Posted in music on December 8, 2012

The Rolling Stones, Barclays Center, Brooklyn, NY - 12/8/2012
Rolling STones

Next up: The Stones play MSG as part of the big Hurricane Sandy Benefit, and then two shows at Prudential Center in NJ.

---

      

Comments (117)

No Mick Taylor and no Bill Wyman.

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 10:47 PM

you got to ro-oh-oll me.

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 10:48 PM

No "Emotional Rescue" is criminal.

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 10:51 PM

no HUMMUS OF BURDEN?

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 10:52 PM

Was this worth 800 dollars?

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 10:55 PM

Nothing from Emotional Rescue = FAIL

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 10:56 PM

No Moonlight Mile either :/

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 11:02 PM

Yeah, they should really play some of their hits.

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 11:04 PM

b4 they make me run

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 11:10 PM

Not enough songs considering the price and this being their 50th anniversary.

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 11:19 PM

What does "Start Me Up" sound like? Don't think I ever heard it, is it new?

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 11:27 PM

Little weird that the top tkts for barclays were 800 where no taylor wyman or beck, when you could pay the same for prudential and get all of those and more.

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 11:35 PM

Mary J Blige .... blah

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 11:37 PM

Worth 800 bucks if Brian Jones showed up.

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 11:44 PM

Mary J cannot hold a tune - sorry to say -

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 11:46 PM

Could be Mister James Bond. Or Major Jack Black.

Posted by Anonymous | December 8, 2012 11:50 PM

Shattered?

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 12:01 AM

I rocked the Barclays.

Posted by Morbid James Brown(!) | December 9, 2012 12:19 AM

Just got back. Mick Taylor would have really made Rambler a lot better. Like someone else said, Mary J. Blige cannot hold a tune. Her duet with Mick should have been better. Keith's fingers do not work anymore.

That said, if you had to see the Stones, and I did (because I couldn't live with myself knowing I hadn't ever seen them), then this show did the trick. Overall, it was below average for them but they are old and a bit of a novelty act.

Posted by Danny | December 9, 2012 12:27 AM

"Little weird that the top tkts for barclays were 800"

Idiot, top ticket prices were way more than 800. Only the last Prudential show is getting Wyman/Taylor/Clapton and Beck and a few others.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 1:09 AM

It is basically the same set that they did in London except for a few songs swapped here and there. Also same freaking banter with Mick making jokes about how high the ticket prices are.

Very clever and original

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 1:10 AM

Standard run through of the hits, not upset I missed it.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 2:36 AM

Were there a lot of empty seats?

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 9:26 AM

What did Mick say about the ticket prices?? Sounds funny.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 9:40 AM

Anyone who spends that kind of money on a 2 hour show is a fool.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 9:47 AM

The 1,000 or so people who left before the encore are probably kicking themselves.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 9:50 AM

This board is a riot. A guy who has never seen them before pronounces the show "below average". Others whine they just played the hits. Well the hits are great. Are they "oldies"? Sure. But so are the works of Sinatra, Coltrane and Mozart. Big deal. And the Stones played them with energy, conviction and swing last night. Find me another rock drummer who swings like Charlie Watts. Dont look too hard. I could count the empty seats on one hand. I didn't particularly miss one song cameos by Bill Wyman, Mick Taylor or Jeff Beck. Now Brian Jones- that's another story.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 10:15 AM

^ dude. They didn't play their best song "Love is Strong" and they didn't even pull out anything from "Undercover." This is an epic fail.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 10:24 AM

Wyman, Beck, and Bryan Jones playing at the second Prudential show . . .

Posted by Richard Benjamin | December 9, 2012 10:26 AM

10:24 nailed it.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 10:27 AM

The Stones are done since 1972.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 10:28 AM

Why did not play dancing in the darK? I know it's a duet but it's also their biggest hit in the states . . .

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 10:48 AM

10:24=10:27

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 11:03 AM


Yeah, love the guy who never saw them, but just had to see them giving his opinion.

Really? Mick Taylor would have really made Rambler a lot better? have you seen mick taylor lately? he is slow, fat and old and a shadow of his former self. The novelty would have been nice, but it wouldnt have made it better.

and Keith's fingers do not work anymore? obviously this is just something you read. He isnt perfect but he pulled it off. He was loud and nailed every classic riff, and his two song set was great.

So now, from someone that has seen the Stone almost 100X, it was an excellent old school rock and roll show, with loud guitars, no filler, and it was far beyond the low expectations I had for a bunch of really old dudes that have barely played together for the past 5+ years.

ok kiddies, now back to your grimes, yo la, real estate, alt-j and hummus.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 11:21 AM

Yep, the peanut gallery here has definitely deteriorated in the past year or so.

Posted by ME | December 9, 2012 11:26 AM

Dear 10:24:

It's a generational thing. There was no MTV 1965-1972 so to many people those are prehistoric times. But believe me every Stones album during that period, with the possible exception of Satanic Majesties, blows the stuff you cite away. Love Is Strong their best song? It wouldn't have even made it on to Let It Bleed.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 11:28 AM

"ok kiddies, now back to your grimes, yo la, real estate, alt-j and hummus."

I agree with you, but don't put YLT in the same category as those other bands. They have been around for over 25 years, they are not yet another hipster band.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 11:33 AM

It is not "Hummus of Burden" it is "Beast Budren." Do some research before complaining and take two seconds to edit your comments.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 11:47 AM

Dear 11:28 aka Rockin Granddaddy. I was kidding. Jesus Christ. Love is Strong LOL!

Posted by 10:24 | December 9, 2012 11:59 AM

I must respond to several of the earlier comments. 95% of every Stones show since 1972 has featured same 18 songs every show on each tour includes the same one liners. for example - in 69 it was just busted a button on my trowsers, keith has been saying its good to be here, its good to be anywhere since the late 90's. "Keeping things Fresh" means adding one or two new songs, as they did for this 50th anniv and the 40th anniv. The last meaningful / impact album was Some Girls. SMU was the last single to be noticed by the general public. I have been listening to and collecting everything i can from them for 30 years, but these are the facts.

Posted by Mick T | December 9, 2012 12:03 PM

No matter what any of these commenters say, the fact remains that The Rolling Stones are the greatest rock and roll band in the history of the universe and the fact that they still go out on the road and do thier thing is unbelievable, and we are lucky to have a chance to see them.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 12:11 PM

10:24

Congratulations. You do a truly convincing impersonation of an idiot

RGD

Posted by RGD | December 9, 2012 12:13 PM

12:11 Church!!!!!

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 12:15 PM

anything they played would have pissed off at least someone, ya just can't please everyone... apparently thats what THEY wanted to play, so suck up people, thats what you got. 'never could have played all their songs, so always gonna be some whiners. just wish i had read some more positive comments about them as i'm one of the poor people who couldn't afford a trip across the states to see them...

Posted by bfp | December 9, 2012 12:31 PM

Hey 11:21, I don't believe you have seen the Stones 100X. If you were such a huge fan you would know that Mick Taylor is not a shadow of his former self, but is playing as well as ever! I saw him during his week long gig at Iridium in May 2012 and he was smoking hot. He would be a "novelty" but wouldn't have made the show better? He made the BAND better. Don't comment on other people not knowing what they're talking about since you are oviously full of shit yourself.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 12:31 PM

^obviously

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 12:34 PM

Scored two floor seats outside the venue for $75 each. Well worth it, even without Mick Taylor, but people paying ten times that were crazy.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 12:48 PM

Rockin daddies, good & plenty

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 12:48 PM

Hi RGD,

Thanks - it's actually pretty easy once you've been on this site for a while.

Posted by 10:24 | December 9, 2012 1:11 PM

It certainly wasn't as epic as Real Estate playing in a hardware store.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 1:17 PM

Hey 1231 have you seen mick Taylor before to make the comparison?

I was at iridium also and that's what was basing it on

He is nowhere near the player he was years ago

And yes I've seen him many times before

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 1:26 PM

Anybody that was actually there that wants to say something useful like, were there people selling out front and/or how much on average?

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 1:37 PM

The guy who thinks Mick Taylor is no good anymore is an idiot!

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 1:44 PM

Ok, so to address some of the criticism that I think was addressed at me. This was the first Stones show I've ever seen live. But I have listened to so many dozens of bootlegs that, at this point, I know the pedigree of their live performances throughout the decades. When I say Keith Richards' fingers don't work anymore, I am saying that what while they were never lightning fast, they are now clumsy and lacking dexterity. You can watch him in the 1989-1995 tours, at which point he was in his late 40's to early 50's, really spilling some great riffs and occasionally unleashing a searing guitar solo. See his performance on youtube of "Sympathy" from 1989 at Atlantic City. Compare that to last night's solo. Now, regarding Mick Taylor, he has definitely lost something. If you are like me and hold the Brussels Affair record in the same esteem as Live at Leeds, you know that that level of blues guitar playing by Taylor is unparalleled. Exquisite only begins to describe some of the most biting passages that carry an incendiary tone that cuts through the riffing by Keith at a time when his riffing really was ferocious. In London last week, Taylor was out of tune at points, playing solos of questionable taste. But you know what, the rhythm section behind him wasn't leading very strongly and seemed to ask him to just improvise for minutes at a time. The second show, 11/29, was very redemptive and showcased the kind blistering performance that could come from future shows and more full band practice. Last night's Rambler performance was all about Jagger. Nothing by Richards or Wood made it memorable.

Now, I think Ronnie Wood is a pretty good lead guitarist. I love his work with the Faces and have seen some great soloing with the Stones. But his guitar tone live leaves you wanting more or, and this is possible, should be louder and placed more in the forefront. Because some of his solos sound muffled.

Taylor's tone is still there, even if the speed is somewhat diminished and his intuition for what notes to play has been dampened by age, drug abuse and the lack of a stable band to grow with.

All that said, I would not have missed last night's show for anything. I had to see the Stones before they stopped touring out of my dutiful fandom for the great band. I just wish I could have seen them earlier in their career.

An aside, Mick is as great as could be expected. He still commands that stage as part singer/part showman. His voice may actually be stronger now and he puts an effort into singing some of the songs that he used to just shout in a cocaine frenzy. If the other Stones had the same dedication to staying fit as does Mick, I think the quality of the shows would representative of such dedication and commitment.

Posted by Danny | December 9, 2012 2:09 PM

Dear 2:09PM,

I thought I wasn't going to have to come out of retirement, but your long ramble ... well, it forced an issue I feel quite dearly about. Here's the thing: Why did you write "40's" and "50's"? Are you giving possession to those numbers? I didn't think so. They should simply be listed as 40s and 50s.

Pay. The. Fuck. Attention. In. Grammar. Class.

Love,

THE Professor.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 2:14 PM

@12:48 - two floor seats for $75 is amazing, nice one. No one I know was able to find tickets for sale outside, and I didn't see anyone selling when I went in. You lucked out.

@12:03 - sure the same 18 songs have been featured since 1972 at every set, would you expect to go to a Stones show and not hear Flash or Sympathy? Come on. And that's why they throw in another 6 random songs. Sure, I'd totally dig if they did an all-country set or an all late 70's early 80's punkier stuff, but no complaints if they don't. And SMU being the last single that the general public cared about? I remember hearing Love Is Strong and Mixed Emotions all too much on MTV and the radio, and that was a good 10 years or so after SMU.

Paid about $500 for my ticket, worth it as a one-time splurge, like a fancy dinner. Can't imagine there's any other band that I'd ever pay that for ever again either, so totally okay with it.

They rocked out better than any other group of 70 year olds I can think of. As shambolic and legendary as 1972? No way, but they were obviously having fun and the songs sounded great. And the theatrics and gimmicks - montage of Stones fans talking, drummers as an intro, choir on You Can't Always Get What You Want all work.

Set list - sure there are always exceptions when you've written as many undeniable classics as the Stones and even your lesser songs are still pretty great, there will always be "should have played this or that". I doubt anyone would expect them to play a Emotional Rescue/Tattoo You set, but I think they spanned the eras pretty well. No Street Fighting Man was the only of the major hits they missed. Sure they could have done Cant You Hear Me Knocking, Moonlight Mile, Monkey Man, Dead Flowers, Rocks Off, Shattered, Bitch, Loving Cup, Under My Thumb, Ruby Tuesday, etc etc, but that list would be endless. I think the real miss here, is during the Mick Taylor shows in London, NOT playing Sway or Time Waits For No One, which to my knowledge was never played live. That would be rad.

No complaints whatsoever about their performance last night.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 2:16 PM

Richard's guitar playing has diminished since he had brain surgery

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 2:24 PM

Mick Taylor is still an amazing guitarist and will always be better than Wood at playing Stones classics.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 2:27 PM

Listen, at the end of the day, I'm glad I saw them. I know that they are a bunch of old guys and that my expectations should have been tempered. I was only trying to give an honest review. Considering the amount of money it costs to see them, I would have liked seeing Mick Taylor. Every Stones fan can list reasons for seeing them live when ticket prices are so exorbitant. One of mine is Taylor. Knowing that he played at the O2 Arena, I was way more inclined to spend the money I did than I would have been if I had the foreknowledge that he would not be in attendance at last night's show.

Posted by Danny | December 9, 2012 2:29 PM

Taylor's "intuition for what notes to play has been dampened..." You, sir, are a Grade-A douche, go back to listening to your bootleg of Start Me Up.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 2:32 PM

Wow, what to even say to the last guy. You clearly didn't even read everything I wrote. It reminds me of a Fox News response to a story: a failure to provide context or accuracy in order to promote some shortsighted agenda.

Posted by Danny | December 9, 2012 2:39 PM

Holy shit you all suck

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 2:58 PM

We are playing talking about Mick Taylor. He played only on a few albums. Granted, they were perhaps their best albums, but the Stones have done so much without him.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 3:05 PM

So are these mick Taylor imbeciles saying the show is worth 800 a ticket if he played but without him it wasn't?

U do realize this is a guy who was In the band for 4-5 years 40 years
Ago right?

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 3:06 PM

I'd rather see DIIV

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 3:26 PM

If you call me an imbecile for being a Mick Taylor fan, then you have never listened to the concerts that came from the MT period. That was the Stones. Now, you are insulting stranger, so very little should be expected of you.

Posted by Danny | December 9, 2012 3:28 PM

Undercover = their best album

Emotional Rescue = second best

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 3:45 PM

As one of the lucky people to score cheap seats outside, I am glad there was no Mick Taylor. Scalper friends say that is why the market crashed right before the show . . .

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 3:48 PM

So expensive, and not ONE song from Bridges to Babylon?!

They should just jump on the bandwagon of album-in-its-entirety tours and do Dirty Work front to back, and then some classics from Voodoo Lounge and Steel Wheels.

Now that would be a Stones show!

(no mention of Undercover....that is actually a really good post-Tattoo You album.)

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 3:51 PM

Not sure if the above poster is being sarcastic, but most Stones fan don't really consider any of their material after Some Girls (some would say Tattoo You, others Goat's Head Soup), to be classic. Most fans, as well as the band itself, consider Dirty Work to be the nadir of their career.

Posted by Danny | December 9, 2012 3:59 PM

By the way, I have a misplaced comma in the above paragraph. If the grammar professor is still here, he may reprimand me for skipping school.

Posted by Danny | December 9, 2012 4:00 PM

"Anyone who spends that kind of money on a 2 hour show is a fool." I could afford to pay $800. I work for a living. I guess that makes me a fool.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 4:04 PM

3:59 baited and hooked by troll.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 4:13 PM

"Mary J. Blige cannot hold a tune." Really? She was awesome in London and I'm not at all a fan of hers.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 4:14 PM

Playing Start Me Up in the middle of the show was a huge fail. After that you could tell the crowd was skeptical but the encore brought them back into it!

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 4:19 PM

At this point the Stones seem like little more than a nostalgia act. No true fan would say their new stuff is better than their old stuff, but it would have been nice to hear one or two from Brirdges to Babs.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 4:25 PM

Mick Taylor's best playing is on Dylan's "Real Live" from 1985, which is also Dylan's best album.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 4:29 PM

No Dylan's best album by a long shot, probably not top 5.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 4:33 PM

Awful venue. I guess that is what you get from naming your basketball dome after one of the stupidest basketball players/commentators in history. Why name the Nets stadium after someone who played most of his career 60 miles away>

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 4:40 PM


If you ONLY love mick taylor era stones then don't call yourself a Stones fan. If you say the Stones have done nothing relevant since Some Girls, then you arent a Stones fan. Youre a fan of a few records, albeit great, by the Stones. Thats all.

If youre a true Stones fan you know and enjoy ALL era Stones music, live and studio. Maybe there are songs you love, maybe there are songs you hate, but youre not some nostalgic goon pining for a cameo appearance from a fat bloated former band member that happened to be in the band when the Stones wrote many of their best songs and recorded some of their best music, and then LEFT.

So real Stones fan, go listen to Voodoo Lounge and then listen to A Bigger Bang, and talk about how great Doom and Gloom sounds.

And then shell out 1000$ to see how a real rock band does it.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 4:40 PM

4:40 u r delusional. sorry 2 b the 1 2 break the bad news 2 u.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 4:52 PM

4:52 is lazy.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 4:57 PM

anon 3:59 There are some great tunes on Emotional Rescue, Tatoo You and Undercover. And yes, Dirty Work was a low point.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 5:05 PM

No, a fan should always be critical. The Stones are not our parents and we are not their sons. Unconditional love is reserved for these relationships only - and even then, not always.

If you're a fan of every piece of work put out by a band, despite changes in personnel, recording techniques, musical styles and a host of other variables, you're some obsequious sycophant.

The truth of the matter is that the quality of the music of the Stones is variable, as is the work of all artists whose careers span numerous decades.

The best of their work came when Mick Taylor was in the band. And certainly, the best live music was recorded during the early 70's when he catapulted their sound into an otherworldly sphere.

Posted by Danny | December 9, 2012 5:15 PM

8==============D

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 5:21 PM

Goats Head Soup was before Some Girls by the way. Don't forge, Black and Blue has some great moments despite having two tunes that are nearly identical.

Ok my two cents (or is it cent's...no its cents), I've seen them on every tour since '81 and the debate has always been the same, they are, washed up, last tour, irrelevant, money grab, Keith will die soon, etc. Yet, they carry on and on Saturday night, I'll be in my seat, beers in hand, a few $50 t shirts with me and a big ol'smile on my face because the Stones are the best. Always have been, always will be. Funny how the debate continues concerning the Stones from their earliest days, the bad boys right? The Beatles were the good guys? It was all part of the plan and now the brand and we are still suckered right into it.

I will rock The Rock on Saturday night.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 5:44 PM

Professor at 2:14

You allow a preposition (about) to dangle.

You use contractions (didn't, wasn't).

You are a poseur. Go back to the midwest.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 5:54 PM

And enjoy it, too. Still a blast. But for the money I spent, and I'm not rich like most of the fans at these overpriced shows, I wanted to see Taylor because he was there at the O2. If he hadn't been playing, I wouldn't have had the expectation and wouldn't have shelled out so much money.

Still a fun act to see live because of the sheer abundance of great music and memories they've given to rock and roll.

Posted by Danny | December 9, 2012 5:56 PM

saturday night 3am. a limo pulls up to mamouns in the village. who jumps out? mick jagger and some hot babe. they wait in line, get some hummus and pita triangles and carry the goods back to the limo. the limo speeds off into the night.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 6:16 PM

4:52 Grow up!

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 6:19 PM

The Stones are like most huge bands that go on long hiatuses - you really want to see them after they've already played a bunch of gigs, not at the beginning of tours. Bands like Bruce and U2 are way better months after they go out on tour. The Stones will most likely be back next year and will do better shows with hopefully cheaper tix.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 6:30 PM

"So real Stones fan, go listen to Voodoo Lounge and then listen to A Bigger Bang, and talk about how great Doom and Gloom sounds." Why bother? They have plenty of great stuff but none of it is on those albums. Doom And Gloom is another retread.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 6:37 PM

I'll only go to the next Stones show if they play an extended version of Cocksucker Blues.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 7:45 PM

nobody got a floor seat for $75 outside the venue I can assure you. TIckets outside were $500- well over a grand.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 7:48 PM

Was disappointed that they didn't encore with Harlem Shuffle

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 8:18 PM

Me and my friend got a pair in the 100s for $160 by waiting a while. Got to our seats about half-way through Paint it Black.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 8:43 PM

Beach Boys 50th > Stones 50th.

Stones are a joke.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 8:50 PM

Beach Boys 50th > Stones 50th?

You are a joke. I'd rather see the worst Stones show than the best Beach Boys show!

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 8:55 PM

how could fixed income retirees afford those ticket prices? they'd have to forgo diapers for a year. and that denture glue. and those blue pills that make their pee-pees hard. and all for a show in whih 'emotional rescue' wasn't performed. harrumph.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 8:56 PM

I like girls with size 34B breasts.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 9:08 PM

any slutty broads in the nosebleeder seats?

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 9:12 PM

Anyone want to speculate how much Mick and Keith netted from this one gig? Million each?

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 9:14 PM

of course 3:59 was being sarcastic....playing Dirty Work in its entirety? clear giveaway.

those albums, starting with Dirty Work up to now (Undercover IS very good! Much like IOR&R and GHS and B&B and EmRes are very good albums, classics on each) are mostly not bad records at all.
What they have going against them us that they are far less than anything that came before them. But from 86 to 05 they nonetheless put out some decent music if you leave out the comparisons. Studio-wise, while they were no longer "the Rolling Stones - greatest rock and roll band in the world", they remained a damn good rock and roll band.
Is Voodoo Lounge better than the Black Crows? Counting Crows?
Any other Crow? Yes it is.
Was Steel Wheels better than the Dave Matthews Band? Sure.
Is A Bigger Bang better than Linkin Park? etc......

Interestingly, while most people feel DW is the nadir, Robert Christgau thinks it is the greatest latter day Stones album.
Well, even that album has some good songs - One Hit, Hold Back.

Was this too serious a posting?

sorry....Hummus, Idiot, Old as Fuck, etc.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 9:20 PM

god u old basterds. r u effing kidding w/ this inconsequential prattle?

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 9:39 PM

1:17 fucking hillarious

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 9:47 PM

Robert Christgau has never has been right all or even most of the time. Dirty Work was absolutely their worst lp. Having Steve Lillywhite produce was a big mistake. Jagger and Watts were barely involved. Even the album cover is lame!

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 10:07 PM

4:04 - Congratulations for being able to afford an 800 dollar ticket. I work for a living too. Bur i still wont be pissing away 800 bucks to be entertained for 2 hours. I can think of many other ways to spend that kind of money that don't involve watching a bunch of old farts way past their expiration date.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 10:35 PM

DW is indeed the weakest album, and the cover photo is ridiculous (but Keith still looks cool, even with the stupid red clothes on the ugly green couch.) But is it actually a bad album? Flat out bad?
mixed bag.

Posted by Anonymous | December 9, 2012 11:38 PM

The best thing about DW is on the cover it looks as if Keith is kneeing Mick in the nuts.

Posted by Anonymous | December 10, 2012 8:21 AM

why don't they play "can't you hear me knockin'" - that's their best song by far

Posted by Anonymous | December 10, 2012 8:42 AM

NOTHING off of a BIGGER BANG! RIP OFF!

Posted by Anonymous | December 10, 2012 9:48 AM

Why would I want to spend money on this crap?

Posted by Anonymous | December 10, 2012 9:48 AM

Those prices are some rough justice!

Posted by Anonymous | December 10, 2012 12:02 PM

stopped seeing the stones in the early 80's. Same goes for all the old classic rock bands they were great in their prime and prefer to remember them that way. Plus too many great bands to see let alone at smaller venues.

for the jackass that saw them a 100X's and then states Their Satanic Majesties Request as the worse album in the early years. wrong!

If a band wnts to keep playing at least drop the old hits you been playing over and over again. Just play new stuff (ha that would really piss people off)


Posted by Anonymous | December 10, 2012 4:48 PM

the latter albums jokes are getting a bit long in the tooth....

(yes, ok, like the stones.)

Posted by Anonymous | December 10, 2012 4:49 PM

What time did they take the stage in Brooklyn? Anyword of special guests Thursday night in Newark?

Posted by Sills | December 11, 2012 1:27 AM

nice of them to play for the hurricane benefit.

Posted by catering winnipeg | July 1, 2013 4:38 PM

Leave a Comment