Tell Me :
Talk
I'm with you. Wouldn't surprise me at all to find out that royalties were split in more ways than just between Jagger & Richards even when the liner notes imply otherwise.
Peace,
Mr DJA
It's different than simply doing cover songs or collaborating with another artist...hiring professional songwriters like Child and Warren (who practically have the writing of pop hits down to a science) to craft hits for them is a cheat.
But while I can enjoy the music, it still offends my sensibilities that they needed outside songwriters to help them write songs. As I said, a working rock'n'roll band should sink or swim on its own merits. Am I a hypocrite for enjoying the material while being critical of the way in which it was created? I don't know...
Mick is involved on all albums. However, he was supposedly less involved on DW (although we have bootlegs who gives an impression of closer Mick/Keith-collaboration than we thought.
Listen to the last track on the Crushed Pearl-bootleg (Broken Hearts For You And Me), where we hear Mick and Keith humming out the lines together and suggesting words.
Interesting. That sort of explains why in the 90s the Aerosmith came out with a string of songs like "Amaaazing", "Craaaazy", "Cryyyying", all following the same lameness. I never knew that they used outside songwriters but it explains a lot.
I still liked their album "Pump" but everything that came after that was not very good and certainly way below their level in the 70s.
But it were the ballads that brought home the bacon for them - much thanks to Desmond Child, Dianne Warren and others...
It's kinda funny that they needed that shot, because imo ballads like You See Me Crying, Dream On and others are superior to Angel, Amazing and the others.
The latter-day ballads are still good pop-tunes, though.
Which is why many people don't rate Jagger or Richards in the upper echelons of 'songwriters', I guess.
They did indeed. The funny thing was that the first single «Living on The Edge» didn't quite take off
Tyler, Perry, Jim Vallance (professional songwriter), Holly Knight (professional songwriter)
- Dude (Looks Like a Lady) writing credits:
Tyler, Perry, Desmond Child (professional songwriter)
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
Send It To me
()
Date: November 20, 2017 17:15
Reading Joe Perry's book now which is very good and I recommend. They began with Tyler/Perry on most song but in the 80's brought in outside songwriters to assist and were able to sell many millions of records on big hits late in their career from '87 to '01. Do you think Mick and Keith could/should have helped the Stones continue to have to hits by bringing in songwriting collaborators during the 80's and 90's? Did their ego as songwriters hold back the band? Or do you prefer the purity of Jagger/Richards? Heck, even Jagger/Richards/Woods was taken away - Ronnie probably could've helped. For what it's worth, I really like Steel Wheels, Voodoo, Bridges, and Bang, but in terms of reaching the non-hardcore fans in the wider world....
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: November 20, 2017 17:20
Hell no. Sink or swim on your own merits.
When Aerosmith needed to bring in the likes of Diane Warren and Desmond Child to craft their pop hits, they were finished as a band.
And truth be told, I like many of their '80s and '90s songs that were written with the help of outside songwriters, but it doesn't reflect well on Tyler and Perry as musicians.
When Aerosmith needed to bring in the likes of Diane Warren and Desmond Child to craft their pop hits, they were finished as a band.
And truth be told, I like many of their '80s and '90s songs that were written with the help of outside songwriters, but it doesn't reflect well on Tyler and Perry as musicians.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 20, 2017 17:22
Wood was credited becayse he wrote (more or less) whole songs when Mick was not present, that he and Keith formed together.
Had Mick and Keith worked closely together in the late 70s/early 80s I doubt that Ronnie would have had many songs on Stones albums.
I'm glad Desmond Child (or any of the other writers) got nowhere near a Stones record, though.
Had Mick and Keith worked closely together in the late 70s/early 80s I doubt that Ronnie would have had many songs on Stones albums.
I'm glad Desmond Child (or any of the other writers) got nowhere near a Stones record, though.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
Kurt
()
Date: November 20, 2017 17:25
We can thank our lucky stars that they didn't.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: November 20, 2017 17:34
No.
Aerosmith were purposely doing that because they tanked - and when MTV came along they did it for the sell out.
The Stones... they never gave a shit about that kind of thing.
Besides, consider some of the pure schlock they did - Rock And A Hard Place, Continental Drift, Always Suffering, Already Over Me, Might As Well Get Juiced, Gunface, Streets Of Love - those are impossible to make better because they're awful songs.
Aerosmith were purposely doing that because they tanked - and when MTV came along they did it for the sell out.
The Stones... they never gave a shit about that kind of thing.
Besides, consider some of the pure schlock they did - Rock And A Hard Place, Continental Drift, Always Suffering, Already Over Me, Might As Well Get Juiced, Gunface, Streets Of Love - those are impossible to make better because they're awful songs.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
mr_dja
()
Date: November 20, 2017 18:41
This seems to be as good a place as any to share this link:
[www.udiscovermusic.com]
In the article Matt is quoted, "“It’s fantastic to be working with Mike Smith and the team at Warner/Chappell,” says Clifford. “I know that they’ll be able to support me in all my various projects, from my exciting work with Mick and the Stones to my composing of film and TV soundtracks.”" (Emphasis by DJA)
Not sure if this means Clifford expects to be getting writing credits on a new Stones album or not. Maybe a hint that some more Jagger/Clifford songs are in the pipeline for Stones involvement?
Peace,
Mr DJA
[www.udiscovermusic.com]
In the article Matt is quoted, "“It’s fantastic to be working with Mike Smith and the team at Warner/Chappell,” says Clifford. “I know that they’ll be able to support me in all my various projects, from my exciting work with Mick and the Stones to my composing of film and TV soundtracks.”" (Emphasis by DJA)
Not sure if this means Clifford expects to be getting writing credits on a new Stones album or not. Maybe a hint that some more Jagger/Clifford songs are in the pipeline for Stones involvement?
Peace,
Mr DJA
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
jlowe
()
Date: November 20, 2017 18:48
The whole business of songwriting credits and copyrights is intriguing with the likes of Clifford and Steve Jordan around.
I suspect there are dome 'private ie monetary deals' agreed even if they don't get an actual composers credit.
I suspect there are dome 'private ie monetary deals' agreed even if they don't get an actual composers credit.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
mr_dja
()
Date: November 20, 2017 19:04
Quote
jlowe
The whole business of songwriting credits and copyrights is intriguing with the likes of Clifford and Steve Jordan around.
I suspect there are dome 'private ie monetary deals' agreed even if they don't get an actual composers credit.
I'm with you. Wouldn't surprise me at all to find out that royalties were split in more ways than just between Jagger & Richards even when the liner notes imply otherwise.
Peace,
Mr DJA
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
Koen
()
Date: November 20, 2017 19:14
Who cares who wrote those songs? They @#$%& rock.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: November 20, 2017 19:20
I care insofar as I'm of the belief that a working rock'n'roll band should write their own material.Quote
Koen
Who cares who wrote those songs? They @#$%& rock.
It's different than simply doing cover songs or collaborating with another artist...hiring professional songwriters like Child and Warren (who practically have the writing of pop hits down to a science) to craft hits for them is a cheat.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
harlem shuffle
()
Date: November 21, 2017 00:01
Hi On what album/songs was Mick Jagger not involved.?Dirty Work?
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
RipThisBone
()
Date: November 21, 2017 00:07
Stones vs. Aerosmith ..............
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHHAHHAAAA...
Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAA...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-21 00:13 by RipThisBone.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHHAHHAAAA...
Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAA...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-11-21 00:13 by RipThisBone.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
Fernandobsas
()
Date: November 21, 2017 02:46
What about David Gilmour in the two studio albums that follows The Final Cut.
Most of the songs of this albums were writen by Gilmour and others helpers.
Bye
Fernando
Most of the songs of this albums were writen by Gilmour and others helpers.
Bye
Fernando
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
wonderboy
()
Date: November 21, 2017 02:51
Yeah, one you start bringing in outside songwriters you are just selling your brand and not artists anymore.
Authors are doing this -- you see famous author's name in large print on the cover, and in tiny print you see the person who really wrote the book.
Authors are doing this -- you see famous author's name in large print on the cover, and in tiny print you see the person who really wrote the book.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
MileHigh
()
Date: November 21, 2017 04:44
Interesting little story about Aerosmith. I saw them in 1976 in an arena and they put on a great show (from what I can remember). They did a truly amazing special effect and there is a Stones connection. I think the "other boys" were getting arrogant...
Half-way through the show the lights went dark. Stage hands came out and pulled on a tall white curtain that completely surrounded the stage so you couln't see anything. They were filling the enclosed space with white smoke and this took a minute or two. Nobody really knew what was going on, you could only vaguely see the tall white curtain.
Then... You heard a single guitar playing the bare Midnight Rambler riff, da-dum da-dum.... What? The Stones? It looked like the curtain was being pulled back but you still couldn't see anything.... The guitar is still playing the Midnight Rambler riff.... And then ***B*O*O*M***!!!! A hundred flash-pots all went off at the same time and the column of white smoke the band was in lit up like a giant blinding flash cube and the boom hit everyone in the chest. It was absolutely shocking! And then Aerosmith tore into one of their songs but I can't remember which one.
It was a fantastic special effect, and a total sensory overload. And the "other boys" were symbolically trying to signal that they were taking over from "the boys" and we all know where that went...
Half-way through the show the lights went dark. Stage hands came out and pulled on a tall white curtain that completely surrounded the stage so you couln't see anything. They were filling the enclosed space with white smoke and this took a minute or two. Nobody really knew what was going on, you could only vaguely see the tall white curtain.
Then... You heard a single guitar playing the bare Midnight Rambler riff, da-dum da-dum.... What? The Stones? It looked like the curtain was being pulled back but you still couldn't see anything.... The guitar is still playing the Midnight Rambler riff.... And then ***B*O*O*M***!!!! A hundred flash-pots all went off at the same time and the column of white smoke the band was in lit up like a giant blinding flash cube and the boom hit everyone in the chest. It was absolutely shocking! And then Aerosmith tore into one of their songs but I can't remember which one.
It was a fantastic special effect, and a total sensory overload. And the "other boys" were symbolically trying to signal that they were taking over from "the boys" and we all know where that went...
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
Toxic34
()
Date: November 21, 2017 05:40
The material from 1987 onward is still very much Aerosmith. It has the energy, the swagger, the verve and all the attitude of Aerosmith's '70s work. Look, Done With Mirrors is, quite simply, an incomplete record. Nothing sounds really finished, and the album never gets out of first gear. The entire band agrees with this and state flatly that "we weren't in a good groove at this point." Joe in particular says this. Aerosmith needed this shot in the arm, otherwise the band would have died then and there, regardless of their sobriety. The albums from then on, with the exception of Just Push Play, are great ones, full to the brim of impeccable material, beyond even the famous radio hits. And even Just Push Play has very Aerosmith material on it, but it simply doesn't work as an album.
If the Stones had needed that boost as well, they would've gone for it eventually, though they would've been brought into it kicking and screaming. But it is great that they never got to that point.
If the Stones had needed that boost as well, they would've gone for it eventually, though they would've been brought into it kicking and screaming. But it is great that they never got to that point.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: November 21, 2017 06:42
As I said, I actually love a lot of Aerosmith's '87-present material. I know it's not COOL to like that era, how the "real" Aerosmith died after Rocks, blah blah blah, but good music is good music.Quote
Toxic34
The material from 1987 onward is still very much Aerosmith. It has the energy, the swagger, the verve and all the attitude of Aerosmith's '70s work. Look, Done With Mirrors is, quite simply, an incomplete record. Nothing sounds really finished, and the album never gets out of first gear. The entire band agrees with this and state flatly that "we weren't in a good groove at this point." Joe in particular says this. Aerosmith needed this shot in the arm, otherwise the band would have died then and there, regardless of their sobriety. The albums from then on, with the exception of Just Push Play, are great ones, full to the brim of impeccable material, beyond even the famous radio hits. And even Just Push Play has very Aerosmith material on it, but it simply doesn't work as an album.
If the Stones had needed that boost as well, they would've gone for it eventually, though they would've been brought into it kicking and screaming. But it is great that they never got to that point.
But while I can enjoy the music, it still offends my sensibilities that they needed outside songwriters to help them write songs. As I said, a working rock'n'roll band should sink or swim on its own merits. Am I a hypocrite for enjoying the material while being critical of the way in which it was created? I don't know...
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
Dan
()
Date: November 21, 2017 07:40
Geffen made a very large investment in resurrecting Aerosmith and they expected a return on that investment and that means they need hits with songs and more importantly music videos that appeal to much younger demographic.
Now the Stones have always appealed to young people but that's more the tongue log o and the strength of the older songs.
At least when Virgin signed them in 1991, they got the rights to reissue the older material. By 1994 when Voodoo Lounge came out, with a few exceptions the 1980's phenomenon of older acts having much bigger hits in the MTV era had mostly worn off. So hit doctors probably wouldn't have done much more for Voodoo Lounge and Bridges To Babylon.
Now the Stones have always appealed to young people but that's more the tongue log o and the strength of the older songs.
At least when Virgin signed them in 1991, they got the rights to reissue the older material. By 1994 when Voodoo Lounge came out, with a few exceptions the 1980's phenomenon of older acts having much bigger hits in the MTV era had mostly worn off. So hit doctors probably wouldn't have done much more for Voodoo Lounge and Bridges To Babylon.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: November 21, 2017 07:50
There's a handful of Aersomith tunes I like from 1985 forward - the last Aerosmith album I ever bought was the so-so Done With Mirrors. But when they brought in outside writers a lot of it lost it's integrity and charm imo. Is a band really a band when they no longer write their own material? I suppose they can be, but I can't think of many that have taken that route and continue to be taken seriously.
As for the Stones, there's tunes from the last 35+ years that I have a hard time believing were actually written by Mick and Keith (or one or the other). For example, Streets of Love is an anomaly of anything that came before it. Are we absolutely sure they didn't get a helping hand from some of the same songwriters Aerosmith has used?
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
As for the Stones, there's tunes from the last 35+ years that I have a hard time believing were actually written by Mick and Keith (or one or the other). For example, Streets of Love is an anomaly of anything that came before it. Are we absolutely sure they didn't get a helping hand from some of the same songwriters Aerosmith has used?
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 21, 2017 10:15
Quote
harlem shuffle
Hi On what album/songs was Mick Jagger not involved.?Dirty Work?
Mick is involved on all albums. However, he was supposedly less involved on DW (although we have bootlegs who gives an impression of closer Mick/Keith-collaboration than we thought.
Listen to the last track on the Crushed Pearl-bootleg (Broken Hearts For You And Me), where we hear Mick and Keith humming out the lines together and suggesting words.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: November 21, 2017 10:48
Well the Stones started with an outside writer namely Lennon/McCartney and they played mainly covers. Theyve used people in the studio from the start and their producer Miller did a lot. The Beatles really wrote everything by themselves with minor input from outside the band. They suggested new ideas to their producer. The Stones never were that kind of band.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
matxil
()
Date: November 21, 2017 11:05
Quote
Send It To me
Reading Joe Perry's book now which is very good and I recommend. They began with Tyler/Perry on most song but in the 80's brought in outside songwriters to assist and were able to sell many millions of records on big hits late in their career from '87 to '01. Do you think Mick and Keith could/should have helped the Stones continue to have to hits by bringing in songwriting collaborators during the 80's and 90's? Did their ego as songwriters hold back the band? Or do you prefer the purity of Jagger/Richards? Heck, even Jagger/Richards/Woods was taken away - Ronnie probably could've helped. For what it's worth, I really like Steel Wheels, Voodoo, Bridges, and Bang, but in terms of reaching the non-hardcore fans in the wider world....
Interesting. That sort of explains why in the 90s the Aerosmith came out with a string of songs like "Amaaazing", "Craaaazy", "Cryyyying", all following the same lameness. I never knew that they used outside songwriters but it explains a lot.
I still liked their album "Pump" but everything that came after that was not very good and certainly way below their level in the 70s.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 21, 2017 12:02
Quote
Toxic34
The material from 1987 onward is still very much Aerosmith. It has the energy, the swagger, the verve and all the attitude of Aerosmith's '70s work. Look, Done With Mirrors is, quite simply, an incomplete record. Nothing sounds really finished, and the album never gets out of first gear. The entire band agrees with this and state flatly that "we weren't in a good groove at this point." Joe in particular says this. Aerosmith needed this shot in the arm, otherwise the band would have died then and there, regardless of their sobriety. The albums from then on, with the exception of Just Push Play, are great ones, full to the brim of impeccable material, beyond even the famous radio hits. And even Just Push Play has very Aerosmith material on it, but it simply doesn't work as an album.
If the Stones had needed that boost as well, they would've gone for it eventually, though they would've been brought into it kicking and screaming. But it is great that they never got to that point.
But it were the ballads that brought home the bacon for them - much thanks to Desmond Child, Dianne Warren and others...
It's kinda funny that they needed that shot, because imo ballads like You See Me Crying, Dream On and others are superior to Angel, Amazing and the others.
The latter-day ballads are still good pop-tunes, though.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
jlowe
()
Date: November 21, 2017 15:23
Quote
Redhotcarpet
Well the Stones started with an outside writer namely Lennon/McCartney and they played mainly covers. Theyve used people in the studio from the start and their producer Miller did a lot. The Beatles really wrote everything by themselves with minor input from outside the band. They suggested new ideas to their producer. The Stones never were that kind of band.
Which is why many people don't rate Jagger or Richards in the upper echelons of 'songwriters', I guess.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 21, 2017 15:25
Quote
Redhotcarpet
Well the Stones started with an outside writer namelyLennon/McCartneyBerry and they played mainly covers. Theyve used people in the studio from the start and their producer Miller did a lot. The Beatles really wrote everything by themselves with minor input from outside the band. They suggested new ideas to their producer. The Stones never were that kind of band.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 21, 2017 15:27
So what did Andrew write on Dandelion, Carpet? What about Lady Jane? Midnight Rambler?
I think you over-estimate the producers a bit here, although they certainly came up with some good ideas on some songs.
I think you over-estimate the producers a bit here, although they certainly came up with some good ideas on some songs.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: November 21, 2017 15:33
The trio of ballad videos that Aerosmith did with Alicia Silverstone (and Liv Tyler) for Get a Grip was HUGE. They were on endless MTV rotation and propelled their career for a few years afterward.Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Toxic34
The material from 1987 onward is still very much Aerosmith. It has the energy, the swagger, the verve and all the attitude of Aerosmith's '70s work. Look, Done With Mirrors is, quite simply, an incomplete record. Nothing sounds really finished, and the album never gets out of first gear. The entire band agrees with this and state flatly that "we weren't in a good groove at this point." Joe in particular says this. Aerosmith needed this shot in the arm, otherwise the band would have died then and there, regardless of their sobriety. The albums from then on, with the exception of Just Push Play, are great ones, full to the brim of impeccable material, beyond even the famous radio hits. And even Just Push Play has very Aerosmith material on it, but it simply doesn't work as an album.
If the Stones had needed that boost as well, they would've gone for it eventually, though they would've been brought into it kicking and screaming. But it is great that they never got to that point.
But it were the ballads that brought home the bacon for them - much thanks to Desmond Child, Dianne Warren and others...
It's kinda funny that they needed that shot, because imo ballads like You See Me Crying, Dream On and others are superior to Angel, Amazing and the others.
The latter-day ballads are still good pop-tunes, though.
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 21, 2017 15:36
Quote
keefriff99The trio of ballad videos that Aerosmith did with Alicia Silverstone (and Liv Tyler) for Get a Grip was HUGE. They were on endless MTV rotation and propelled their career for a few years afterward.Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Toxic34
The material from 1987 onward is still very much Aerosmith. It has the energy, the swagger, the verve and all the attitude of Aerosmith's '70s work. Look, Done With Mirrors is, quite simply, an incomplete record. Nothing sounds really finished, and the album never gets out of first gear. The entire band agrees with this and state flatly that "we weren't in a good groove at this point." Joe in particular says this. Aerosmith needed this shot in the arm, otherwise the band would have died then and there, regardless of their sobriety. The albums from then on, with the exception of Just Push Play, are great ones, full to the brim of impeccable material, beyond even the famous radio hits. And even Just Push Play has very Aerosmith material on it, but it simply doesn't work as an album.
If the Stones had needed that boost as well, they would've gone for it eventually, though they would've been brought into it kicking and screaming. But it is great that they never got to that point.
But it were the ballads that brought home the bacon for them - much thanks to Desmond Child, Dianne Warren and others...
It's kinda funny that they needed that shot, because imo ballads like You See Me Crying, Dream On and others are superior to Angel, Amazing and the others.
The latter-day ballads are still good pop-tunes, though.
They did indeed. The funny thing was that the first single «Living on The Edge» didn't quite take off
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
Koen
()
Date: November 21, 2017 15:42
So are Dude... and Rag Doll also written by others?
Re: Stones vs. Aerosmith re outside songwriters
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: November 21, 2017 15:49
- Rag Doll writing credits:Quote
Koen
So are Dude... and Rag Doll also written by others?
Tyler, Perry, Jim Vallance (professional songwriter), Holly Knight (professional songwriter)
- Dude (Looks Like a Lady) writing credits:
Tyler, Perry, Desmond Child (professional songwriter)
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
bv , cyclist , EggersBand , fedecarp , FoolToCry , hot stuff , Irix , keefmick , Kevinstones78 , MJAGGER123 , NedKellyBandit , NilsHolgersson , ohmercy61 , Potato , roryg , souldoggie , TooTight , usetobesampeg
Guests:
1730
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10