[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Stones v. Who
In a message dated 3/30/04 4:00:53 PM, Schrade writes:
<< I don't hear it. I mean, he sounds older. His voice isn't perfect.
But I think you're being way too critical. The guy takes care of his
voice. He sees throat specialists, he does vocal warm-ups before
shows,.... I don't think he sounds *that* bad. You could make the
same argument against Daltrey, for that matter. There may be some
dude on a Stones list, right now, saying The Who suck 'cause Daltrey's
vocals have been horrible since 1982. >>
The next time I'm in Cleveland, I'm going to have to drop down and meet
I'm the veteran of 46 Stones concerts since '81 and 8 Who concerts since '79.
Of their (Who and Stones) last tours in '02 - Mick's voice has held up
better. The falsetto he managed on Worried About You at a few shows was amazing.
As to the better voice in their youth, Roger wins hands down to my ears - but
then there are ranges that Mick can do that Roger can't and vice versa.
Between the vocal coaches, the vocal warm-ups, the throat specialists, etc... -
Mick's voice was more reliable than Roger's on the last tours. Which isn't to
say Mick wasn't cheerleading his way through songs '81 - he was. There have
been tours where he really didn't sing, that has not been true of the recent
As to which band puts on the better show, they both can put on fantastic
shows. Trying to compare them though is apples and oranges. With the Who, it
seems like I've seen the same tour since '79, just a little rearranging of the
setlist. With the Stones there are a core eight to ten songs I've heard just
about every tour - but the other ten to fourteen songs are a mixture of songs
never played before, retired for a few tours or brought out every other tour.
If there's a new album, anywhere from four to seven of the songs will be off of
the new album.
As for going to just hear the Stones play Don't Stop, I'd go. But then my
boyfriend told me he was in love with me during that song - so I'm sentimental
Whether Mick is a visionary depends on how you define it. The structure of
today's tours from country to rock to the three tenors all came from decisions
the Stones made. They were the first to bring their own sound system on tour,
have a tour sponsor, etc... Mick doesn't see rock and roll's main purpose as
saving the world, but several Stones songs have expressed political and
social issues. When it comes to touring though, the Stones run a tight ship and
deliver the goods. The Who haven't always done that.
I agree with most of Schrade's set list eliminations, but I'd like to keep I
Can't Explain and maybe Anyway Anyhow Anywhere. I'd throw out Pinball Wizard
- let Elton have it for his next tour and I wouldn't miss Who Are You too
much. I'm not as thrilled about Love Reign O'er Me live, but I wouldn't mind
hearing it again. And I'd add Going Mobile and Sister Disco.
<<> I just looked on their website and counted 53 songs played on their last
> tour. That's a lot, but it ain't 200. I guess they just practiced 147
> of them for kicks.
Your facts frustrate me. ;-) I was just going by what was said on one of
those Stones documentaries. Still, imagine if The Who played over 50 songs
on one tour! Fuck, even 30!!>>
The Stones played 77 songs on their Licks Tour:
53 songs were played during the B2B tour in 1998, which made be where that
number came from. The B2B tour stretched over three years. Since 1962, the
Stones have played 1782 concerts, 820 songs during those tours, with 272 songs
debuted over forty years. Can the Who come close to the song variety in those
The Stones dusted off more songs during the Licks rehearsals than they have
in previous tour rehearsals. A website that listed the songs rehearsed is
currently down, so I can't give an accurate figure on that. I do believe it was
over 100. Two hundred sounds like a stretch to me though.
"And Staples Girls are so extraaaaaavagant...I just don't have that much
driiiiivvvvvvel..." - Alan, 2/12/03