Quote
LongBeachArena72
IMHO, it's only significant for the usual "how can they do this at their age" reasons.

Hard to judge the music based on the camera phone videos but that was very possibly the worst performance by their vocalist in a LONG time.

Then again the original Hyde Park gig was out of tune. But if everyone around you is saying it will go down in history, the people there say it will go down in history and the media are saying it will go down in histpory, any arguments about whether the singer had an off night are kind of academic.

"Hard to judge the music based on the camera phone videos but that was very possibly the worst performance by their vocalist in a LONG time."

With respect, i wonder whether you really did watch the Stones performance in Glasto and not some stuff from Beacon Theatre 2006 or some stuff from "Love You Live" era...

Quote
sjs12

Quote
LongBeachArena72
IMHO, it's only significant for the usual "how can they do this at their age" reasons.

Hard to judge the music based on the camera phone videos but that was very possibly the worst performance by their vocalist in a LONG time.

Then again the original Hyde Park gig was out of tune. But if everyone around you is saying it will go down in history, the people there say it will go down in history and the media are saying it will go down in histpory, any arguments about whether the singer had an off night are kind of academic.

That's true. Only my opinion, certainly.

Quote
laertisflash
"Hard to judge the music based on the camera phone videos but that was very possibly the worst performance by their vocalist in a LONG time."

With respect, i wonder whether you really did watch the Stones performance in Glasto and not some stuff from Beacon Theatre 2006 or some stuff from "Love You Live" era...

Basing my opinion solely on what I've seen/heard on this site.

I'm not sure how many of you were at Glastonbury. I think BV was, not sure if others made it or not. Now, I've seen the Stones play probably around 10 times over the last decade, and Glastonbury was the best gig from them I've ever been at.

Have listened to some of the BBC coverage and it does not come close to doing it justice. Now, the BBC were pissed over the amount they could show, so I can't imagine they'd do many favours in the mix, but the sound was much better there, and combined with the atmosphere, the energy from the band, and the crowd quite simply made it the best I've seen.

People go to Glastonbury for all sorts of reasons, but the vast majority go because of the festival, not because of who is playing – you buy your ticket before the line-up is announced – and you go to have fun. That's what helped make this gig such a special one. I've been to shows in stadiums, arenas and clubs, but there's only ever a small hardcore of Stones fans (of the sort who post on here or similar sites) and a lot of people who turn up to see the band and tick them off a list. Glastonbury is different, because people are there to see bands, and arts and theatre among other things. So when you get record numbers turning up at a headliner act they've come to see something they want to see, participate in and be part of.

But the crowd are fickle – if you don't rock them, they leave, or don't give you any sort of response. From the moment JJF started the crowd went nuts, and threw themselves into it. Biggest ever crowd I've seen at Glastonbury and I've been going there for about 10 years too. TV doesn't do it justice. I just hope Hyde park is half as good, because I can't imagine it will come close to matching Glastonbury. Actually, I don't need to imagine, there's no way it will match Glastonbury (and I'm not saying that to rub it in, it's just Hyde park will be another of those shows where people will be there for reasons other than being massive Stones fans – although I know the hardcore fans will be there too and probably love it.)