Tell Me :
Talk
Nothing wrong for me, although I would prefer them playing in my backyard.
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
I agree with most of your usual posts, Doxa, but I do think some songs just don't "work" in a stadium context and are better suited to smaller, more personal venues.
Intimate or rare songs just get lost in a stadium and they need to resort to the crowd-pleasing hits to make an impact on big audiences who wouldn't appreciate -and would probably get bored by- certain picks that would make us hardcore fans quivering wrecks.
These songs worked OK pre-2002 (or, in the US, the 'No Security' tour in '99) when Stones concerts were primarily made up of Stones fans and not the sort of people winter brilliantly describes above. Check the setlists from that era. The Stones had no reservations about playing new songs or taking ambitious dips into their back catalogue despite the fact that they were playing to huge crowds in football stadiums.
Unfortunately, the audience has changed in the last few years as the band and Cohl have blatantly targeted a different demographic. As a result, the band has felt the need to lower themselves to pandering to them. So you get a show from a cautious band unwilling to take too many chances musically.
The situation you describe (and its not an inaccurate one) is of the band's own making. By whoring themselves so shamelessly they've created the monster they deserved - an audience of non-fans who dont and wont even buy their records.
Probably because you're so caught up in stadium shows being "the best" when in fact they are not. Yeah yeah yeah whatever it can be a good show and it "looks" great because everything is big and loud but it's not "great".
Compared to an arena? No.
Compared to a club? Hell no.
For some it's better than nothing. For others, not going is better. If it's all there is and you want to see 'em then it is what it is.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
colonial
()
Date: September 4, 2010 10:58
Whats so wrong with The Rolling Stones having concerts at Stadiums.I don't know how many times i've heard fans say they just dont like them.When ya' got 30,000 people wanting to go to a Stones concert its only common sense to have them in a Stadium.Am I just one of a few here that actually like them.I dont know what all the fuss is about...
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
SwayStones
()
Date: September 4, 2010 11:13
Because some of us will want to see if the Stones still can be good on a small venue ,I guess.
I am a Frenchie ,as Mick affectionately called them in the Old Grey Whistle Test in 1977 .
I am a Frenchie ,as Mick affectionately called them in the Old Grey Whistle Test in 1977 .
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: September 4, 2010 11:47
Actually I'm not against stadiums per se but it looks like that the size of the audience seems to gain and control the policy of the nature of the performance (and set list)... the show is more spectacle - the visuality, fireworks, lights and all, are more important than the musical substance. The set lists are safe and sure hot rocks/forty licks kind of deals. There are even claims that certain "obscure" songs do not "work" in stadiums, but need smaller context, etc. Bullshit.
I think the claim that certain songs doesn't work in the stadium-context actually tries to say that in a stadium they need to concentrate to theatrics, fooling around, Vegas Show-ness to "entertain" the crowd. This means that they can't put the energy to actual music.
It shouldn't need to be so. In 1978 - and to an extent 1981/82 - the band show that it can challenge the audience and rock hard in a stadium without the stadium theatrics. Seemingly they don't believe any longer to the power of their own musicianship and music to think it is to be enough to "win" the audience.
I think there was nothing wrong with the gigs getting bigger - what happened, say, from 1969 to 1982, was quite natural development. But after 1989, it looks like that the stadium show, as a concept of its own, have started to control the performance and its limits; it's living like a life of its own. And The Stones somehow stuck into it, and sound like being forced to do the shows and set lists like they do. It is musically sad that seemingly anyone involved seem to have accepted this supposed necessary state of affairs. I think that's bull shit. There is always a chance to do things differently, if there is a will or artistic braveness and ambitousness.
- Doxa
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-04 12:02 by Doxa.
I think the claim that certain songs doesn't work in the stadium-context actually tries to say that in a stadium they need to concentrate to theatrics, fooling around, Vegas Show-ness to "entertain" the crowd. This means that they can't put the energy to actual music.
It shouldn't need to be so. In 1978 - and to an extent 1981/82 - the band show that it can challenge the audience and rock hard in a stadium without the stadium theatrics. Seemingly they don't believe any longer to the power of their own musicianship and music to think it is to be enough to "win" the audience.
I think there was nothing wrong with the gigs getting bigger - what happened, say, from 1969 to 1982, was quite natural development. But after 1989, it looks like that the stadium show, as a concept of its own, have started to control the performance and its limits; it's living like a life of its own. And The Stones somehow stuck into it, and sound like being forced to do the shows and set lists like they do. It is musically sad that seemingly anyone involved seem to have accepted this supposed necessary state of affairs. I think that's bull shit. There is always a chance to do things differently, if there is a will or artistic braveness and ambitousness.
- Doxa
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-04 12:02 by Doxa.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
Rolling Hansie
()
Date: September 4, 2010 12:29
Quote
colonial
Whats so wrong with The Rolling Stones having concerts at Stadiums.
Nothing wrong for me, although I would prefer them playing in my backyard.
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
kish_stoned
()
Date: September 4, 2010 12:36
stones have the best wherever they play, i have seen them in clubs,arena and stadiums,after all its only rock-roll but we like it.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
slew
()
Date: September 4, 2010 16:33
I don't mind the stadiums but I like to see the band stripped down without all of the hoopla. I saw the boys in 1981 (not the best show I've seen) and it was not until 1999 that they again did arenas with any consistency I loved the No Security tour especially after they got rid of the "cage" glad it was gone by Boston. I like Licks they played three types of venues with great results and I'd like them to do it again! Unless you pay the top dollar and get close its very impersonal its hard to get into the show from the third deck in Gilette Stadium!
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
marvpeck
()
Date: September 4, 2010 17:10
I saw the No Security tour in Charlotte.
It was much better than Voodoo lounge in Atlanta.
I agree stadium shows have too much glam and not enough music
Marv Peck
Y'all remember that rubber legged boy
It was much better than Voodoo lounge in Atlanta.
I agree stadium shows have too much glam and not enough music
Marv Peck
Y'all remember that rubber legged boy
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: September 4, 2010 19:33
<I don't mind the stadiums but I like to see the band stripped down without all of the hoopla.>
Like Julliard?
Something in the middle would be fine, I think...
Like Julliard?
Something in the middle would be fine, I think...
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
pmk251
()
Date: September 4, 2010 19:54
Doxa's post is spot on. Not much to add. It's the tail wagging the dog, the harsh price of "success."
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
sjs12
()
Date: September 4, 2010 20:03
There's nothing wrong with stadium shows, except sometimes the set list is played safer. I love seeing them in a huge venue.
The thing I hate most of all is having seating on the pitch which, for some reason, they've instisted on doing for the last few tours in the UK.
The thing I hate most of all is having seating on the pitch which, for some reason, they've instisted on doing for the last few tours in the UK.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
melillo
()
Date: September 4, 2010 20:44
I have always loved the stadium shows, the circus atmosphere is fun
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
winter
()
Date: September 4, 2010 20:47
Nothing is "wrong" with Stones Concerts at Stadiums, per se. It's the declining % of the Stones' stadium audience (at least in the US) that is 'bohemian'?, cool?, rock'n'roll lifers, blue collar and lower middle class income. That's what happens when half of the tickets cost $175-$400, the show/band is a token must-see legend, the core audience is 40-50 y.o. and corporations buy blocks of seats as a tax write off. No pot, no smoking cigs, "sit down", no dancing, "I'm an overweight, stodgy Republican whose lifestyle/beleifs are the antithesis to the spirit of rock and roll, spilling over into your seat; hey I recognize this one; isn't this one Satisfaction, -I mean Jumping Jack Flash"? That's obviously a subjective over-generalization, but I think you might get the gist of what I'm trying to describe. After the '94 tour, the atmosphere/audience at a Stones stadium show isn't fun or rock'n'roll anymore. Maybe, hopefully, it's very different in the rest of the world. The arena shows I attended were still mostly cool, perhaps less diluted by those casual rock fans who show up at stadiums. But even then, the Rotterdam Ahoy 2003 audience was still way cooler than the last 3 US shows I saw, and that ability to feel more connected to the audience is a big part of enjoying the show for me.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
tomcat2006
()
Date: September 4, 2010 21:38
Quote
Doxa
Actually I'm not against stadiums per se but it looks like that the size of the audience seems to gain and control the policy of the nature of the performance (and set list)... the show is more spectacle - the visuality, fireworks, lights and all, are more important than the musical substance. The set lists are safe and sure hot rocks/forty licks kind of deals. There are even claims that certain "obscure" songs do not "work" in stadiums, but need smaller context, etc. Bullshit.
I think the claim that certain songs doesn't work in the stadium-context actually tries to say that in a stadium they need to concentrate to theatrics, fooling around, Vegas Show-ness to "entertain" the crowd. This means that they can't put the energy to actual music.
It shouldn't need to be so. In 1978 - and to an extent 1981/82 - the band show that it can challenge the audience and rock hard in a stadium without the stadium theatrics. Seemingly they don't believe any longer to the power of their own musicianship and music to think it is to be enough to "win" the audience.
I think there was nothing wrong with the gigs getting bigger - what happened, say, from 1969 to 1982, was quite natural development. But after 1989, it looks like that the stadium show, as a concept of its own, have started to control the performance and its limits; it's living like a life of its own. And The Stones somehow stuck into it, and sound like being forced to do the shows and set lists like they do. It is musically sad that seemingly anyone involved seem to have accepted this supposed necessary state of affairs. I think that's bull shit. There is always a chance to do things differently, if there is a will or artistic braveness and ambitousness.
- Doxa
I agree with most of your usual posts, Doxa, but I do think some songs just don't "work" in a stadium context and are better suited to smaller, more personal venues.
Intimate or rare songs just get lost in a stadium and they need to resort to the crowd-pleasing hits to make an impact on big audiences who wouldn't appreciate -and would probably get bored by- certain picks that would make us hardcore fans quivering wrecks.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
stateofshock
()
Date: September 4, 2010 21:52
they got their start in clubs, I want to see them in a club.
***********************************************************
"What I'm doing is a sexual thing. I dance and all dancing is a replacement for sex". - Mick Jagger
***********************************************************
"What I'm doing is a sexual thing. I dance and all dancing is a replacement for sex". - Mick Jagger
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
StratoGR
()
Date: September 4, 2010 22:26
I was in a u2 concert last night which is not even in my top 10 artists.However it was nearly 80000 people and all that energy from the crowd is awesome.I wish I could see them both in club and stadium shows again.
U2 last night were great the show fantastic but I am thinking we are so lucky we've got stones still around even if they are sloppier as they get older etc.
U2 last night were great the show fantastic but I am thinking we are so lucky we've got stones still around even if they are sloppier as they get older etc.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: September 4, 2010 22:27
Quote
tomcat2006
Intimate or rare songs just get lost in a stadium and they need to resort to the crowd-pleasing hits to make an impact on big audiences who wouldn't appreciate -and would probably get bored by- certain picks that would make us hardcore fans quivering wrecks.
These songs worked OK pre-2002 (or, in the US, the 'No Security' tour in '99) when Stones concerts were primarily made up of Stones fans and not the sort of people winter brilliantly describes above. Check the setlists from that era. The Stones had no reservations about playing new songs or taking ambitious dips into their back catalogue despite the fact that they were playing to huge crowds in football stadiums.
Unfortunately, the audience has changed in the last few years as the band and Cohl have blatantly targeted a different demographic. As a result, the band has felt the need to lower themselves to pandering to them. So you get a show from a cautious band unwilling to take too many chances musically.
The situation you describe (and its not an inaccurate one) is of the band's own making. By whoring themselves so shamelessly they've created the monster they deserved - an audience of non-fans who dont and wont even buy their records.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
The Sicilian
()
Date: September 4, 2010 22:45
Quote
Bill Wyman
Did you feel when you left the band two years later; that its best music was in the past?
I think the best music was done between ’68 and ’72. Never mind about when I left in ’92.
When was the last time you saw the Stones in concert?
It was at London’s O2 Arena in 2007 or 2008. I don’t hear the Stones the same way now as when I was in the band, because in those days, it was all sort of dangerous and loose. Now, it’s like a machine. It’s like they’re playing to click tracks, which we never did. The music has become more machine-like than I would like, and that’s not the way it was when I was with them.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
JumpingKentFlash
()
Date: September 5, 2010 01:20
I don't really buy the whole "expensive ticket equals non-Stones fan crowd". It may very well be true that the audience at the shows mostly consist of non-fans, but I don't think that's the reason to the safe setlists of the last tour (Note that it was only the last tour. A few too many people here talk like it's been going on since 1989). A person who is not a fan and who goes to a Stones concert wouldn't know the hits would he? And if he actually did know the 7-8 usual songs, he's hardly likely to call up all of his banker friends and tell them not to go, because of the lack of hits. Most likely he wouldn't care a whole lot what they play. Look at it this way: If these people really have that much disposable income, and only buy a ticket to be able to say that they were there, or whatever reason they might have, they'd probably take whatever The Stones threw at them. The reason they go is as much the spectacle and the chance to say that they've seen The Stones, than it is the music. So I don't think they're the reason for safe setlists. What is the reason, I don't know. But not expensive tickets.
JumpingKentFlash
JumpingKentFlash
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: September 5, 2010 01:36
Winter 
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: September 5, 2010 01:39
Kent, I think its a case more that the Stones IMAGINE these people will only 'react' to the songs they know - and so the show is tailored accordingly. Jagger is on record as being concerned at a 'non reaction' to material that deviates from the 'greatest hits' formula, and Leavell has also commented on his frustration in recent years of pitching song selections at Jagger only to have them shot down because of his insistence on playing no more than about one ballad per show or singing any 'non warhorse' material from the Brian Jones era.
If anything, its a serious lack of self belief in their own ability to work a crowd (which is a remarkable about turn for a man of Jagger's undisputed and continuing talent as a performer) - and also in the greatness of their back catalogue. Its also a bit of a nonsense to assume that people who go to a concert can't enjoy a song that they're not that familiar with.
You make a good point that this mentality was much more pronounced on the last tour - although the stadium shows on the Licks tour (when they did the 'small, medium and large' shows in one city) was a sign of what was to come.
>A person who is not a fan and who goes to a Stones concert wouldn't know the hits would he?
Well, of course he would. I'd imagine most people with only the most basic grasp of the Rolling Stones would be familiar with JJF, Honky Tonk Women, Brown Sugar, Satisfaction, Start Me Up, Miss You and at least a couple of others...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-05 01:41 by Gazza.
If anything, its a serious lack of self belief in their own ability to work a crowd (which is a remarkable about turn for a man of Jagger's undisputed and continuing talent as a performer) - and also in the greatness of their back catalogue. Its also a bit of a nonsense to assume that people who go to a concert can't enjoy a song that they're not that familiar with.
You make a good point that this mentality was much more pronounced on the last tour - although the stadium shows on the Licks tour (when they did the 'small, medium and large' shows in one city) was a sign of what was to come.
>A person who is not a fan and who goes to a Stones concert wouldn't know the hits would he?
Well, of course he would. I'd imagine most people with only the most basic grasp of the Rolling Stones would be familiar with JJF, Honky Tonk Women, Brown Sugar, Satisfaction, Start Me Up, Miss You and at least a couple of others...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-05 01:41 by Gazza.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
skipstone
()
Date: September 5, 2010 03:35
Quote
colonial
Whats so wrong with The Rolling Stones having concerts at Stadiums.I don't know how many times i've heard fans say they just dont like them.When ya' got 30,000 people wanting to go to a Stones concert its only common sense to have them in a Stadium.Am I just one of a few here that actually like them.I dont know what all the fuss is about...
Probably because you're so caught up in stadium shows being "the best" when in fact they are not. Yeah yeah yeah whatever it can be a good show and it "looks" great because everything is big and loud but it's not "great".
Compared to an arena? No.
Compared to a club? Hell no.
For some it's better than nothing. For others, not going is better. If it's all there is and you want to see 'em then it is what it is.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
JumpingKentFlash
()
Date: September 5, 2010 03:43
Well Skippy. It all depends on where you're standing. If you're right up front and center, it might as well be a club. I'm certainly not gonna turn around and look the other way.
JumpingKentFlash
JumpingKentFlash
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
skipstone
()
Date: September 5, 2010 03:53
Ah ha. But does it sound good?
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
JumpingKentFlash
()
Date: September 5, 2010 04:03
1.- Don't expect a concert to sound like your living room hi-fi.
2.- Every time I've been all the way up front, I've been more than happy with the sound.
JumpingKentFlash
2.- Every time I've been all the way up front, I've been more than happy with the sound.
JumpingKentFlash
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
skipstone
()
Date: September 5, 2010 04:06
I've seen the Stones three times in US football stadiums - one outdoor, the other two in domes. For two of them I was quite a ways away and although I could hear OK and see OK it was just...OK.
The first time I saw them I was somewhat close and it sounded really good. So distance certainly comes into play with the stadium shows.
The first time I saw them I was somewhat close and it sounded really good. So distance certainly comes into play with the stadium shows.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
flilflam
()
Date: September 5, 2010 05:11
I vowed to never see A Stones concert again, after we had to sit in cold, pouring rain for about three hours at Churchill Downs in Louisville, Kentucky in 2006. The Stones played well as usual, but the rain part of it was very uncomfortable. I will never do that again.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
Justin
()
Date: September 5, 2010 06:54
Hey I don't mind where they play...it's just what they play. And we tend to get the most non-adventurous set lists at stadium shows. Mick is so concerned with the new fans in the audience--what about the hardcore fans? How about making the show (or tour) worthwhile for us too?
I wish they'd put some warhorses on the shelf for a while...actually make it a treat to hear it when they do pull it out. I mean...every damn show we know we can expect: JJF, Tumblin, HTW, Brown Sugar, Satisfaction and Start Me Up. Do audiences REALLY need Start Me Up? It's a great track but you really get the idea after the first 90 seconds. As a concert goer---you can predict the last block of songs to the T. It doesn't help that there really isn't anything "new" in how they're playing these songs either. Show me JJF from the Licks tour or ABB tour...I wouldn't be able to notice the difference. The best songs are the ones where you can tell what tour it's from...that's when you know they're still adding something to the song. Now, the songs are beyond regurgitation.
So, I would still be faced with these issues even if they played an arena or a club show. But something magical does happen to the band when you stick them on a small stage where they can actually FEEL the music.
I wish they'd put some warhorses on the shelf for a while...actually make it a treat to hear it when they do pull it out. I mean...every damn show we know we can expect: JJF, Tumblin, HTW, Brown Sugar, Satisfaction and Start Me Up. Do audiences REALLY need Start Me Up? It's a great track but you really get the idea after the first 90 seconds. As a concert goer---you can predict the last block of songs to the T. It doesn't help that there really isn't anything "new" in how they're playing these songs either. Show me JJF from the Licks tour or ABB tour...I wouldn't be able to notice the difference. The best songs are the ones where you can tell what tour it's from...that's when you know they're still adding something to the song. Now, the songs are beyond regurgitation.
So, I would still be faced with these issues even if they played an arena or a club show. But something magical does happen to the band when you stick them on a small stage where they can actually FEEL the music.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
slewan
()
Date: September 5, 2010 09:56
the general problem with very large venues, especially open air venues is that you have to give people who stand some 100 meters or more away from stage the impression of being part of the whole thing. Therefore you need video screens, fire forks, posing, a lot of songs everybody knows etc etc. All that forces you into a rigid scheme. There's no possibility to change the set list during a show or for an extra encore (for example). And if you take a look at the cue sheets even the tempo of the songs is fixed. Not to mention the running time of any individual song - there's no way to play some bars more or less - because the integrated show on the video screen forces you to play the songs in exact the same way as always.
All in all: stadium concerts are not about music. They are just entertainment
All in all: stadium concerts are not about music. They are just entertainment
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: September 5, 2010 10:26
I need to admit have I have sometimes difficulties to see the differences in "nuances" happened since 1989 but both Gazza and Kent are absolutely spot on that there had been some importantat alterations. As good idea as the LICKS underwear tour sounded at the time, in a long run it was a Pyrrho's win: there was cemented the idea what are the differences - as far as the performances go - between a stadium, arena and a club show. Before that I don't think they really thought the venue really to make such a big difference (the small cub gigs were just unoccasional specialities they treated with different attitude altogether). (Of course, you couldn't still compare, say VOODOO LOUNGE tour to 1978 or 1981 tour in their way to challenge audience, and play the latest album but that's relative). But ABB tour consisted solely of stadiums so it was the LICKS stadium show receipt applied there, and that's it. Seemingly, the latest album (the tour was name after) consisted too "obscure" material to play...
Okay, I need point out that NO SECURITY tour was the mark to make a difference between a stadium anda an arena, and to the idea that arena (smaller) crowds can be treated with more daring material - that was applied to LICKS TOUR. Anyway, NO SECURITY was infamous for its relatively expensive tickets that were "justified" with smaller venues and more extraordinary show but the band didn't have difficulties to apply the ticket price policy to their following stadium gigs as well...
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-05 10:28 by Doxa.
Okay, I need point out that NO SECURITY tour was the mark to make a difference between a stadium anda an arena, and to the idea that arena (smaller) crowds can be treated with more daring material - that was applied to LICKS TOUR. Anyway, NO SECURITY was infamous for its relatively expensive tickets that were "justified" with smaller venues and more extraordinary show but the band didn't have difficulties to apply the ticket price policy to their following stadium gigs as well...
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2010-09-05 10:28 by Doxa.
Re: Whats so wrong with Stones Concerts at Stadiums
Posted by:
skipstone
()
Date: September 5, 2010 10:53
Even Keith said about the No Security tour that he wouldn't pay that much to see the Stones!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
alexander paul , EddieByword , Irix , josepi , marcovandereijk , midimannz , Mr.Soul , NathanLaze , stoned52 , superglen , Testify , UGK56 , z
Guests:
1903
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10