from the pay per view
    that there were three or four backup singers onstage.  Fowler also got
    credits on the "Steel Wheels" CD for harmonies. 
    
    I can't believe they'd hire someone to play Keef's parts because based
    on what I hear from the tape of that same pay-per-view, the guitar work
    wasn't exactly what I'd call *polished*. Not to mention that they'd
    then need to get someone to ghost for Ron Wood, too  8^)  8^)
    
    Yeah, who cares.
    
    							Brian

    re:34
     and I think You're operative word is hundreds other great guitarists
                                                         ^^^^^
    but not the best

    Debate over whether any of The Stones' are "the best" or "great" belies
    a point missed. It's been years (hell, a generation) since they were at
    the point on the rock 'n roll curve where they could be judged solely
    on their musical ability. Instead, they have become an institution.
    Denying, or even belittling, their influence on rock music is
    tantamount to denying the very roots of rock.
    
    At the most pragmatic level, they could be cited as the "World's Most
    Persistant Bar Band". I challenge anyone to name another rock group
    who, after 30 years, can still tour without joining a Dick Clark oldies
    caravan, much less sell out most any venue they play.
    
    Stopping at that level though leaves most of the legacy untold. They
    are the elder statesmen of rock, and as such paved the way for those 
    who came and improved. Sure, their tunes are basic, but ROCK is basic.
    So why have they lasted 30+ years while countless others are relegated
    to "who did that tune?" status. They have "the hook", the "catch", the
    "schtick" that defines rock and roll, and they've had it since day one.
    The KIDS of their original fans still hear it.
    
    They've got the attitude. Mick and Keith trashed their first hotel room
    before Axl Rose had his first (prophetic) temper tantrum.
    
    Sorry folks. Judge the Stones' as musicians and you'll have to trash
    Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Muddy Waters and countless others who
    were there at conception. 
    
    I don't particularly care for their music, but I do recognize they've
    achieved a status few, if any, other rock groups have attained. They've
    lasted.
    
    Edd

    Excellent note, Edd. I've found it to be very curious that so many fans
    of the more current crop of artists find it necessary to trash those
    that have in fact paved to way to what is modern music today. Sadly it
    seems to indicate an inability to be able to see something in the
    context in which it took place. I say "sadly" because that inability to
    grasp the context, to see the bigger picture, has implications that go
    way beyond music appreciation. To me, it's a serious impediment to
    understanding life, who we were, who we are.

    The odd part is that this is a fairly new phenomenon. The pioneers of
    rock in the past have been revered by the new comers. For instance, when
    the Stones and the Beatles were new they paid homage to the elders by
    doing covers of Berry, Perkins, Presley, Richard, etc. It also seems to
    be particular to rock and roll, as I'm not aware of a similar pentchant
    among say jazz, country, or bluegrass, fans. And of course it can be
    fashionable to bash people like Keith Richards for their guitar playing,
    but if he "stinks" then what does that make John Lee Hooker? Or Muddy
    Waters? Or Robert Johnson? Maybe it's just not politically correct to
    bash those guys.

    In all fairness, I'll conclude by pointing out that, as far as I can
    tell, this type of trashing seems to be only among young listeners and
    wannabees, as opposed to those actually getting somewhere with their
    talent. So maybe it's all just sour grapes.

.37 and .38 really hit the nail on the head for me.

    re: .37
    >Debate over whether any of The Stones' are "the best" or "great" belies
    >a point missed. It's been years (hell, a generation) since they were at
    >the point on the rock 'n roll curve where they could be judged solely
    >on their musical ability. 

Yeah, I admit they should have broken up round about 1978, but what the hell -
how many bands have been consistently good over their entire career (perhaps
the Beatles, Buffalo Springfield)? Perhaps you should really be comparing the 
Stones with their white R&B contemporaries of the mid-sixties, because arguably
their most important contribution to music was to bring black music into the 
homes of young white kids who were pretty much unaware of the phenomenon. Well,
I don't think the Stones score badly against the Butterfield Blues Band.
The latter had a more scholastic approach whereas the Stones hit you more on an
emotional level. The Stones made you want to move about, where Paul 
Butterfield's made you want to put your headphones on and study Bloomfield's
guitar solos. Personally, I love 'em both!   

    re: .37
    >Sorry folks. Judge the Stones' as musicians and you'll have to trash
    >Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Muddy Waters and countless others who
    >were there at conception. 

Quite. And it'd be wise to leave Brian Jones out of this too, because the guy
could play practically any instrument he turned his hand to.
    
    re: .38
    >And of course it can be fashionable to bash people like Keith Richards for
    >their guitar playing, but if he "stinks" then what does that make John Lee
    >Hooker? Or Muddy Waters? Or Robert Johnson? Maybe it's just not 
    >politically correct to bash those guys.

Exactly! I watched a John Lee Hooker documentary on TV the other night, and his
backing musicians remarked affectionately that he's murder to play with because
his 12-bars often become 11-bars, 13-bars, 16-bars, etc! I don't think I've 
ever heard a Muddy Waters recording where he convinced me that he knows how to 
tune his guitar. Bloody essential artists, though! And they both say a lot more
about the blues (to me at least) than any old Gary Moore, Stevie Ray Vaughan or
Robben Ford. 

Oh, and while we're on the boring subject of judging people on technical 
ability alone, I'd like to come right out and say that, IMO, SRV had the worst 
blues voice of any singer I've ever heard. Period. A semi-nasal groan, more 
suitable for singing pub songs accompanied by a banjo player. Pretty dreary 
composer too - most of his songs are 12-bar vehicles for guitar pyrotechnics. 
Robben Ford? I read a review the other day that put his music down as "blues 
diluted with holy water". Not exactly Howlin' Wolf for feeling, is he?

    re: .38
    >In all fairness, I'll conclude by pointing out that, as far as I can
    >tell, this type of trashing seems to be only among young listeners and
    >wannabees, as opposed to those actually getting somewhere with their
    >talent. So maybe it's all just sour grapes.

Yeah, they've made a killing from music - time to shoot them down in flames!

Dom

    
    one other important milestone..... We now have a rock band whose
    members are older than our president and vice president.
    
     Bob

>             <<< Note 459.40 by CPDW::PALUSES "Bob Paluses @MSO" >>>
>                      -< The times, they are a changing >-
>
>    
>    one other important milestone..... We now have a rock band whose
>    members are older than our president and vice president.
>    
>     Bob


Make that at least 2 rock bands and probably more...

Phil Lesh of the Grateful Dead is 52 or 53 and Jerry Garcia turned 50 last 
year, I think.

    re: Edd
    
    what about the Grateful Dead? They're always one of the top grossing 
    touring bands in the world, never playing the "Dick Clark" circuit.
    Try to get tickets to any of the 6 shows they'll be playing at the
    garden this fall. Good luck!
    
    re: Burati
    
    other musicians don't pay tribute to their predecessors? How many
    jazz guitarists do the CHarlie Christian/Django thing? How many
    bluegrass players do Bill Monroe and Jimmy Rodgers tunes?
    
    - Dave

    The Dead certainly deserve acknowledgement for their not insignificant
    contribution and their staying power, although their cult following
    assuredly is surpassed by the Stone's ability to attract an audience.
    The Dead certainly have their own unique appeal.
    
    None of which diminishes the Stones' influence. 
    
    Edd 

    re .37, good note.
    
    The first time I saw The Rolling Stones, in concert, I was 15.  The
    next time I saw them I was 39 and my daughter just happened to be 15. 
    As we left after the show, my daughter turned to me and said, "Well,
    that blows away every other concert I've ever seen!"    (of course,
    that *was* before she had ever seen U2, so now they would come first
    and The Stones 2nd.)
    
    As Mick Jagger sings his current album, "but I can still paint the town
    all the colors of your evening gown..."  I, for one, don't doubt him. 
    He's still got what it takes.  IMO, he is the definitive lead singer.  
    
    It's easy for a lot of ordinary working people, who are also musicians,
    in their spare time, to trash The Rolling Stones, but most of the
    people who trash them still need their day jobs.  Mick and Keith never
    needed day jobs, and never will.  Like it or not, there's more to being
    a star than technical ability and a good singing voice.  It takes
    charisma, style, and attitude and they've always had it.
    
    Lorna
    

    
    re .37 - enduring bands; Ironically, the Moody Blues (who were
    contemporaries of the Stones) and represent the other end of the rock
    spectrum, are still touring, more or less intact.  As are, I beleive,
    the Kinks.
    
    None of which diminishes the Stones' influence, indeed.  Though do you
    know a bar band that doesn't do You Really Got Me or All Day and All
    of the Night?
    
    len (who last saw the Stones live at Lynn Bowl in 1968).
    

RE: .42 

>    other musicians don't pay tribute to their predecessors? 
    
    Dave, maybe I said it badly. My point was that in most art forms and
    genres, contemporary artists in general DO pay homage to their
    predecessors.

    --Ron

    I guess my "name another" challenge pushed the envelope a little too
    far, as previous notes readily named other bands from the British
    Invasion years who are still slogging it out in the arenas to general
    success.
    
    ...and yet the Stones *still* have that certain something. Back in the
    early 80's "The Cockroaches" played a gig at Sir Morgan's Cove in 
    Worcester. This wasn't just a gig, this was an event. I saw a BRAND
    NEW Camaro with "WAAF" spray-painted on the sides by a fan in an effort
    to be amongst the chosen few. The city went nuts. (Of course, the same
    thing happens when the Grateful Dead brings their traveling circus to
    town, but the Stones' madness was purely spontaneous.)
    
    Edd

    The thing that sets the Stones apart from many other old bands is that
    they aren't resting on their laurels. They are still trying (and we
    could argue about with what amount of success) to come up with fresh
    material, new ways of creating their brand of R&R. They haven't fallen
    into a replay mode. They are basically doing exactly what they started
    out doing, and somehow, they're still doing it with the same irreverence
    that they showed in 1965. Don't get me wrong, I've observed a number of
    distinct lulls in their efforts along the way.

    BTW, you may think from my notes that I'm a big Stones fan. I'm not,
    although I regard tunes like Under My Thumb, Jumpin Jack Flash and
    Satisfaction to be among the all time great rock and roll tunes. The
    last album of theirs that I bought was in 1968.

    I'm glad somebody mentioned The Kinks. The Who outlasted anyone's
    estimates of their intrinsic value also.
    
    IMHO, The Stones have been "followers" & not "leaders" of musical
    trends since somewhere around the Mick Taylor days. I think it's
    usually related to the transition from working to build something
    (musical identity or whatever) to working to perpetuate an illusion of 
    something (image, style, personality).
    
    There was a time (believe it or not) when people came away from Stones
    gigs saying, "Those guys were so *good* ...", so at one time in
    (ancient) history, you had to play well to be a Stone.  
    
    The fact that they can produce "mega-shows" nowadays has more to do
    with marketing & production than music. What's really great is when the
    elements of the "mega-show" combine with the elements of music. I feel
    that right now, Aerosmith is probably the best example of this. They're
    good musicians, they've got a ton of good tunes, & their shows are
    HUGE. (Not to mention Steve Tyler's lips !)
    
    Another thing to consider is that people don't go to Stones shows to
    see great "musicians". They go to see great "performers", or legendary
    personalities, but not to study Keith's intricate guitar chops.
    
    Paul
    

    
>    Another thing to consider is that people don't go to Stones shows to
>    see great "musicians". They go to see great "performers", or legendary
>    personalities, but not to study Keith's intricate guitar chops.
 
    The Stones don't simply play rock 'n roll; they ARE rock 'n roll.
    
    Edd

    RE: -1
    
    >>> The Stones don't simply play rock 'n roll; they ARE rock 'n roll.
    
    IMHO, they WERE rock'n'roll... I feel they kinda lost it when Mick 
    started with all that annoying falsetto crap. I would never go so far 
    as to belittle their affect on rock'n'roll. I still trot out their 
    older stuff like Sticky Fingers and Exile.. for the occasional 
    listen and still enjoy it quite a bit. I also liked some of Keith's
    stuff with Xpensive Winos. The music is a bit raw (like KR's voice) but
    it's nice to hear him step out of the Stones same old tired rut. I've
    only heard a few cuts off Mick's new album, but what I've heard, I've
    liked (certainly better than his last solo outing). As far as the 
    Stone's longevity goes, it is quite impressive. However, as with most
    things, thiere is definately a time to call it quits... and for the
    Stones, the clock is ticking ...
    
    /Billy_K

    Yeah, their best stuff is definately behind them. Seen them 3 times
    since 72 Garage band rock through their Vegas act of the early 80's.
    Enjoyed all 3 though all were very different and catered to a different
    audience.
    
    Tumblin Dice is still one of my favorite songs of all time. Top 25 
    anyway.
    
    Jim C.
    

    My favorite tune by them is "Monkey Man". Go figure!
    
    Edd

    My favorite Rolling Stones song is "Winter" from the Goat's Head Soup
    album.
    
    Lorna
    

    
    Not to knock one of my favorite bands, but they sure have a lot of 
    "filler" per album - Good song, good song, honky crap, country filler,
    good song, whiny attempt at soul, country hoe-down, good song, etc.
    
    Defintely not a high singnal to noise ration, in my opinion (not like
    the Kinks or Moodies, 2 who've been mentioned).  And nothing
    innovative, really either.  They've accomplished the feat of being
    the best representative of a entity, and that's no small thing I
    suppose.
    
    Yup, they ARE rock and roll, as Edd says, like it or not.  If you
    had to explain to someone from Mars what RnR was, you'd have to play the
    Stones.
    
    - Sean

Re Note 459.45 by DRUMS::FEHSKENS 
    
>    re .37 - enduring bands; Ironically, the Moody Blues (who were
>    contemporaries of the Stones) and represent the other end of the rock
>    spectrum, are still touring, more or less intact.  As are, I beleive,
>    the Kinks.

The Kinks will be performing at Riverside Park in Agawam Mass. Sunday
August 1 at 7 p.m. with Joan Jett and the Blackhearts opening -- free with
park admission, $12.99 after 4 p.m. -- call 1-800-370-7488 for more
information. 
							Mike

    re .56, I wonder when The Stones will be performing in Agawam?  :-)
    
    Lorna
    

    
     And to me they made the best (rock and roll) album of all
    time: Get Yer Ya Yas' Out, the 1970? live album recorded
    at Madison Square Garden just before they performed at
    Altamont.
    
     PAW

    
    re -1... Did the Stones ever do 'Sympathy for the Devil' again
    in any *live* concert? I know back then they said it wouldn't
    be done live again. In case anyone doesn't know or remember,
    Sympathy was being played when all hell broke loose at Altamont.
    I've seen them twice, and it was not included in the set.
    
    		Jerry

    The Stones broke out Sympathy for their 1975 tour after not playing it
    since Altamont.  I was very fortunate to see them in Madsion Square
    Garden, where I sat in the absolute worst seats ever and saw the
    greatest concert in the world.  I walked out of there thinking I had
    seen G_D in the person the Mick himself.
    
    I saw them in 1989 for the Steel Wheels tour where they also did
    Sympathy.  All I can say is that I wished that I hadn't seen them. 
    Living Color who opened for them was 100% better, they had energy,
    flamboyance (sp?), killer tunes and a guitar god in the person of
    Vernon Reid.  And what did the Stones do?  Trott themselves out as
    legends and do a throw-away set that disrespected the fact that the 
    audience spent mucho dinero to see them.  It was all about
    commercialism not music.
    
    However, (after bashing them), I am of a firm belief that they are one
    of the greatest bands ever to grace the world's shores.  They've given
    us timeless music that transends so much of the "trendy" music that's
    come along.
    
    And, Keith's solo albums showcase his talents in such a way that those
    of you who haven't heard it - go buy it you won't be disappointed!
    
    Fredda
    
    P.S. Did any of you ever hear the very old rumor from their 1969 tour? 
    Ike & Tina Turner opened for them and the story goes that Mick watched
    Tina every night and stole her moves!   

    
    
    i've read that mick acknowledged his 'theft' of moves
    from tina.
    it's one thing to steal, it's another to acknowedge it.
    
    willie
    

    hymm... interesting I also saw them in 75 at the Boston Garden,
    no Sympathy.. but GREAT show/music.
    
    I saw them in 70(?) also. Again, in Boston Garden, again no Sympathy.
    That was the time that they were arrested in Providence for some
    kind of assault on a reporter.. They didn't show up untill after
    12:00AM! Stevie Wonder opened that night and played for hours. It
    became obvious that something was wrong.. SW was good, but it was
    the Stones everybody came to see. After SW left the stage, there
    was a loooong wait. The crowd got ansi, but for the most part
    it was good fun! They only played a short set.... bummer
    
    		Jerry
    

    re .60, I saw the Steel Wheels Tour in 1989, and I thought it was
    fantastic.  I was blown away by it.
    
    I saw that show 2 days before my 40th birthday, and it really helped me
    deal with it.  I thought, "wow, if Mick can do that at his age, then I
    don't have to get old yet either!"   :-)
    
    Lorna
    

    re. 62
    
    i think you are wrong on the date.  it would have been
    post 72 cuz i didn't live in boston until then.
    i remember that mayor kevin white went out on stage
    as the crowd was getting more antsy and made a speech
    about 'my city is in flames, i need the police elsewhere,
    i bailed the stones (actually i think it was mick and keith)
    and they are on the way here with a police escort.'
    
    the show went on after midnight and kevin white was
    a hero among the young in boston.
    
    also, the reason they were in rhode island was a fogged in
    logan airport.
    
    eyewitness news
    

    re: -1
    
    I think your right. Looking back, it doesn't seem like I saw
    them twice in three years, that's why when someone mentioned
    the 75 tour, I assumed it was then. I remember Kevin White's
    'city in flames' comment now that you refresh my memory!
    
    	thanks for the info.
    
    		Jerry

    
    The BIG difference between the 70's and 80's... Taylor and Wood!!
    
    Wood... Your no Taylor!!
    
    John

    
    Yesterday, I played hookey and took my 7 year old daughter and my
    13 year old guest who is spending her summer vacation with us, to
    Canadian Museum of Civilization in Quebec. 
    
    In the museum there was a large section on historical musical
    instruments and their building. I saw hundreds of interesting
    instruments and their internal parts and pieces. Very original
    and some very weird stuff. That place is a must for anyone
    interested in music. ("opus" means "work" in Latin ;-))
    
    Why am I putting this under Rolling Stones note ? Well, because, when I
    was there, I bought tickets for the "Rolling Stones at the Max" show,
    for tonite. This is the outstanding IMAX movie I have mentioned in
    another note before. I have seen it but my daughter (a fan) and my
    young guest (will become a fan tonite) hadn't. So, I'll just put up
    with it again, just for the kids ;-)
    
    All the other IMAX movies playing at the CINEPLUS in the Civilization
    Museum, have discounts for kids but Rolling Stones was the full price
    for everybody kid/seniour/student. I asked why. The answer was "Cause
    kids like Rolling Stones too".   (???????)
    
    ;-)
    
    Lale

Is there anywhere I can see the IMAX Stones movie in the Boston area?
I've only heard great things about it.  Also,  Lale you mentioned that
you talked about it in another note - which one?  I'd like to know more
about it.

thx
bob

Hey Bobo;

There's an IMAX theater at the Museum of Science in Boston, though I'm not
sure if they've shown the Stones movie there.

- DC

    Hi Bob,
    
    I just searched, I had talked about "Rolling Stones at the Max" in note
    # 131.80, the "worst performances" topic, of all topics ;-)
    
    Also read Mr. Old Willie's note 131.81, he confirms the quality of the
    movie. Willie is writing somewhere from New England, so I assume there
    are such shows going on down there. Mr. Willie ?
    
    The CINEPLUS in the Civilization Museum here, also plays Titanic,
    Antarctica, Momentum, Grandcanyon and a couple more. I haven't seen
    any of those yet, but they are in my five year plan.
    
    Look for it. Go for it.
    
    Lale

    i saw the movie in norwalk, ct.
    as i recall it was a german or english outdoor
    concert.  the sound was great.  too many close ups
    of mick jaggers lips (5 stories high!).
    there was even an intermission.  i think it was two
    45 minute halves.
    i often wondered why they didn't bring it to the boston
    museum of science. maybe we should start a letter writing
    campaign.
    i don't know if it is still in norwalk but there is some
    sort of science museum there that showed it.
    
    worth finding!
    
    willie
    
    

    p.s. - i'm a member of the boston museum of science
    and have never seen any mention of it in any museum
    newsletters.  i can say with certaint that it hasn't
    been in boston cuz i've beein going to the omnimax
    theater from the start and have seen every one.

    
    yes, there is an intermission during which you get to buy a button
    for your button collection ;-)
    
    It is a compilation of a few concerts from Europe and Japan.
    
    In one scene, Mick Jagger is wearing a gorgeous, bright coloured,
    kimono type mantel. Notice the tear under one arm. He wore two such
    outfits, one of them was yellow, the other was blue. I don't remember
    which one was the torn one. I will look closely tonite. What ? It is
    important !
    
    ;-)
    
    Lale
    

    i just spoke to the museum of science.
    they had barely heard of it.  i think the
    guy below must be the director of the theater
    cuz the woman i was talking to got sick of my
    questions and said i could write to bill.
    
    if you want to petition for the stones at boston,
    write to:
    
    Bill Kochanczyk
    c/o Museum of Science
    Science Park
    Boston, MA 02114
    

ahh, 

Thanks to all.

I didn't know that Imax was what was at the Museum of Science.  

thanks,
bob 

    Some of the songs from "At The Max" :
    
    Start me up
    Sad Sad Sad
    Between a rock and a hard place
    Ruby Tuesday
    It's only rock'n roll
    Paint it black
    Honky tonk women
    You can't always get what you want
    Jumping Jack Flash
    Brown Sugar
    Sympathy for the devil
    Satisfaction
    
    The show starts with "start me up" and ends with "satisfaction" as an
    encore. I am not sure of the order of the songs in between. Keith sang
    one song too but I have no idea what it was.
    
    At the end (satisfaction), Mick Jagger is wearing a navy blue, long
    jacket which is slit open under the left sleeve. I didn't see such
    an opening under the right arm, but still, it may just be the fashion.
    
    It is Steel Wheels European tour compilation. No Japan, although,
    I am sure I read that somewhere.
    
    I hope you guessed my name.

    i'd guess that keith sang "happy"

    
    Is there a specific person "Play with Fire" was written for ?
    
    Lale

    if i recall, 'play with fire' was written by nanker phelge.
    i always assumed that was some kind of made up name.
    
    anybody know.
    
    i don't know who it was written for.
    
    willie

    
                    Nanker Phelge :
    
	Karen Help Gen
    	General Phenk
    	Parke Glen Hen
    
    
    	Lale		

    Nanker Phelge was a pseudonym.  In the early days, the Stones shared
    writing royalties equally.  Then Mick and Keith decided since they
    wrote everything, they should get all the money and the credits changed
    to Jagger/Richards.
    
    						Brian

    
    Correction! Nanker Phelge was the late Brian Jones. Brian used this
    name on a few of their tunes. He would make this far out face at the
    cameras when he was getting his picture taken and he was feeling pretty
    "far out himself" - he called it a "nanker".  Source - "Up and Down
    with the Rolling Stones"  by Tony Sanchez. 

    
    re .83
    
    In Wymans autobiography "Stone Alone", he states quite clearly
    that Nanker Phelge was something that the band used as a
    means to seperate Jagger/Richards songs from songs that the
    whole band wrote, for royalty purposes. He sounded pissy in
    that songs that should have been Nanker Phelge credited (and
    he would get his cut) got somehow released as Jagger/Richards
    even though they were a group effoft....he gave examples but
    I don't remember exactly which ones.
    
    Nanker was a play on "wanker"; if you know your British humor,
    that'll help. Phelge was supposedly from some guy named Jimmy
    Phelge that hung out at the apartment that Jagger and Richards
    once shared......Wyman said he was the grossest person in the
    world and the source of many an inside joke for the band.
    
    I would tend to believe Wyman as his book contains amazing
    detail about the early years....the man wrote everything down!
    Of course, everybody has their own axe to grind and ol' Bill
    feels he got shafted by what he called the "unholy trio" of
    Jagger, Richards, and Andrew Loog Oldham.
    
    DAP
    

    Can anyone tell me what album(s) I might find "Can't You Hear Me
    Knockin'" on?
    
    -johnb

   "Sticky Fingers", I believe.

   -- Sam

    Thanks!

    Is there a Rolling Stones fan club ?  Address ?
    
    Thanks,
    
    -Ed

    I heard on the radio yesterday that the Stones will be playing at
    Foxboro this year.  But I didn't hear when they'll be playing or when
    the tickets go on sale....anyone got more details?
    
    				Thanks,	
    				Donna

    Foxborough on Sept. 4. No idea on tickets.
    
    Jim C.
    

    
    Stones: At Foxboro on 9-4-94...no on sale date for tickets yet.
    
    Don

    Saw the Stones announcing their tour on TV this morning.  Mick Jagger
    is my hero.  He's over 50, he's a grandfather, he's still sexy (thin
    with all his hair!), and he can still rock'n'roll!  :-)
    
    Lorna
    

Elton John has a lot of hair too!!!

    its not his but he does have a lot :')

    
    
    Thanks, Lorna, I knew we could depend on you for a hormone report... 
    *8')   *8')   *8')   *8')   *8')   *8')   *8')   *8')   *8')   *8')   
    
    Tickets for this tour are supposed to be "under $50", according to a
    local TV news cast.
    
    Any truth to the rumor that "The Killer", Jerry Lee Lewis is handling
    bass duties for this tour?
    

    re .93, I think Mick's hair is real, though, and if it isn't then he
    should let Elton know where to get his next wig!  :-)
    (Poor Elton's hair just doesn't fall right.  Also, Elton has never been
    thin, so although he's a fantastic piano player, and appears to have a
    good personality he just doesn't cut it for me in the looks department,
    which I'm sure wouldn't bother him since he likes guys, anyway.)  :-)
    
    I'd love to see the Stones again, but dread going to Foxboro.  I saw
    them last time and they were fantastic, though.
    
    Lorna
    

re Jerry Lee Lewis ... haven't heard that one ... last I'd heard was that they
narrowed their selection down to two candidates who've been mentioned before
... don't remember who, though.  Sara Lee wasn't one of them.  :^(

re Foxboro, yeah, I hate that place, but the '89 Stones show there was one
of the best concerts I've ever been to.  Yeah, parts of it may have been
from tape etc. ... it was just a great, straight-forward rock'n'roll show.
Stones fans weren't disappointed.  I'll be there again this year.

    I'll second the recommendation.  Not sure if I'll go to all the trouble 
    to see them again this time, but their show a few years back in Foxboro 
    was just incredible.  I've always liked the stones but I never thought 
    they could be nearly as good as they were that night.  They were so
    good it was exhausting.  

    I too saw one of the show from 5 years ago, and like most everyone who
    did see the show, it was one hell of a show ! I'm glad to hear that the
    ticket price will be below $50....myself, have no intentions on seeing
    this tour, unless someone gives me tickets for like a birthday gift,
    personally I wanna see Buffett but thats another note :')
    
    Chris

    The show in '89 was everything thats been stated and more!!  Jagger
    said in an interview that they'd be playing alot of colleges too - Hope
    that's in the area so I can avoid Foxboro but still see them.  Just
    couldn't let a stones tour pass me by :-)
    

    I thought it was Daryl Jones, jazz bassist who played with
    Sting's Blue Turtles band, who got the bass chair.  Or is he
    just on the new album and not touring?
    

    Yes, the show at Foxboro in '89 was fantastic.  I saw it 2 days before
    my 40th birthday and it was an inspiration.  :-)   
    
    Also, my ticket was a birthday present, from a friend, so that was
    nice, too.
    
    The Stones were the first band I ever saw in concert, in 1965, and they
    were good then, too.   In fact, I blame them for my life long
    fascination with rock stars and rock concerts!
    
    Lorna
    

At the '89 show we had floor seats ... you may remember those chairs, very
rickety plastic cheap things ... way in the back, and we had to stand on them
because everyone else in front of us was doing the same thing.  Looking for
a place to dance, I noticed a huge area right behind the soundboard that
was totally empty.  It was kinda eerie, I have no idea why it was empty like
that ... it wasn't like the soundboard was obstructing the view or anything.
Stayed there all night.  What a show!  I'm glad tickets will be under $50
... if they had pulled one of these $75 Eagles deals, I would've boycotted. ;^)

- dc

How about Lemmy playing bass?

    Yes, Daryl Jones is playing bass for this tour... at least to start
    out.

    
    
    
    Jerry Lee Lewis, on hearing about Bill Wyman's young wife: "What's the
    big deal?  They're not even related!"
    
    

    
    The Stones are playing the Rose Bowl out here in L.A.
    Last time it was the Colliseum, but that was really wrecked by the 
    earthquake.
    
    Anybody got dates on when my favorite rock band will be in Los Angeles?
    
    Another sell out tour no doubt.
    
    

    Or any UK dates?
    
    julia

    
    Well I got a wait.
    
    Stones play L.A. Oct 19, tickets on sale May 21.
    
    Probably add another show or two. Frisco has three shows due to sell 
    out.
    
    Dave
    

    
    
    Any word on when the tickets go on sale for the Foxboro show
    here is Mass. ?  If L.A. is on sale May 21st for Oct 19th...
    shouldn't Foxboro be on sale for Sept 4th.  Did I miss the
    annoucement ?
    
    

    
    Out here in So. Cal I checked with a Music Plus store, they handle
    tickets through TicketMaster.
    
    You might want to check with a ticket type operation in your area, or
    one of the rock radio stations that have concert info. hotline.
    
    In Frisco the tickets sold out in 80 minutes and they kept adding
    concerts.
    
     Dave
    
    
    

    
    Well I got tickets to the Rose Bowl show Oct 19th.
    
    Geeesh they must have sold out fast. I was about 8th in line, got the
    $40 tickets (seats are $30, $40 and $50). 
    
    I will need my telescope to see whats going on.
    
    Hopefully it ain't as bad as the seating chart looks. Maybe those
    large tv screesn will make up for it.
    
    Oh well, one last time.
    
     

    I hear they're calling this the Steel Bedpan tour.
    
    /edward

    
    Regarding what I've heard off "Voodo Lounge" so far...  Yawn.
    
    If these guys would have taken the best cuts off of Expenive Winos,
    Ron Wood's, and Mick's recent solo efforts, geez, they'd have a
    half-decent Stones album.  The sum of the parts is definitely greater
    than the whole for these guys lately.
    
    - Sean

    
    Well I just heard that tickets go on sale July 16th, at 10:00 for
    Foxboro (MASS).   
    Any recommendations on how to guarantee two tickets.
    
    ..rke
    

    re .115
    
    Get in line before anyone else does.
    
    8^)

    
    	No truth to the rumor, but I heard that the Stones will be
    	playing at Old Orchard Beach, Maine this tour.  
    
    	If anyone has a tour schedule and can post it here, that
    	would be great !!!
    
    	Gilley

    
    Anyone got a set list from the new tour? The first show was August 1
    at JFK in Washington. Anyone go to the show?

    For those of you so inclined, you can email the Stones @
    
		    	stones@delphi.com
    
    -b

re: .118
    
>    Anyone got a set list from the new tour? The first show was August 1
>    at JFK in Washington. Anyone go to the show?

I didn't go, but J.D. Considine, our local music writer, gave it a very
favorable review.

-Hal

    I saw some part's on TV lasty night and this AM, and from what I saw and
    from what I've heard on the new album,, they seem to have found their
    way back to the place where they did their best work, rather than that
    screwy SHU-SHU-SHU-SHATTERED junk. Just stripped-down, raw R&R.

    -Ron

	New album is said to be very good.  I liked the one cut
	I heard on the radio, something about love and having
	a sweetheart

    I think it is good. It's the first Stones album I bought since 
    Emotional Rescue. 
    If you like the Beggars Banquet, Let it bleed, Exile on Main Street
    period, you'll like this as well.
    
    Even one of the songs Keith is singing is good (it's called
    The worst..)
    
    - Minne

re: .123

>    Even one of the songs Keith is singing is good (it's called
>    The worst..)
    
Yeah, the reviewer in Baltimore (whose opinion I value) commented
that Keith's singing sounded good.  He also said good things about
the guitar interplay between Keith and Ronnie Wood. He even complimented
Ronnie's slide playing. :-)

The new bass player is getting good reviews as well, not just in my
local paper, but in Guitar Player magazine too.  Sorry, I'm spacing and
can't quite remember his name at the moment.

-Hal

	Darryl Jones plays bass on the album, (many will know him from work
with Sting on the Blue Turtles and Bring On the Night, and with assorted Jazz
artists).  Anyone know if Darryl Jones is playing on the tour dates?

/ml

re: .125

>	Darryl Jones plays bass on the album, (many will know him from work
>with Sting on the Blue Turtles and Bring On the Night, and with assorted Jazz
>artists).  Anyone know if Darryl Jones is playing on the tour dates?

Yes, he is.

-Hal

    
    VH1 on cable is covering a lot on this tour. Last night, Dan Akroyd
    was hosting as they rehearsed. It appears that will be doing cuts
    from early albums besides the Honky Tonk-Satisfaction routine.The
    stage is gigantic. Something about a huge metallic cobra, but they
    couldn't show it on tv, just the lower stage. 
    
    I am looking forward to seeing them in Oct at the Rose Bowl. It will
    be a great show no doubt. Stones have not let me down concert wise
    since I saw them first in '69. Their contract with Virgin record calls
    for more albums. 
    
    Dave

From last nite's Letterman...

======================================================
Top Ten Things Overheard At The Rolling Stones Concert
======================================================

  [The Stones kicked off their "Voodoo Lounge tour in D.C.]

10.  "I love it when they smash their walkers at the end of a song"

 9.  "The Medic Alert beepers are drowning out the music"

 8.  "Look!  The new guy on bass!  It's Matlock!"

 7.  "He means, time was on their side"

 6.  "Start me up!  I'm serious!  This isn't part of the song!"

 5.  "It looks like a comet smashed into Keith Richards"

 4.  "Cool!  Jagger's teeth just landed in my lap!"

 3.  "What's Letterman doing up there with a fiddle?"  [followed by
     famous clip of guy who looks like Dave playing a fiddle and
     singing "Camptown Ladies."]

 2.  "Michael Jackson married?  Please...!"

 1.  "I can't get no Met-a-muc-il"

--
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| This Late Show with David Letterman Top Ten list copyright 1994 World Wide |
| Pants. Lists are contributed by Bob Lennard and Rick Nebel.                |
|                                                                            |
| To subscribe or unsubscribe to the list send your request to               |
| listserv@tamvm1.tamu.edu. In the BODY of your message put:                 |
|    subscribe top-ten first last                                            |
| Replace first and last with your name. To unsubscribe, put:                |
|    signoff top-ten                                                         |
|                                                                            |
| If you have any questions or comments send them to top-ten@tamvm1.tamu.edu |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: from inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com by us4rmc.pko.dec.com (5.65/rmc-22feb94) id AA27279; Thu, 4 Aug 94 01:05:17 -040
% Received: from TAMVM1.TAMU.EDU by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com (5.65/27May94) id AA28427; Wed, 3 Aug 94 21:52:36 -070
% Message-Id: <9408040452.AA28427@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com>
% Received: from TAMVM1.TAMU.EDU by tamvm1.tamu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5866; Wed, 03 Aug 94 23:39:23 CD
% Received: from TAMVM1.TAMU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@TAMVM1) by TAMVM1.TAMU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4612; Wed, 3 Aug 1994 23:39:22 -0500
% Date:         Wed, 3 Aug 1994 21:39:20 -0700
% Reply-To: Late Show Top Ten List mailing list <TOP-TEN@tamvm1.tamu.edu>
% Sender: Late Show Top Ten List mailing list <TOP-TEN@tamvm1.tamu.edu>
% From: Bob Lennard <blennard@ix.netcom.com>
% Subject:      David Letterman's Top Ten List for 08/03/94
% To: Multiple recipients of list TOP-TEN <TOP-TEN@tamvm1.tamu.edu>

VH-1 had Gimme Shelter on last night.  They will replay it Friday as well.  That
movie is one of the best concert/music documentaries (Despite the fact sometimes
they're horribly out of tune or sound like they're playing two different songs
at the same time.)

What were they thinking when they hired Hell's Angels for Security and paid them
with beer????  Like the outcome would have been a surprise

Tim

>What were they thinking when they hired Hell's Angels for Security and paid the
>with beer????  Like the outcome would have been a surprise

Yow, talk about flashbacks....

I lived in SF at the time and was at Altamount. The Angels were very much a
part of the local scene in those days, although not usually in an "official" 
capacity. It wasn't such a big deal, or shouldn't of been, and it certainly 
wasn't the Stones fault. No one could have anticipated what happened, and 
the outcome was very much a surprise to everyone. We could NOT BELIEVE what 
was happening, from about noon till after dark when the Stones played. It 
was a Fellini film come to life, we were in it and couldn't get out. One 
of the most amazing days of my life.

Meanwhile, the Stones played one of the greatest sets I've ever heard
under the most difficult circumstances imaginable. They were magnificent.

Geez, now I'll be flashing back all day ;)

josh

ps - that fat naked guy stepped on me.

    re. 130
    
    Hey, I was there too. Drove from L.A all night. What an experience.
    Remember that fat guy dancing throught the crowd...he must ahve weighed
    300 lbs. 
    
    Glad I went to it. Remember getting there when it was dark and waking
    up surrounded by thousands of people. Also remember the wine that
    was circulating....what was in that stuff.
    
    Such a long time ago, and the Stones are still going. They love doing
    music or they would have quit years ago. No band alive can get 
    a crowd going like they do, even at Altamont. 
    
    First show is tonight at RFK, correct?
    
    Dave
    

Watching the film it's pretty obvious Mick realizes that they're in over their
head but must continue on to prevent a riot.  I'm sure he wanted to leave, but
felt me must continue.

The look on his face at points and tells it all.  At some points he just stops
and watches the crowd.

Tim

  >  Glad I went to it. Remember getting there when it was dark and waking
  >  up surrounded by thousands of people. Also remember the wine that
  >  was circulating....what was in that stuff.

If I remember correctly it was a mixture of acid and methedrine, otherwise 
known as BAD ACID! It definitely had an effect on the overall situation.
The other big problem was going to the bathroom. Thousands of people with
bursting bladders and nowhere to go.

It was an amazing day. Being from NYC, I always figgered that only 1 person
got murdered, which is pretty good for a day in a city of 600,000. The
problem was that the anticipation was so intense, and lasted so long, that
when the Stones finally hit that first monster chord the crowd went *nuts*,
and pushed towards the front. 

Personally, I went under a speaker tower so I could dance....

josh

    Was it Marty Balin that got punched out?  I would have paid just to see
    that!
    
    Mark.

  >  Was it Marty Balin that got punched out?  I would have paid just to see
  >  that!

It was WITHOUT A DOUBT the highlight of the day - and it was free! The Airplane
was hammering away at an *awful* set and the crowd was getting a bit rowdy, so
a couple of Angels strolled across the front of the stage with beers in their
hands and made faces at the crowd, really playing up their "official" status.
Balin was so stupid and arrogant that he thought he could give *orders* to
the Angels, fahcrissakes, in PUBLIC! He marches up to one of them and starts 
to give him a lecture, and the totally predictable thing happens.....he gets 
knocked unconscious, flat on his face, he's out for like five minutes. Jack
Cassidy (the only one of the Airplane I had any time for) sorta ducks behind 
his amp while he cools the Angels out, and they dragged Balin outta the way 
while they finished the set. It sounded better with Marty on the sidelines.

Not that I condone the Angels actions, but it takes a special kinda guy to
do what Balin did. An idiot. It's like jumping in front of a subway - of
COURSE you're gonna get hit. You had to take the Angels at face value - 
don't mouth off to them, and DON'T mess with their bikes, and you'd get
along fine. 

josh

ps - the best pre-stones set was the burrito brothers. they almost calmed 
the place down.

    Hey, nice to hear these "I was there" reports from Altamount;
    interesting stuff.  Thanks
    
    /rick

    
    Anybody heard how the show went at RFK?
    
    They play Raleigh NC tomorrow.
    
    Heard something last night that the Stones stood up a visit to the
    White house or something like that...too busy. Well that's
    understandable. Besides, it would ruin their image.
    
    Dave
    

    
    Any comments on Lenny Kravitz as the opener for the Stones ?
    
    rke

    
    Entertainment Tonight showed clips of the show at Foxboro, MA.
    They opened with "Not Fade Away" it appeared. How appropriate.
    
    Any reviews from attendees at the show from those back east?
    
    I am really looking forward to the Rose Bowl show now, Oct.
    
    Dave
    
    
      

I went to the show on Labor Day (Monday) in Foxboro Mass.  In my opinion
it was an excellent show, wish I could go again!!  The Stones still put
on a good show!  I'm not a big concert person but I love the Stones and
this is the 3rd time I have seen them.

Lenny Kravitz was good as the opener.  Although I am not familiar with
his songs I enjoyed it.

The Stones came out at 9:15, I wrote down the songs they did:

Not Fade Away
Tumbling Dice
You got me Rocking(new)
Shattered
Rocks Off (from the Exile on Main St. CD)
Sparks will Fly(new)
Satisfaction
Beast of Burden
Memory Motel
All Down the line (from the Exile on Main St. CD)
I go wild(new)
Miss You
Honky Tonk Woman
Happy (Keith Richards)
The Worst (Keith Richards)
Love is Strong(new)
Monkey Man
Street Fighting Man
It's only Rock n Roll
Start Me Up
Brown Sugar
Jumpin' Jack Flash (Encore)

    
    Thanks.
    
    Red Hot Chile Peppers are opening at the Rose Bowl show in Oct.
    I like all the new stuff on their Voodoo album, mainly the rockers.
    
    Let see, my 5th time to see them. First was 69, The Forum in L.A.
    and Altamont. Could have seen them in San Bernadino in 65 at a small
    auditorium but didn't have a ride. 
    
    Yep, they do put on quite a show. Lots of history and Jagger is a 
    showman.
    
    Dave
    

    
    	My father drives busses for a tour company in Northboro, and
    	he had what he considered the displeasure of bringing a bus-
    	load of people to the show on Monday.
    
    	I talked to him Monday night when he got back and he said
    	that he got a $50 tip AND they bought him a ticket so he
    	could get in and watch the show [$55 or so].
    
    	So what does the dummy do?  Walks in, buys a cup of coffee
    	and leaves.  8^)
    
    							GTI
    

    
    The Voodoo Lounge tour has now gained the number one spot for
    a tour. Surpassing Pink Floyd. They hold number three with Steel
    Wheels. That's based on sales. Price of tickets was $30-$50. 
    Tour ends in December in Canada. If I recall the figure it was
    $103 million.
    
    Dave
    

    
    The Oct 19 show at the Rose Bowl was incredible to say the least.
    The band played each song perfect, lot's of energy. The crowd sang
    a long with the band on most songs. The stage and the lighting
    cannot be described. 
    
    Playing time was 2:20 minutes. 
    
    The opening song, Not Fade Away just blew me away. They even did
    It's All Over Now. Which they havn't played in concert for 
    decades. The crowd went nuts.
    
    Charlie got longest ovation when introduced by Jagger. 
    
    It appeard at the end the Stones couldn't believer the great reception
    Los Angeles gave them. Another 80K crowed will see them tonight.
    
    Yep, Greatest Rock and Roll Band fits them well.
    
    Dave
    

    			October 25, 1964
    
    The Rolling Stones make thier first appearance on the Ed Sullivan show.
    I wonder if they realize.

    Anyone know the date of the Stones Pay-Per-View? Nov 12 or Nov 19 ???

    
    I read that it was Nov 25th. But check to be sure. The cost was $25.
    
    Just read the the first concert by the Stones was outside of Boston 
    at a high school stadium, Mannsfield High or something like that.
    It was the first place they played on their 1964 tour. 
    
    I am hoping this tour comes out on videotape.
    
    The other band was a local garage band. Later in the tour they
    had other bigger names play. They played out here in So California
    first at San Bernardino, the Orange Show Fairgrounds. Seated 8000.
    They still consider that show their best, because of the fans. Wanted
    to play there again in '81, but the place was damaged.
    
    Dave
                                                 

    
    	http://www.stones.com - Cyber Stones!
    
    

    Did anyone have the chance to catch the Pay-per-View show on Friday
    nite ?  I wasn't able to watch....anyone tape it ?  Would love to get
    a tape.  Don't know if it will be showing up at my local video store.
    
    ..rke
    

    
    I got to see the first 4 minutes of them doing Not Fade Away, then it
    got scrambled.
    
    ONe of their concerts from this tour is orderable via that "Goods"
    thing they keep  advertising. 
    
    Glad I went to their show in L.A.
    
    Dave
    
    

    I was vacationing in sunny Florida during pay-per-view time.  My friend
    tried to get us tickets, to no avail.  However, they did release some
    last minute full-view seats, but we had already ordered the
    pay-per-view.
    
    Having seen the Stones previously at Giants Stadium in August (during
    the worst rainstorm in years) and thinking that this was a show from
    the heavens, I was totally psyched for the broadcast.  Keep in mind I
    also saw the Steel Wheels tour and thought that was the biggest ripoff
    show and I also saw them in '75 (with the pedal stage) and was
    convinced that Jagger the ultimate rock 'n roll god.
    
    The cable company left 4 hours for the broadcast, but lo and behold the
    'boys' played for 2 1/2 hours (including encore).  That was the major
    disappointment for us.  We felt that they should have done 2 sets and
    more tunes (isn't it always that way?)  The "acoustic" set was 3 songs
    and the "blues" set was 2 songs (one with Robert Cray and one with Bo
    Diddley).  Sheryl Crow sang one song and their were no other "special"
    guests.
    
    It was a very strong performance with substitutions of new songs (Love
    is Strong) for older songs (Angie, Sympathy for the Devil).  They
    kicked butt, high energy, strong vocals and searing solos.  All in all
    it was much better than the Pink Floyd pay-per-view, but it doesn't
    give you the "you are there" feeling.  They didn't get the true feel of
    the stage and the interesting videos couldn't really be seen, except in
    passing.  A- for performance, B for broadcast.
    
    See them at a stadium near you. 
    
    Fredda  

    Bought the new Stones CD yesterday, "Stripped". It's not a world-
    shaking album but decent. Contains a couple songs I didn't listen to
    for a looong time. Good compilation IMO. Most songs are recorded live
    at the Paradiso (Amsterdam) and the Olympia (Paris). Mick sings quite 
    unaffected, Keef and Ronnie use (semi-) acoustic guitars most of the
    time. For CDROM owners, there are in addition 3 live videos on the CD.
    
    Tracklist:
    
    - Street Fighting Man           Let It Bleed
    - Like A Rolling Stone          Dead Flowers
    - Not Fade Away                 Slipping Away
    - Shine A Light                 Angie
    - The Spider And The Fly        Love In Vain
    - I'm Free                      Sweet Virginia
    - Wild Horses                   Little Baby
    
    Have a nice weekend.
    Ryener