Mick Jagger does his thing and moves on. Brown and Redding do it, run off the stage, then come back and do it again, run off the stage again, come back again..... They are sort of like a woman trying to be seductive who doesn’t quite have what it takes to pull it off. As for Hendrix, I agree with Bill Graham, who told him he forgot to play. Getting back to the subject, before we were so rudely interrupted by the PC sheep(no offence to shepherds and/or their herds), If James Brown was so great, why didn’t he become the concert draw that the Stones did? And the audience seems to be quite taken by the Stones when they do follow Brown on the T.A.M.I. show. I don't see where they had anything to worry about. I wouldn't place too much importance on the audience for the T.A.M.I. show as that was a time when phony hysteria was all the rage a concerts. As for being "possibly racist"…..you said it, not me......without further explanation of this possibility I can only guess where you're coming from. Does anybody think this could also be possibly sexist? And, while you're getting yer ya yas out for the lynching, don't forget about the specieist comment I made about the sheep. That's sure to get me run in on a hate crime charge. I'm not sure which one gets the Everybody Got To Go! award for this one.......is it Strider or zepofile?

That's boring. James Brown is boring. He along with Otis Redding and Jimi Hendrix he would do something that would get a response from the audience and then would do it over and over.

On that subject, the old brag about Led Zeppelin out selling The Beatles in concert doesn't mean much when you consider that The Beatles weren't touring when Led Zeppelin toured. Now If we could magically bring back both bands, who would win?

When I tryed it here in the USA it says: "Due to copyright reasons this video program is available for download by people located in Australia only. If you are not located in Australia, you are not authorised to view this video. If you ARE located in Australia and feel an error has been made we would appreciate your help with improving this service. Please provide your details to help us resolve the problem."

Oh, she's in the music business? a

Part of the fun of discussing music, especially rock 'n' roll, is to use sarcasm. Anyone who tries to convey they don't use equally strong words such as "that thing", when giving thier opinion of music they don't care for, is a lier. I'm not so sure if the Stones are showing respect for those other musicians they have sitting in with them or if they're more so expoiting them out of greed. But that's another dicussion.

Evidently you.

I got pulled over by the PC police. Maybe I should have called her a "squermin' dog" who's having her day. Ah, the things some people find to be offended by.

Calling Lady Gaga "thing" highly insulting and vulgar? This is a rock 'n' roll site isn't it? This takes me back to the days when women got up in arms over the words to "Under My Thumb".

At least Led Zeppelin didn't have guest artist sitting in on songs. The Stones seem to have a need for the special guest BS. I draw the line at Lady Gaga sitting in on "Gimme Shelter" as that's my favorite song to hear the Stones do live and when you have that thing singing on it you've done muddied up my creek.

Question: What do Dead Heads say when they run out of dope? Answer: This band stinks!

They really need to work on the segues between the different parts of the song on "Midnight Rambler". It is getting worse with each tour. And Mick, you need to relearn the words and put a little more excitement into that last verse.

They're in need of a competent everything. They don't seem to have a good sense of who they are and what they can or have done well.

------

I was there in 2005. It was a very well up-kept black top race track and still in use.

I'd say the Stones, The Who, and Led Zep were the top live bands who made classic rock classic rock. Without those guys this type of music would be in danger of just being "listening to the oldies". The Who, in later years, also had the extra hired help such as the horn players who sounded real good when they weren't playing. So in that respect Led Zeppelin gets extra credit for just using the original lineup, save for Jason Bonham. I was trying to be objective as I think all three of these bands have similar problems brought on by time. The Stones are the greediest followed by The Who. I haven't seen any over priced Celebration Day sets (I got my Deluxe Blu-Ray set for $26.99) so Led Zeppelin should be commended for that. As for any of these bands being on top of their game in the last few years......I'd say the Stones are, but that game is making every move some kind of "big deal" and not so much the music. I think Robert Plant's singing is way better on Live From The Artist's Den than on Celebration Day and the Band Of Joy also does a much more exciting version of "Ramble On".

After watching Celebration Day I'm sorry to say both Led Zeppelin and the Rolling Stones have much in common when it comes to performing in their senior years. One main difference though is the Stones have extra musicians hired to help the songs stand up. Much of the time Jimmy Page's skills seem to be on the same level as Keith Richards' though many times more on the Ron Wood level. Ouch! One thing that Mick Jagger does when singing some songs is to put the same emphasis on the last verse, such as “Midnight Rambler” or “She Was Hot”, as he does on the first verses. This makes it sound like he's just laboring though the song. Robert Plant does the same thing on some of the songs on Celebration Day. The Stones seem to dress up for stage where the Zeppeln guys clothes seemed not so much in bad taste but rather tasteless. I mean Plant's pants and a shirt look like some things that just happened to be lying around the house.

I call that the sheep factor. "Everybody got to go!"

The Super Deluxe versions of both Exile and Some Girls sold for, what was it, a couple hundred bucks and contained some little thing on disc that you couldn't get in the two disc expanded versions.....that is if you're just interested in just the music and video itself and not the pictures, books or whatever. The same goes for the soon to be released Charlie is my Darling Super Deluxe set. Just to get the blu-ray and the live material on the cds you also have to buy the dvd and vinyl and so on. So, unless the price comes down to about 40 bucks, I'm just getting the blu-ray and leaving it at that.

"Doom and Gloom" sums up the current state of the Rolling Stones. The good news is I'll be saving money, hand over fist, when the Stones roll out their 50th anniversary forced collectors items as I won't be buying a three or four cd set just to get two songs of the caliber of "Doom and Gloom". I used to buy all the Stones music and video releases, but back when I passed on the Super Deluxe version on Exile On Main Street and then again on that (1971-2006) CD singles set, it makes it that much easier not to buy the next over priced-over hyped sales gimmick. That answers that musical question....."can you break the spell?".

I'll wait for the DVD/Blu-ray release.

I've always thought that the Faces had a lighter sound than the Stones. The Stones really should have gone with an unknown to replace Mick Taylor. Now Taylor is holding all the aces. He should be proud.

Unbeknownst to anyone at the time, when Mick Taylor left the Stones he took their credibility with him. Metaphorically speaking, if rock 'n' roll was whiskey the current Rolling Stones would be selling booze of the watered down variety and Ron Wood's inability to play this stuff is only part of the problem. The only good thing I can say about Woody off hand is, for a Strat player he does have nice tone.

I can play "Jumpin' Jack Flash" better than Ron Wood.

Seeing what songs these die-hard Zeppelin fans don't like is a hoot! And to think how some get worked up about what Keith Richards says about the band.