For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
jloweQuote
laertisflash
"How frustrating it must be for those "Stones haters" to see the Stones fill stadiums around the world with ease still after 55 years!"
Correct, Georgie...
Is that correct?
Is it a sell out tour?
are you insinuating these shows are not overwhelmingly successful? I think the only possible issue, from them not completely selling out is that the damn ticket prices are astronomical.
If they charged $1 million a ticket the shows would be really empty, if they charge $25 it would be a complete sellout (with scalpers re-inflating to market prices).
Quote
laertisflash
BV, I think there is an additional reason why the Stones easily filled huge venues in 2014 and why they are doing the same on the current tour. MAIN reason IMO: Strong people's desire to see them again, after 7 non - touring years!...
They played Europe in 1990, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2003, 2006, 2007. Highest frequency of their touring act, then. So, seven... no Stones years made people eager for attend, again, the greatest and most popular rock live act. And now some of us, as you see on various threads, have the opportunity to bring our kids to their gigs. Kids 5 and 8 years old included. Pure Happiness!
Quote
shattered1978Quote
potus43
every baseball player has a bad day. Same with musicians but I have NEVER seen a review less than A or A+ from BV. Correct me if I am wrong
Interesting point. After the Stones in Amsterdam I read a lot of newspaper reviews. To me it seemed like each one of the journalists expected a baseball player or something, and were disappointed to see the Stones in its true form anno 2017.
And still, I believe each of those reviews was honest. Perhaps the journalists went to the show a bit poorly prepared, but that's still honest.
Most attendees of the show knew they were going to the Rolling Stones, in @#$%& 2017. And were completely stunned by the way they were grasped by the throat by the Rolling Stones anno 2017. @#$%& yeah, I am so glad they are there. On stage. In 2017. And that's also honest.
Quote
bv
From 1990 into 2017 is 27 years. Those fans from 1990 are 27 years older now and they spend their savings on seeing the band live now. People have more freedom in their 60's than when they are in their 30's and 40's with children. It is not rocket science. The Stones do know they have a strong brand now. The venues are filled up with smiling fans every night. I don't see any empty seats, and the queues are long, long, long. No reason to worry about unsold tickets these days. Well unless you sit at home in a grumpy state and wish you could have been there.
Quote
bvQuote
TheflyingDutchman
Jan Vollaard (the journalist you are referring to) is a well respected Dutch music journalist/reviewer, writing for the NRC.nl, affiliated to NRC Handelsblad, a Dutch quality newspaper. His reviews on the Rolling Stones concerts where a musical opinion on the Rolling Stones musical efforts in Holland 2017 and 2007. You can argue about his opinions, but people that read and work for the NRC paper are basically well educated, and well informed about what's going on in the world, from a political, cultural and/ or musical point of view.
I don't need journalists to tell me how the Stones are performing. If we go to the shows we can form our own opinion. It is like asking a journalist to write about the kiss you get from your girl friend. They feel outside so they can't relate to it. They may write about age and technical details of the show, but they will still feel left outside, they wonder why all these thousands of fans are having so much fun, and they are bugged by the journalistic challenge of writing something "smart and unique".
Quote
jloweQuote
treaclefingersQuote
jloweQuote
laertisflash
"How frustrating it must be for those "Stones haters" to see the Stones fill stadiums around the world with ease still after 55 years!"
Correct, Georgie...
Is that correct?
Is it a sell out tour?
are you insinuating these shows are not overwhelmingly successful? I think the only possible issue, from them not completely selling out is that the damn ticket prices are astronomical.
If they charged $1 million a ticket the shows would be really empty, if they charge $25 it would be a complete sellout (with scalpers re-inflating to market prices).
My question (because I don't know the answer was):
'Is it a sell out tour?'
I wasn't insinuating anything!!
Quote
RG
BV, I love you and I love your reports. Never stop.
Quote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
bvQuote
TheflyingDutchman
Jan Vollaard (the journalist you are referring to) is a well respected Dutch music journalist/reviewer, writing for the NRC.nl, affiliated to NRC Handelsblad, a Dutch quality newspaper. His reviews on the Rolling Stones concerts where a musical opinion on the Rolling Stones musical efforts in Holland 2017 and 2007. You can argue about his opinions, but people that read and work for the NRC paper are basically well educated, and well informed about what's going on in the world, from a political, cultural and/ or musical point of view.
I don't need journalists to tell me how the Stones are performing. If we go to the shows we can form our own opinion. It is like asking a journalist to write about the kiss you get from your girl friend. They feel outside so they can't relate to it. They may write about age and technical details of the show, but they will still feel left outside, they wonder why all these thousands of fans are having so much fun, and they are bugged by the journalistic challenge of writing something "smart and unique".
I don't need a journalist either to tell me how the Stones or any musical performer functions once I have seen and listened to their music for years. There are however countless music lovers out there that like to read different reviews, positive or critical ones, it might even make them curious to check the real thing out. So journalists/ reviewers serve a purpose that goes beyond writing something 'smart and unique' only, they have a well balanced and experienced view, but it can differ from other people's opinion. To write that Jan Vollaard (NRC.nl) or some other professional hates the Rolling Stones, like some people on this board do is just not ok. Nobody hates the Stones: they are too touching for that, but they are not above criticism.
Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Did you actually read the review? It's not that negative like you put it here.
Quote
georgie48Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Did you actually read the review? It's not that negative like you put it here.
Yes, I read the whole article, just like the earlier ones.
I could have mentioned even more (the article header f.i.), but I think I made a point. Dutch concert visitors are not like f.i. Argentina or even Cuban concert visitors, but like quite some foreign visitors of the Amsterdam concert noticed, the overall mood among the Dutch after the concert was one of smiles on faces and ... satisfaction. They prefer to spend a lot of money to go and see the Stones instead of pocket money to go and see a Stones cover band perfectly copying the Stones. I'm a well travelled person and I know from experience that there are countless people around the world who would be willing to turn the world upside down to see these "old rockers". I honestly feel for those people not to be able to have that unique experience. Never enough Stones ...
Quote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
georgie48Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Did you actually read the review? It's not that negative like you put it here.
Yes, I read the whole article, just like the earlier ones.
I could have mentioned even more (the article header f.i.), but I think I made a point. Dutch concert visitors are not like f.i. Argentina or even Cuban concert visitors, but like quite some foreign visitors of the Amsterdam concert noticed, the overall mood among the Dutch after the concert was one of smiles on faces and ... satisfaction. They prefer to spend a lot of money to go and see the Stones instead of pocket money to go and see a Stones cover band perfectly copying the Stones. I'm a well travelled person and I know from experience that there are countless people around the world who would be willing to turn the world upside down to see these "old rockers". I honestly feel for those people not to be able to have that unique experience. Never enough Stones ...
I read it too.Can you point out were the reviewer mentioned that he hates the stones? He ends with saying that they are rock dinosaurs, a league of their own.
Quote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
georgie48Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Did you actually read the review? It's not that negative like you put it here.
Yes, I read the whole article, just like the earlier ones.
I could have mentioned even more (the article header f.i.), but I think I made a point. Dutch concert visitors are not like f.i. Argentina or even Cuban concert visitors, but like quite some foreign visitors of the Amsterdam concert noticed, the overall mood among the Dutch after the concert was one of smiles on faces and ... satisfaction. They prefer to spend a lot of money to go and see the Stones instead of pocket money to go and see a Stones cover band perfectly copying the Stones. I'm a well travelled person and I know from experience that there are countless people around the world who would be willing to turn the world upside down to see these "old rockers". I honestly feel for those people not to be able to have that unique experience. Never enough Stones ...
I read it too.Can you point out were the reviewer mentioned that he hates the stones? He ends with saying that they are rock dinosaurs, a league of their own.
Quote
jloweQuote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
georgie48Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Did you actually read the review? It's not that negative like you put it here.
Yes, I read the whole article, just like the earlier ones.
I could have mentioned even more (the article header f.i.), but I think I made a point. Dutch concert visitors are not like f.i. Argentina or even Cuban concert visitors, but like quite some foreign visitors of the Amsterdam concert noticed, the overall mood among the Dutch after the concert was one of smiles on faces and ... satisfaction. They prefer to spend a lot of money to go and see the Stones instead of pocket money to go and see a Stones cover band perfectly copying the Stones. I'm a well travelled person and I know from experience that there are countless people around the world who would be willing to turn the world upside down to see these "old rockers". I honestly feel for those people not to be able to have that unique experience. Never enough Stones ...
I read it too.Can you point out were the reviewer mentioned that he hates the stones? He ends with saying that they are rock dinosaurs, a league of their own.
They were called rock dinosaurs in 1978..after Punk Rock had arrived.
Quote
caschimann
Sorry I am not native.
And was in a rush.
And even desribing Stones members in two words is a hard attempt.
Let me correct this into: "natural born frontman"
But what do you think about my point general?
Quote
bv
I have to remind people about one very important fact:
A newspaper is writing for everyone. The journalist may like or dislike the band for many reasons. A journalist in a newspaper may say the show is terrible and that the band should retire.
IORR is a Rolling Stones Fan Club site. People who visit are guests, and people who write and report are supposed to have some sort of love for the band. You might have a love that is fading, some do, like you miss the old days with Bill Wyman, Mick taylor and cheap beer, long hair, young girls, and you want these days back. But still. Most visitors and writers on IORR are supposed to have some sort of rewspect for the band and their band members, as well as their fans. If you write with disrespect it is just like with a newspaper, it will be rejected. It does not make any sense to write a report of 1,000 words about a show, when the entire report is saying "Mick can not sing". Why not? Because it would be the same as saying it may rain upwards. We all know rain fall down, not up.
Quote
bv
FYI more than 99% of all posts and reports are published and never censored or touched on IORR. It is an offence and an insult to compare IORR with Pravda, North Korea or any other "system controlled" information channels. Just like people compare me - the IORR Editor, with dictators from past history, it is tastless and offending.
The information on IORR flow freely like a river to the ocean. I hardly touch anything posted. In a normal newspaper they get may be a thousand posts and letters every day, sites are heavily monitored, because they get infected by hate, intolerance and biazed writing. Any serious publication do have editors, many editors, and they do not publish more than a small fraction of what people try to get into the world.
The IORR editor is busy on the tour, and unless something is reported as insulting, offending, political or racist, the posts just stay, regardless of their contents. Don't tell me I do censorship on IORR. It is a lie. A big lie.
This thread is like a lamp in the summernight. It is getting the attention from people who complain and nag nag nag. So it will be merged into the "Complaints" thread soon. That is where complaints belong.