I'm so glad the folks recognize how GREAT Albany was for performance and crowd response! Over the top! They had played there 40 years ago and returned with something to prove and they PROVED IT all night that they were STILL the best band on the planet! Hartford was a close second for both reasons mentioned previously and both Philly shows were incredible, REALLY LOUD and the audience hung on every note! ( At least from where I sat in the 8th row, Keith's side). THe mistakes made during the first Philly show were historical! They didn't really detract from the show as a whole. Every one of the 6 shows I've seen were great for different reasons; every show was over 2 hours, 22 or 21 songs, and on each night, the band really seemed to be energized and Mick was smiling alot, very animated.

For me, based on the shows I've heard - Chicago and Albany

I saw Hartford and Philly #2...I preferred Philly #2; better setlist
and I prefer to see arena's rather than stadiums; more intimate..sound is
alot better..less hassle

Hershey, no doubt about it. The setlist, the perfect weather, a rested band (two nights off), energetic crowd, and an overall excellent performance from the band. Better than Columbus and Albany, much better than D.C. or Philly and only Pittsburgh compares because of a great opening act, Pearl Jam. Just my opinion.