The Rolling Stones

[Mr Bridger]

Can't wait for this tonight at glasto, but so looking forward to next week at Hyde park, any of you going?

Good line up with the vaccines, temper trap and really looking forward to Gary Clarke jr

 

[nomoremithras4me]

Can't wait for this tonight at glasto, but so looking forward to next week at Hyde park, any of you going?

Good line up with the vaccines, temper trap and really looking forward to Gary Clarke jr

Gary Clarke Jr was outstanding supporting Clapton at the rah last month, enjoy

 

[Mr Bridger]

Gary Clarke Jr was outstanding supporting Clapton at the rah last month, enjoy

Yes heard good things about him , very Hendrix-esque.

Another great band to look out for is Vintage Trouble, saw them support The Who last night in Birmingham, amazing energy and really got the crowd going

 

[BHAZiggy]

I saw The Stones at Twickenham. To be honest, I was disappointed. I got the feeling that they were just doing their job rather than still enjoying what they're doing, unlike others of their age group that I've seen in their older years. Eg. Tina Turner, John Fogarty, ZZ Top, Black Sabbath.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Going on the 13/7 with one of NSCs finest.

 

[Mr Smggles]

Got tickets for the 6th, cannot ruddy wait! I'll watch tonight too though

 

[DumLum]

Can't wait for this tonight at glasto, but so looking forward to next week at Hyde park, any of you going?

Good line up with the vaccines, temper trap and really looking forward to Gary Clarke jr

I'll be setting the planner for BBC2 at 10.30 tonight.

 

[Vegas Seagull]

I saw The Stones at Twickenham. To be honest, I was disappointed. I got the feeling that they were just doing their job rather than still enjoying what they're doing, unlike others of their age group that I've seen in their older years. Eg. Tina Turner, John Fogarty, ZZ Top, Black Sabbath.

Incorrect.
The Stones are at least 5 years 'older' at least than most if not all of those & reached far higher levels live & for longer as well, so to compare them in the same year is unfair

 

[Icy Gull]

Not a big fan of old timers and rock concerts, except when it's Neil Young who still writes and plays decent NEW songs. I saw the Stones at Knebworth about 35 years ago and they were nothing special, although in fairness it was pretty windy and the sound was all over the place from where I was watching. I'm looking forward to seeing this though as I'd like to be proved wrong about crusty old bands playing songs that they wrote so long ago. Will it just be show or will they actually be any good?

Have to say I thought the recent Beach Boys live performances were brilliant so it can be done.

 

[BHAZiggy]

Incorrect.
The Stones are at least 5 years 'older' at least than most if not all of those & reached far higher levels live & for longer as well, so to compare them in the same year is unfair

John Fogerty is 1 year younger than Jagger and Tina Turner is 4 years older. Every one of them was born in the 1940's, except for Tina who was born in the 1930's. I reckon that makes them the same generation.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

I thought they had a contractual dispute with the BBC. Is it being shown live tonight?

 

[Beach Hut]

I thought they had a contractual dispute with the BBC. Is it being shown live tonight?

Not on the web, *******os Rolling Stones refuse to be shown live except BBC2 at 22:30

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Saw the 'Stones' in Brighton and have a LP signed by them....in their day ....were the Dogs..B*ll*cks....now they are just rich old men....like me only I'm not rich...

 

[Icy Gull]

Thought they were pretty good, nice to see Mick Taylor for a few numbers and not a bad set list apart from 2,000 light years. Jagger's voice is a little shot but that's to be expected but he certainly is still a showman. Enjoyed it.

 

[Vegas Seagull]

John Fogerty is 1 year younger than Jagger and Tina Turner is 4 years older. Every one of them was born in the 1940's, except for Tina who was born in the 1930's. I reckon that makes them the same generation.

You said the Stones as a band, debut album 5 years earlier

 

[Blues Rock DJ]

have to say with my reviewers hat on, I thought they sounded like a tribute band of themselves. Jagger, apart from his loss of vocal chords, appeared to be trying to get the crowd going, but the others looked like they'd rather have been somewhere else.
As for set-list, not the greatest, but then I did switch off after 'Miss You'.

 

[Mowgli37]

I heard it on the radio so I couldn't comment on how it looked but it sounded fantastic, I think the criticism aimed at Jagger's voice has been a bit unfair, he never was the greatest singer technically but he's kept it in good nick for a very long time as he proved yesterday

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

I heard it on the radio so I couldn't comment on how it looked but it sounded fantastic, I think the criticism aimed at Jagger's voice has been a bit unfair, he never was the greatest singer technically but he's kept it in good nick for a very long time as he proved yesterday

He sounded out of breath. Should have stood still instead of trying to strut around to prove he still has it. That said, I'll be happy if I can even walk at his age ...

 

[Icy Gull]

He sounded out of breath. Should have stood still instead of trying to strut around to prove he still has it.

My wife said exactly the same thing, but half of his appeal on stage is his showmanship. Take that away and he be pretty average because his voice has never been all that live.

 

[Blues Rock DJ]

just checked the set-list, the Beeb started showing them over halfway through the set....still no excuse, thought they'd gone to a local pub gig !!!!