For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
slew
Paulywaul - I saw the Who's Quadrophenia show and paid $100.00. I paid $500
00 to see the Stones in Brooklyn and let me tell you the $500.00 was a better value for the Stones than the $100.00 for the Who. Roger Daltrey flat can't sing anymore and Mick Jagger defies time based upon his performances on those five shows. Stones at this point are a much better value than the Who and I love both bands. Have fun at the Who its still well played but Roger needs to hang it up!!
Quote
drbryant
One thing the Stones could do to truly enhance their legacy would be to play larger venues in more locations, thereby allowing younger generations to attend.
There is definitely an audience of younger fans that would like to see the show, and popularity among younger demographics is one area where the Stones "pushed past" the Beatles a LONG time ago. I'm a pretty avid concertgoer, and have seen over 40 Stones shows and over 20 Paul McCartney since 1989. The one constant - there was always a much greater percentage of young people at Stones shows. McCartney shows had more families (with very young kids), but the Stones shows had groups of guys in their 20's and 30's, and young couples. It was very noticeable at shows that I attended in three continents - North America, Europe and Asia (especially noticeable at the GA standing shows in Europe) - and judging from video footage, the Stones crowds were even younger in South America.
It was different at the shows in 2012. I attended in London and NJ, and the crowds were, on average, much older. There were a handful of banker types, young girls with older guys, and younger guys attending solo, but clearly, by playing arena shows in limited locations (and charging incredibly high prices) the band has left a generation or two of potential fans unable to afford tickets. Really a shame.
Quote
GasLightStreet
More inane threads from JumpingWhackOMoleTrollWatchman etc than 2012.
Quote
drbryantQuote
GasLightStreet
More inane threads from JumpingWhackOMoleTrollWatchman etc than 2012.
What happened to the "other guy"? Was it BatCave? I can't remember the name.
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
drbryantQuote
GasLightStreet
More inane threads from JumpingWhackOMoleTrollWatchman etc than 2012.
What happened to the "other guy"? Was it BatCave? I can't remember the name.
You think he had more than the 4 or however many he said? You're close, some name like that.
Quote
JumpinJackOLanternQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
drbryantQuote
GasLightStreet
More inane threads from JumpingWhackOMoleTrollWatchman etc than 2012.
What happened to the "other guy"? Was it BatCave? I can't remember the name.
You think he had more than the 4 or however many he said? You're close, some name like that.
You don't say, Skippy, WeLoveToPlayTheBlues, GasLightStreetBag!
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JumpinJackOLanternQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
drbryantQuote
GasLightStreet
More inane threads from JumpingWhackOMoleTrollWatchman etc than 2012.
What happened to the "other guy"? Was it BatCave? I can't remember the name.
You think he had more than the 4 or however many he said? You're close, some name like that.
You don't say, Skippy, WeLoveToPlayTheBlues, GasLightStreetBag!
Whatever you say there JumpinWhackO. Once a troll always a troll. 50 and counting with at least a hundred more to come this year.
Quote
riverrat
I have several friends (on & off this forum) who went to the shows. I am certain that it was a fun experience but I just can't see it being worth $1600.
I bet they smelled good, tho.
Quote
JumpinJackOLanternQuote
GumbootCloggerooIt's not about me. I'm not the one that thinks there's some sort of imaginary race. Nice try, though. Now, please, indulge us. What is this moving past The Beatles thing all about? How is one last album by The Stones going to move them past The Beatles? Did A Bigger Bang move them into a tie? Or did it push them back a bit? I want to know what is going on in your brain. You bring this "pushing past the Beatles" thing up time and time again. Explain it, please.Quote
JumpinJackOLanternQuote
GumbootCloggerooHave you ever explained to us just exactly how The Stones will "push past the Beatles"? What does that even mean? Are you talking about record sales? Please explain.Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
2013 will see one last great Stones album (which will push the Stones past the Beatles)
No, I am not talking about record sales. That said, now what do YOU think I meant when I said the Stones would push past the Beatles?
Every once in awhile you sound sincere, so I will indeed explain in detail sometime over the next few days. Gotta run for the moment but I will get back to you soon.
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
I don't know what a troll is, but if it's someone that loves the Stones and can help motivate and inspire them to produce one last great album, then that's what I am!
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JumpinJackOLantern
I don't know what a troll is, but if it's someone that loves the Stones and can help motivate and inspire them to produce one last great album, then that's what I am!
You sure do know - you're excellent at it. And it certainly is not what you described - that's not possible from anyone.
Quote
GasLightStreet
Recent review of Super Bowl halftime acts brings up the Stones. Mighty50TrollOLantern will have to swallow this one:
The Rolling Stones (2006, Detroit).
Eschewing the medley approach, the Stones managed to squeeze only three songs into their performance. One, “Rough Justice,” was a new song from a new album that no one much cared about. Thus, a third of the show was wasted. “Start Me Up,” as great a concert opener as exists in the Stones catalog, kicked off the show; the well-worn “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction” was the uninteresting choice for a closer. In the eternal The Beatles vs. the Stones debate, McCartney was the clear winner in these back-to-back Super Bowls.
[www.nola.com]
Quote
slew
Paulywaul - I saw Roger Daltrey in 2011 and thought his voice was fixed/improved. Then I saw Quadrophenia last November and shortly thereafter saw them on TV at the Sandy benefit and his voice is shot. I have a bias towards the Stones as they are by far my favorite band but in watching Jakker in brooklyn and then on the pay per view he sounded better than he has since 1989. He defies time. Is it a nostalgia show? Of course but played gusto and bravado and when they played Midnight Rambler it was like I was back in the seventies I thought it was that good bithe with Taylor on PPV and without in Brooklyn. Yes the tocket prices are awful but I found them a lot more entertaining at this stage than the Who.
Quote
JumpinJackOLanternQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
JumpinJackOLantern
I don't know what a troll is, but if it's someone that loves the Stones and can help motivate and inspire them to produce one last great album, then that's what I am!
You sure do know - you're excellent at it. And it certainly is not what you described - that's not possible from anyone.
So what is a troll exactly? You seem to know. So please describe.
Quote
JumpinJackOLanternQuote
GasLightStreet
Recent review of Super Bowl halftime acts brings up the Stones. Mighty50TrollOLantern will have to swallow this one:
The Rolling Stones (2006, Detroit).
Eschewing the medley approach, the Stones managed to squeeze only three songs into their performance. One, “Rough Justice,” was a new song from a new album that no one much cared about. Thus, a third of the show was wasted. “Start Me Up,” as great a concert opener as exists in the Stones catalog, kicked off the show; the well-worn “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction” was the uninteresting choice for a closer. In the eternal The Beatles vs. the Stones debate, McCartney was the clear winner in these back-to-back Super Bowls.
[www.nola.com]
I am a huge fan of both bands, but some Beatles fan's opinion on a couple of Super Bowl halftime performances won't have much influence on the final outcome. Rock historians will have the final say, and that is still about ten years away.
Quote
paulywaul
The element of the Stones pricing that really is a bit tragic though is that it has precluded a certain proportion of predominantly younger generations from attending their shows, from seeing this "legendary" band play live. That is sad, that's what that is. So if you're a kid growing up today, and your taste in music is to some extent influenced by that of your parents, which might include these great 60s bands like the Stones and the WHO who are fortunately and miraculously still out there playing live, one makes themselves reasonably accessible for £80 odd per seat, and the other prices themselves at a rather more offputting £400 odd. Don't tell me that isn't sad .......
Quote
Stoneage
Are there any real indications on a 2013 tour? Or a new record? All I hear is silence and the usual yakity-yak...
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JumpinJackOLanternQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
JumpinJackOLantern
I don't know what a troll is, but if it's someone that loves the Stones and can help motivate and inspire them to produce one last great album, then that's what I am!
You sure do know - you're excellent at it. And it certainly is not what you described - that's not possible from anyone.
So what is a troll exactly? You seem to know. So please describe.
Everytime you post you're a troll.
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
JumpinJackOLanternQuote
GasLightStreet
Recent review of Super Bowl halftime acts brings up the Stones. Mighty50TrollOLantern will have to swallow this one:
The Rolling Stones (2006, Detroit).
Eschewing the medley approach, the Stones managed to squeeze only three songs into their performance. One, “Rough Justice,” was a new song from a new album that no one much cared about. Thus, a third of the show was wasted. “Start Me Up,” as great a concert opener as exists in the Stones catalog, kicked off the show; the well-worn “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction” was the uninteresting choice for a closer. In the eternal The Beatles vs. the Stones debate, McCartney was the clear winner in these back-to-back Super Bowls.
[www.nola.com]
I am a huge fan of both bands, but some Beatles fan's opinion on a couple of Super Bowl halftime performances won't have much influence on the final outcome. Rock historians will have the final say, and that is still about ten years away.
Regardless, you can't handle the truth and refuse to acknowledge it. Whatever the "final outcome is"? What final outcome?
Quote
JumpinJackOLanternQuote
Stoneage
Are there any real indications on a 2013 tour? Or a new record? All I hear is silence and the usual yakity-yak...
All I hear is Doom and Gloom. Seriously, we should all know the routine inside and out by now. Expect a new album to be recorded in the first part of the year and more shows during the second part. And hope for a surprise performance in the first part of the year. I would be happy with just a new album, but I know we will get both. It's business as usual, we wait, watch, listen, and try and keep ourselves entertained in the meantime. All shall come to pass, just as the 50th anniversary shows came to pass. The Stones will roll on as long as they possibly can.
Quote
Stoneage
Let's hope so, Jack!