The Stones, retire or re-invent themselves?


At least in some circles, and from some people it is popular to bash the Stones as being too old, or irrelevant.

I personally believe they still put on one of the best shows out there. It is though, the source of much of the criticism, and a question of how long Mick can prance about the stage?

However, I do agree that their best albums were made long ago, maybe back to "Some Girls" and before.

My solution to the Stones dilemma, if indeed they have one, is too become at least partially acoustic, and make country-blues albums.

I envision an album of songs along the lines of "Sweet Virginia", "No Expectations", "Far Away Eyes", "Country Honk", "Salt of the Earth", & "Sweet Black Angel", for example. Hey, they might even bring back Mick Taylor for some sweet licks on the slide, and Mick blowing on the harp.

The show would be in smaller venues which would accommadate a semi-acoustic sound.

Am I on to something, or should aging rockers from the 60's and 70's call it a day?
wildoats
The Stones are over with. I'd rather see them lip-synching to their old music than look at their shameless rip-off of a show they perform currently. Thak God Brian Jones isn't around to see this. Bill Wyman knew when it was time . Mick and Keith don't. Unfortunately neither does the oft easily duped public that buys into these retread acts over and over again. P.T. Barnum sure hit the nail on the head.
Retire! At once! It's been said many times before: the Stones haven't put out anything really worthwhile since Some Girls, about a quarter of a century ago.
Seeing the Stones Live is probably like seeing the 4,237th performance of Cats by the same cast. There is absolutely nothing left. I think the only reason people go is because they think it's cool because the tickets are hard to get.
Kind of like some NFL quaterbacks that didnt know when to quit ,seems like everyone knew it but them,kind of sad