The shows I attended were 2:15 and 2:25.

I'd say it was a success on all accounts. Even long term critics have converted now after attending several shows on this tour

A succes!

I didn't think they could outdo three sold out shows at Tokyo Dome, but there is something special about the Stones in Europe in the summer.

Great cities, reasonable ticket prices, a couple of the biggest festivals in the world, huge crowds. Three years ago, if someone had told me that in 2014, the Stones would be headlining a sold-out Roskilde and that the highlight of the show would be a version of Midnight Rambler with Mick Taylor that goes for over 16 (!) minutes, I would have said they were crazy. The two shows I saw were just great experiences I won't soon forget. The only people who were disappointed were those who couldn't get tickets.

It has been a long ride since the Sixties but very happy with the Werchter concert.

Would like to hear reviews from the newest generation?

Realistically isn't the 2007 leg of ABB the only tour that would be labeled as a disappointment? Granted, some could never bring themselves to admit that as it goes against everything they believe in...

I seriously doubt that anybody who has actually been to a show this year went home disappointed.

It's been a great tour, I've never seen them playing better before (and that includes everyone (!) on stage).

This was a legendary tour. An enormous success. Our kids and grandchildren will read about this tour in history lessons as the evidence that this band never lost relevance, untill the end and beyond.

Never got so many cool reactions from kids to my stones shirts. Agreed, a rediculous indicator, but did we see any other 50 year old rock act manage that? Those kids mean that Stones CD's will be sold and collected the next 50 years as well.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-07-07 22:08 by shattered1978.

Quote
StonesCat
A success in entertainment, money, and spectacle, but a disappointment as far as interesting. Where you fall in caring along that spectrum dictates the answer.

this is about it. Certainly a financial and entertainment success, the Stones having honed their greatest-hits oldies show to perfection. The disappointment is at the musical end, ignoring their great songbook and the shameful misuse and under-use of Taylor. But, they do what they can do these days, and they do it well.

Quote
Mathijs
I loved it. I only saw the Waldbuhne, but it simply was great. They sounded great, they played well, but above all: it was the first time in my life that I simply enjoyed seeing the Stones. I didn't care about the mistakes, the setlists or whatever. I thought it simply was a miracle that after being a fan for 32 years I was still seeing them play live. And I enjoyed simply that.

Mathijs

Me too.

Just for the record - for complaints about set lists and ticket prices there is already a thread about that. If this thread is taken into that direction it will simply be merged onto the same thread:

[www.iorr.org]

Then to the comments about success or failure. Anyone may express their subjective opinions of course, but the best way to see the objective measures is to read all the reports, there are tons of pages, and to see how fast the tickets sold. TYhese are the facts:

- All 14 shows sold out in matters of minutes and hours
- All the venues were full i.e. the ticket holders came to the shows
- People stayed until the shows finished
- I saw smiling faces wherever I went, after the shows
- Most of the reports I got were positive
- People want more shows in all parts of the world

There are a few who think the Stones should call it quits, but there are also people who think that women shoud stay at home and watch babies. Also there are people who still think that the earth is flat.

Finally, I will add a comment from some young fans I was sitting next to on the "Tunnelban" back home from the Stockholm show. They were 5-6 "kids" age 25-35. I thibnk it must have been their first show. I was just listening, did not really talk to them. Then one of them said:

"You know, the Stones are not really that great as musicians, they are not great at all, but when they get together on stage, something magic happens. They just get fantastic, and they are the greatest band in the word."

That was just a randon "Tunnelban" report. I have listened to so many of these reports, after 14 shows this summer, and they are all very positive. In fact I have never met people who are pissed off and who want their money back.

Bjornulf

Looks like a success

That's what blew me away in Europe - the number of young people - young couples, families. Obviously, the US shows were heavily over-50, primarily because of the pricing, but I think that there were more young people at this tour than in Europe in 2006 - 2007. Not sure why.

Sounds like a fun time had by most...And sadly you will never make everyone happy.

Sold out concerts with happy fans are a success. ROCK ON!

a success and a fun, no doubt

but point 1 in bv list is of course not true at least for circo massimo. ticketone put tickets on sale many times and in the last few days before the show. in the end the venue was full but of course it was not sold out in minutes or hours

Succes for me. I was ready to say farewell to the band in Madrid and almost shed a tear during YCAGWYW. But in the end, it was a rocking party. It was my 7th Stones gig and,probably, it's been the last one. But never felt nostalgia, just pure joy. My girlfriend and some pals saw them that night for the first time and we all had a blast. We sang, danced and jumped to the most amazing music ever made. That has to be a success...

What was generally praised was the scaled down minimalism of the show itself. The pure rock and roll of it. Mick Jagger seemed to be the most raved about member of the band. Not much talk about Keith Richards.
Setlist was criticized - rightly so. My estimation tells me that ticket prices were overall lower than on the US tour. But I might be wrong.

The "2014 European Tour - A Success or Big Disappointment?" Thread...a success or disappointment?

dredging up the same old dreck over and over again.

Gotta say it's a big disappointment.

Quote
Stoneage
What was generally praised was the scaled down minimalism of the show itself. The pure rock and roll of it. Mick Jagger seemed to be the most raved about member of the band. Not much talk about Keith Richards. .

NOT MUCH TALK ABOUT KEITH RICHARDS - golly, I must have been following a different board.

Quote
EJM

Quote
Stoneage
What was generally praised was the scaled down minimalism of the show itself. The pure rock and roll of it. Mick Jagger seemed to be the most raved about member of the band. Not much talk about Keith Richards. .

NOT MUCH TALK ABOUT KEITH RICHARDS - golly, I must have been following a different board.

I was refering to the media reviews I have read. Most critics praise Mick Jagger foremost. They write in smaller prints about Keith Richards. One critic even called them "The Rolling Jagger"...

Quote

In fact I have never met people who are pissed off and who want their money back.

I wonder if that scenario would happen if they played a few tunes the audience wasn't as familiar with. My guess is yes since for years we've been told an audience has to know every song at a concert to enjoy it.

Quote
Stoneage

Quote
EJM

Quote
Stoneage
What was generally praised was the scaled down minimalism of the show itself. The pure rock and roll of it. Mick Jagger seemed to be the most raved about member of the band. Not much talk about Keith Richards. .

NOT MUCH TALK ABOUT KEITH RICHARDS - golly, I must have been following a different board.

I was refering to the media reviews I have read. Most critics praise Mick Jagger foremost. They write in smaller prints about Keith Richards. One critic even called them "The Rolling Jagger"...

So sorry - misunderstood

Thanks, EJM. You don't have to be sorry. I guess my post wasn't distinct enough...

Quote
Stoneage
Mick Jagger seemed to be the most raved about member of the band. Not much talk about Keith Richards.

Then nothing has changed since '72. If you read the newspaper reviews from that tour (See the site: Through The Frames Brightly: Chasing The Stones Across America) it is all Jagger, Jagger, Jagger. Around that time I believe the band was once introduced on a TV show as Mick Jagger and the RS! Very little mention of Keith and hardly none at all about Taylor (except for The Village Voice, I believe)...."...but mainly it was Mick Taylor who played a lead guitar which burned your ears off."

This tour sounded like business as usual for the band even with Taylor. Even his participation in MR became borderline schtick. An early performance of Slipping Away caught my interest. But alas, nothing came of it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-07-08 00:03 by pmk251.

Funny. Every reporter from the beginning Only notice Mick Jagger.

Even the film Ladies and Gentlemen The Rolling Stones have 96%
Of only Jagger.

Some things stay the same!! Haha

Quote
Stoneage

Quote
EJM

Quote
Stoneage
What was generally praised was the scaled down minimalism of the show itself. The pure rock and roll of it. Mick Jagger seemed to be the most raved about member of the band. Not much talk about Keith Richards. .

NOT MUCH TALK ABOUT KEITH RICHARDS - golly, I must have been following a different board.

I was refering to the media reviews I have read. Most critics praise Mick Jagger foremost. They write in smaller prints about Keith Richards. One critic even called them "The Rolling Jagger"...

This has always been true of news coverage. However, the general public only actually cares about Mick as a member of the Rolling Stones. Well, except for the 1200 people who bought "The Best of Mick Jagger" or the 35 people who bought "Superheavy".

As I am a new poster on here I'm a bit afraid of saying the wrong thing OR a wrong thing in the wrong place.

I've only recently discovered the Stones despite being 53. I've never seen them live.

I've followed all the threads here about ALL the shows and watched quite a lot of clips. What comes across to me is the SHEER JOY of performing, the emotion of it, and how very organic their music is.

Anything, any topic can be analysed to death and that can be enjoyable to do as well. But in the end it has to be whether the performers are true in their intentions and to their vocation. It's as if a spirit possesess them for those moments on stage. I thought the spirit possessed them entirely, so that must be a "success". Apologies for incoherence.

Quote
bathsheba
As I am a new poster on here I'm a bit afraid of saying the wrong thing OR a wrong thing in the wrong place.

I've only recently discovered the Stones despite being 53. I've never seen them live.

I've followed all the threads here about ALL the shows and watched quite a lot of clips. What comes across to me is the SHEER JOY of performing, the emotion of it, and how very organic their music is.

Anything, any topic can be analysed to death and that can be enjoyable to do as well. But in the end it has to be whether the performers are true in their intentions and to their vocation. It's as if a spirit possesess them for those moments on stage. I thought the spirit possessed them entirely, so that must be a "success". Apologies for incoherence.

Well said!!! Welcome. 53---better late then never. Haha.

You didn't say anything wrong bathsheba..........welcome on board

__________________________

Quote
Stoneage
What was generally praised was the scaled down minimalism of the show itself. The pure rock and roll of it. Mick Jagger seemed to be the most raved about member of the band. Not much talk about Keith Richards.
Setlist was criticized - rightly so. My estimation tells me that ticket prices were overall lower than on the US tour. But I might be wrong.

Spot on. Honestly I wish the US tour had been handled similarly. Lower ticket prices for sure, and larger venues! The US had no big venue gigs with affordable seats. Thankfully the world stage received a great show albeit with predictable setlists. As much as I would love for them to dig deep and reward longtime fans with a rarities set, it was an unreasonable request for this leg of the tour. All setlist complaints should be levied on the US leg of the tour and not the larger WORLD tour.

It has been pointed out countless times and should be pointed out again... the Stones played a setlist comprised of the greatest ROLLING STONES SONGS of all time. As fans we love the whole canon of available work, but not everyone does. Their setlist would be a dream dream to my 12-year-old self.

Welcome Bathsheba, there is no right or wrong here, and you have as much rights as anybody. I only wish I could listen to the current lineup with virgin ears.

As for the overpriced arena tickets in the U.S., it is strange isn't it? It's not like anyone needs to see the Stones close up anymore. It's supposed to be about the music. Maybe their metrics showed them it would be easier to get a small audience to pay big bucks, instead of a lot of tickets at a stadium.