Quote
6s7s9s



SO TRUE. I saw Bob Dylan in NY last Friday. I did not recognize a single song, except 'Tangled Up in Blue'. Apparently he also played 'Blowin' in the Wind', but I was not able to recognize it. I am not a Bob Dylan diehard, but feel that I do know more than one or two songs.
Anyway...I looked up his setlists from this recent tour...he played the EXACT same songs in the EXACT same order for every show.
So, the Stones do a much better job of catering to their wide variety of fans than many other artists do...especially Mr. Dylan.

Quote
Woz
> The Stones are entertainers, world-class entertainers but they have not reached the level of sophistication Bob has. <

If by this you mean they continue to perfrom at a high level while Dylan should have retired more than 20 years ago I agree. Dylan's performances over the last devcade(or two) have been abysmal.

Quote
Naturalust
Yep. Let 'em play sitting on chairs with acoustics, messing up the chords and lyrics due to dementia and arthritis, telling stories of the old days, playing more ballads, country blues and blues, I'm still in. In fact that sounds like a pretty interesting show.

peace

Quote
dcba

Quote
6s7s9s

So, the Stones do a much better job of catering to their wide variety of fans than many other artists do...especially Mr. Dylan.

Dylan is an artist i.e. he does exactly what he wants.
The Stones are entertainers, world-class entertainers but they have not reached the level of sophistication Bob has.

Quote
varilla
Please, never reach the point of permorming like the last Chuck Berry, not the Stones , for god´s sake

Quote
Dan

Quote
alhavu1
No Doubt is not a headliner by any means

Other than selling about 90,000 tickets in Southern California on their last full tour in 2009. Throw in radius clauses and the fact they haven't played here at all since 2012 and you have a LOT of people going to see them.

A decent co-headliner and they could do an LA Rising type stadium show right here. They are absolutely a festival level headliner and I am really surprised they haven't played Coachella yet.

It would make sense for the Stones to play on Metallica night (if the rumor has any validity to it). As long they get paid and get to deliver a full set to their fans, Metallica wouldn't mind going on early. Sub-headline is usually the best slot at any festival, just ask AC/DC.

Quote
alhavu1

Quote
Dan

Quote
alhavu1
No Doubt is not a headliner by any means

Other than selling about 90,000 tickets in Southern California on their last full tour in 2009. Throw in radius clauses and the fact they haven't played here at all since 2012 and you have a LOT of people going to see them.

A decent co-headliner and they could do an LA Rising type stadium show right here. They are absolutely a festival level headliner and I am really surprised they haven't played Coachella yet.

It would make sense for the Stones to play on Metallica night (if the rumor has any validity to it). As long they get paid and get to deliver a full set to their fans, Metallica wouldn't mind going on early. Sub-headline is usually the best slot at any festival, just ask AC/DC.

Not a headliner

Quote
MileHigh
I know that we are fans, but sometimes I think the superlatives about their recent performances are a bit over the top. When Mick goes down to sing off at the sides of the stage, sometimes people are just walking by to go to the bathroom, they are indifferent. It's time catching up and taking over. The "Rock God" aura is only for the hard-core fans. The frenzy of continuously screaming girls is from two generations ago. It's nice to see them play, and I think that they found the right formula for today, but it is definitely not the same. I think the last true blast of "Oh my God it's the Rolling Stones!" was in 1973. I am talking about really _really_ feeling the excitement and the frenzy.

In this Internet age, there are very few surprises. It's a shame in a way, because in days long past, when you went to see a big group perform, you didn't know what the stage was going to look like, you didn't know what they were going to play, etc. I miss that. I had just one moment like that in the recent past. When I watched the late 2012 performance in New Jersey, I was shocked when the choir came out for YCAGWYW and I almost teared up. Imagine if they pulled off that surprise in 1973!

So, for 2015, if they do somewhere between 15 and 25 shows, more power to them. Even if they did five shows or less, more power to them. If they do play, chances are economics will dictate that they play at least 15 or so shows over a four month or less stretch. The staging and lighting and video wall are very expensive, and I am sure even now that they don't want to lose money.

Instead of making a big deal saying, "this is out last performance" I think they should just do a mini tour and keep people guessing. It would be the classy way to end it all.

A lot of people are saying that age doesn't matter, but in fact it does matter. We all know the old joke, "Steel Wheelchairs" and that was 25 years ago. I don't want to see them hobbling around on stage in front of a mixture of hard-core fans and indifferent viewers that stare at them passively. You can also clearly see that there is a fair amount of musicianship stress on the stage nowadays. They often mess up the structure of their songs, Mick often starts singing at the wrong time, or mixes up the words or the order of the verses. Ending a song is quite often a hit and miss affair and there are a lot of looks back and forth and Mick uses audio cues to get the ending pulled off with a semblance of order. I definitely sense "age induced rustiness" and that will likely get even worse as time goes on.

It really is not the same anymore. Please don't shoot the messenger. If they do something in 2015 then great, but then it should finally really and truly be all over.

Mick said that he didn't want to be singing Satisfaction by the time he hit 40. Well, 80 is in sight for Mick and the boys as we speak.

It was a great ride and they did some amazing things. I would only go to see them in 2015 if they did the ticket lottery stuff and I could get tickets for less than $100 each. That's how I got tickets in 2013. I would definitely not spend $500 a ticket to go see them in 2015. The "idea" of the Rolling Stones and their music will always be in my blood. They did some great things and I respect them immensely.

Quote
MileHigh
Boys, it's okay to have differing opinions without getting a bit excited. There is no need to circle the wagons. Like others have stated, they pulled it off over the past two years so they could quit now and go out on a relative high. If they do indeed do some shows in 2015, I think the majority of us would agree that it would essentially be the same show we have seen in 2012/2013/2014. All things must pass, to quote George Harrison. I suppose that was a reference to the end of the Beatles. 40+ years later and we are very close to the end of the Stones, and they also have to pass. They do struggle on stage, Mick doesn't have the same moves, and they are playing songs that are mostly 40+ years old.

If you are a child of the 70s like me and a lot of us around here, think about this: Pretend it's 1973 and your friend invites you to go see a "rock band" of 70-year-olds that plays songs from the 1930s. It just wouldn't compute. Well, that's essentially what is happening right now. If they do some shows in 2015, then great, but I am a bit apprehensive about the whole thing. If they really messed up on stage it would be heartbreaking.

Quote
MileHigh

If you are a child of the 70s like me and a lot of us around here, think about this: Pretend it's 1973 and your friend invites you to go see a "rock band" of 70-year-olds that plays songs from the 1930s. It just wouldn't compute. Well, that's essentially what is happening right now. .

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
MileHigh

If you are a child of the 70s like me and a lot of us around here, think about this: Pretend it's 1973 and your friend invites you to go see a "rock band" of 70-year-olds that plays songs from the 1930s. It just wouldn't compute. Well, that's essentially what is happening right now. .

Not a good analogy. The mass marketing of the 60's and 70's effected and influenced us all much more than anything that happened previously. The Stone's became HUGE and a soundtrack for most of our lives. Besides Rock and Roll is different than anything that happened in the 1930's.

The Stones are still interesting and entertaining, and entertainment is what it is all about, not musical relevance. peace

Quote
angee

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
MileHigh

If you are a child of the 70s like me and a lot of us around here, think about this: Pretend it's 1973 and your friend invites you to go see a "rock band" of 70-year-olds that plays songs from the 1930s. It just wouldn't compute. Well, that's essentially what is happening right now. .

Not a good analogy. The mass marketing of the 60's and 70's effected and influenced us all much more than anything that happened previously. The Stone's became HUGE and a soundtrack for most of our lives. Besides Rock and Roll is different than anything that happened in the 1930's.

The Stones are still interesting and entertaining, and entertainment is what it is all about, not musical relevance. peace

Very well said, NL.
Plus the 30s are 80 years ago now, another reason it's not a good analogy. Mostly what you said though, on the band's seminal influence on the new music of the times, still around, if I got that right.

Quote
Limbostone

Quote
babyblue
Is this a stadium or arena tour?

Has any act done a stadium tour in the US lately?

South America will be stadiums I'm sure.

Quote
kahoosier
Well BV has tried to explain why some of us do what we do. Let me say a few extra things. I saw 32 songs performed this tour, so while this band is not as unpredictable as the Dead were, they are a lot less locked in then many people assume after glancing at a set list or two. Moreover, having been to a few Dead shows in the day, comparing the performances of these two bands is worse than apples to oranges, and I mean that as a criticism of neither band. You just do not have the same expectations if you appreciate both.

But over the last few tours I have come to the belief that for me it is the tribal quality of being on the road. I have written here before, every few years my friends and I hit the road. For weeks on end we meet, re meet, share rooms, share meals, share drinks, share stories and every 3rd or 4th night hire the best damn house band in the world to play our favorite songs for us. Some of these people I stay in contact with constantly, but only see during tours. Nonetheless I grew up in Indiana, spent almost 20 years On Hawaii and other Pacific Islands, live in Auckland and my best friends live in London, so I don't see that as entirely strange. I stepped through the door of a strange hotel in Adelaide the Sunday before the last week of rehearsals and ran straight into BV. I shared a room with a an uber fan from Japan and a good friend from New Zealand. Along the way I ran into familiar faces from the UK, talked more to Linda then I have in over a decade, shared cues with Germans I know, shared drinks with crazy Kareem from Amsterdam, and met Peter and Dereyn (sp?) from Australia, honestly two of the most interesting and genuinely nice people I could imagine. Hats of to Katie, Andrew, Andy, where are you Dean ...Ian??? I could go on and on. Beast , Paulywauly and I are already discussing the merits of a giant Vegas festival VS waiting for South American Stadiums. Hats off to the Apprentice Ben from Canada and your 3 Watts Drumsticks, I still have that Charlie Pic.

I saw my fist stones show in 1975 on Jagger's birthday, probably remember less than anyone but Keith. Over the last 40 years, as time and finances allowed, every tour has become a bigger commitment. It is something visceral , not rational, and if you don't have the bug, you may never understand it. But in the last 15 years alone I have wondered over 4 continents to places I would never have been (Brno? Bucharest?) and seen unexpected beauty and wonder, and I have never felt alone. At each stop I have met people I know , and while we may take a day tour out into Transylvania, we all are all held together buy another night hearing our band play on into the night.

And why have a travel agent arrange your vacation, LOL, the Stones have the best travel arrangements, just follow them to see the world )

Quote
alhavu1

Quote
Dan

Quote
alhavu1
No Doubt is not a headliner by any means

Other than selling about 90,000 tickets in Southern California on their last full tour in 2009. Throw in radius clauses and the fact they haven't played here at all since 2012 and you have a LOT of people going to see them.

A decent co-headliner and they could do an LA Rising type stadium show right here. They are absolutely a festival level headliner and I am really surprised they haven't played Coachella yet.

It would make sense for the Stones to play on Metallica night (if the rumor has any validity to it). As long they get paid and get to deliver a full set to their fans, Metallica wouldn't mind going on early. Sub-headline is usually the best slot at any festival, just ask AC/DC.

Not a headliner

Quote
bv
The year of 2015 will bring more great shows as it seems, but many would have to travel. Best case, they might still do South America in the spring, seems as they work on that option too now. Keep the 2015 calendar available for the Stones, also the first half. That is my best advice now.