For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
tioms
hi, DandelionPowderman,"
Can you tell us more about "(supposedly because 10 CC fvcked up their equipment)"
(sound equipment, or something else)?
I was in Knebworth.
I've read a more detailed story, but it's mentioned here as well:
[www.loudersound.com]
Quote
Freebird1959
Greatttttttttttttttttttt! Ofcourse I own Freebird The Movie, but any "new" material is more than welcome!!
[youtu.be]
Play it Loud as Slade says.
Quote
batcaveQuote
TumblinDice76
Keep in mind I was 2 months old when this Fair took place, that said, I always enjoyed this sloppy Stones Set. A little bit of Country Honk is fun and it's nice to hear Route 66 and Around and Around again live. One interesting comparison is the Stones played 2 hours and twenty seven minutes. Skynard played around an hour and 15 minutes. Now I like Skynard and have seen them over 10 times through the years, but short tight sets are always good. I saw the Ramones (who I also love) at Lollapalooza 1996. Did they blow Metallica and Soundgarden off the stage? Of course they did. The Ramones came out 1234, and ripped through 55 minutes of classics. Soundgarden and Metallica played over 2 hours each of a "full" show. Sometimes less is more and in this case Skynard rips through an hour plus of mostly their best hits and closes with the always amazing Free Bird.
The other thing to remember is that Skynyrd had been on the road for over a year so they were pretty tight at that point. The Stones hadn't played live for a few months and probably had some rust that had built up...
Quote
Silver DaggerQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
tioms
hi, DandelionPowderman,"
Can you tell us more about "(supposedly because 10 CC fvcked up their equipment)"
(sound equipment, or something else)?
I was in Knebworth.
I've read a more detailed story, but it's mentioned here as well:
[www.loudersound.com]
10cc had several synths which went out of tune when the temperature rapidly dropped after the scorching hot August sun. So they were nearly 90 minutes late coming on and then, apparently Keith was waiting for Spanish Tony to arrive with the gear and refused to go on until he made the connection. That took another 90 minutes or so. So instead of taking to the stage at 9pm the Stones arrived at nearly midnight.
Quote
EddieBywordQuote
24FPS
Isn't there more from video/film from'76 than just Knebworth? Wasn't there a filmed Wembley concert? And Paris?
Yes, there was Paris - which featured on the Old Grey Whistle Test in 1977 and a French music show but no Wembley as they played Earl's Court x 6 in May.
There was/is about 50 mins of Wembley pro - shot '82 available.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
It was Artemus Pyle who claimed that. Then the Skynyrd-fans loyally contributed to the legend
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
It was Artemus Pyle who claimed that. Then the Skynyrd-fans loyally contributed to the legend
Yeah, I guess that is one side of the story. What actually happened, and how the people back then viewed the performances that probably depands on the eye of the beholder...
But I recall reading from Stones biographies that generally the Stones were critizised by British rock press for their performance - them being hasbeens, and acts like 10cc showing what the day's rock is like. But I guess we need to mind the context there, and the nature of always overtly-critical British rock press; the 'old farts' Stones being like a relic from the past, a dying representation of dinosaur rock - and the punk movement was not yet, but just about to happen. There was so much to not like about the Stones at the time (and probably BLACK AND BLUE didn't much help to see them musically not irrelevant). Add their their arrogant, hedonist rock star attitude, Jagger's controversial superstar persona and all that. So even though the Stones performance most likely wasn't their best, I would imagine that the verdict by the trend-following/leading press would have been the same no matter how would have they played. And no matter who else have played there - and how well - they would 'have blown the Stones away'.... Time (press) wasn't in their side at the time... but it could be that the thousands of people who actually saw the Stones that night might have thought differently....
Surely the Stones weren't that hot band any longer for the new generations of rock music listeners, but I guess that fact doesn't mean anything in a Stones concert - then or ever since. The Stones have a huge appeal to big crowds and people want to see them, be them no matter how relevant or not. I guess that was the case already in Knebworth. Da Stones, man...
- Doxa
Quote
SpudQuote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
It was Artemus Pyle who claimed that. Then the Skynyrd-fans loyally contributed to the legend
Yeah, I guess that is one side of the story. What actually happened, and how the people back then viewed the performances that probably depands on the eye of the beholder...
But I recall reading from Stones biographies that generally the Stones were critizised by British rock press for their performance - them being hasbeens, and acts like 10cc showing what the day's rock is like. But I guess we need to mind the context there, and the nature of always overtly-critical British rock press; the 'old farts' Stones being like a relic from the past, a dying representation of dinosaur rock - and the punk movement was not yet, but just about to happen. There was so much to not like about the Stones at the time (and probably BLACK AND BLUE didn't much help to see them musically not irrelevant). Add their their arrogant, hedonist rock star attitude, Jagger's controversial superstar persona and all that. So even though the Stones performance most likely wasn't their best, I would imagine that the verdict by the trend-following/leading press would have been the same no matter how would have they played. And no matter who else have played there - and how well - they would 'have blown the Stones away'.... Time (press) wasn't in their side at the time... but it could be that the thousands of people who actually saw the Stones that night might have thought differently....
Surely the Stones weren't that hot band any longer for the new generations of rock music listeners, but I guess that fact doesn't mean anything in a Stones concert - then or ever since. The Stones have a huge appeal to big crowds and people want to see them, be them no matter how relevant or not. I guess that was the case already in Knebworth. Da Stones, man...
- Doxa
Well I was already a big Skynyrd fan. I'd seen them on previous UK tours and they were as brilliant as ever at Knebworth...
But they did not "blow the Stones away".
A few bands , like Skynyrd, play great Rock N Roll.
The Stones , on the other hand, are Rock N Roll ...and certainly were on that longest day in '76 !
Quote
teleblasterQuote
SpudQuote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
It was Artemus Pyle who claimed that. Then the Skynyrd-fans loyally contributed to the legend
Yeah, I guess that is one side of the story. What actually happened, and how the people back then viewed the performances that probably depands on the eye of the beholder...
But I recall reading from Stones biographies that generally the Stones were critizised by British rock press for their performance - them being hasbeens, and acts like 10cc showing what the day's rock is like. But I guess we need to mind the context there, and the nature of always overtly-critical British rock press; the 'old farts' Stones being like a relic from the past, a dying representation of dinosaur rock - and the punk movement was not yet, but just about to happen. There was so much to not like about the Stones at the time (and probably BLACK AND BLUE didn't much help to see them musically not irrelevant). Add their their arrogant, hedonist rock star attitude, Jagger's controversial superstar persona and all that. So even though the Stones performance most likely wasn't their best, I would imagine that the verdict by the trend-following/leading press would have been the same no matter how would have they played. And no matter who else have played there - and how well - they would 'have blown the Stones away'.... Time (press) wasn't in their side at the time... but it could be that the thousands of people who actually saw the Stones that night might have thought differently....
Surely the Stones weren't that hot band any longer for the new generations of rock music listeners, but I guess that fact doesn't mean anything in a Stones concert - then or ever since. The Stones have a huge appeal to big crowds and people want to see them, be them no matter how relevant or not. I guess that was the case already in Knebworth. Da Stones, man...
- Doxa
Well I was already a big Skynyrd fan. I'd seen them on previous UK tours and they were as brilliant as ever at Knebworth...
But they did not "blow the Stones away".
A few bands , like Skynyrd, play great Rock N Roll.
The Stones , on the other hand, are Rock N Roll ...and certainly were on that longest day in '76 !
I agree 100%. I was also a Skynyrd fan with a few shows under my belt (including one at the Glasgow Apollo in which they did blow away the headline act, Golden Earring, a gig still much discussed round these parts).
They were great at Knebworth and the highlight of the daylight bands, but while they certainly went down a storm, they did not blow the Stones away.
I don't understand the discussion about 10cc "showing what the day's rock is like" compared to old farts like the Stones. 10cc were a very poor choice who, combined with the lengthy delays, sucked a lot of energy out of the audience between Skynyrd's set and that of the Stones. They were a clever pop band, totally out of place between rockers like Skynyrd and the Stones in a festival setting. Very few in the audience were there to see 10cc, they were the least cool act that day and I found their set boring. By the time the Stones came on, my mate had passed out, but I loved their set despite sound problems, etc. and the audience loved them. It would just have been so much better without 10cc, in my opinion.
Quote
teleblasterQuote
SpudQuote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
It was Artemus Pyle who claimed that. Then the Skynyrd-fans loyally contributed to the legend
Yeah, I guess that is one side of the story. What actually happened, and how the people back then viewed the performances that probably depands on the eye of the beholder...
But I recall reading from Stones biographies that generally the Stones were critizised by British rock press for their performance - them being hasbeens, and acts like 10cc showing what the day's rock is like. But I guess we need to mind the context there, and the nature of always overtly-critical British rock press; the 'old farts' Stones being like a relic from the past, a dying representation of dinosaur rock - and the punk movement was not yet, but just about to happen. There was so much to not like about the Stones at the time (and probably BLACK AND BLUE didn't much help to see them musically not irrelevant). Add their their arrogant, hedonist rock star attitude, Jagger's controversial superstar persona and all that. So even though the Stones performance most likely wasn't their best, I would imagine that the verdict by the trend-following/leading press would have been the same no matter how would have they played. And no matter who else have played there - and how well - they would 'have blown the Stones away'.... Time (press) wasn't in their side at the time... but it could be that the thousands of people who actually saw the Stones that night might have thought differently....
Surely the Stones weren't that hot band any longer for the new generations of rock music listeners, but I guess that fact doesn't mean anything in a Stones concert - then or ever since. The Stones have a huge appeal to big crowds and people want to see them, be them no matter how relevant or not. I guess that was the case already in Knebworth. Da Stones, man...
- Doxa
Well I was already a big Skynyrd fan. I'd seen them on previous UK tours and they were as brilliant as ever at Knebworth...
But they did not "blow the Stones away".
A few bands , like Skynyrd, play great Rock N Roll.
The Stones , on the other hand, are Rock N Roll ...and certainly were on that longest day in '76 !
I agree 100%. I was also a Skynyrd fan with a few shows under my belt (including one at the Glasgow Apollo in which they did blow away the headline act, Golden Earring, a gig still much discussed round these parts).
They were great at Knebworth and the highlight of the daylight bands, but while they certainly went down a storm, they did not blow the Stones away.
I don't understand the discussion about 10cc "showing what the day's rock is like" compared to old farts like the Stones. 10cc were a very poor choice who, combined with the lengthy delays, sucked a lot of energy out of the audience between Skynyrd's set and that of the Stones. They were a clever pop band, totally out of place between rockers like Skynyrd and the Stones in a festival setting. Very few in the audience were there to see 10cc, they were the least cool act that day and I found their set boring. By the time the Stones came on, my mate had passed out, but I loved their set despite sound problems, etc. and the audience loved them. It would just have been so much better without 10cc, in my opinion.
Quote
Elmo LewisQuote
Freebird1959
Greatttttttttttttttttttt! Ofcourse I own Freebird The Movie, but any "new" material is more than welcome!!
[youtu.be]
Play it Loud as Slade says.
"Turn it up", as Ronnie Van Zant says.
Quote
EddieBywordQuote
Hairball
I've read many times, including from members here who were in attendance, that Lynyrd Skynyrd dominated and ultimately stole the show by a landslide.
Similar to hearing from many that AC/DC were the highlight and blew away the Stones at the SARS benefit.
I was there as a 16 year old about 30/40 yards from the stage and although Skynyrd were a really, truly impressive surprise (I'd never heard them before), well, if it was possible, to go back and see one set again - if I had to choose - no contest, the Stones everytime. They were and still are in a class of their own..............Midnight Rambler alone was a masterpiece with Mick in those weird tights more or less crawling round the stage moaning and groaning.........not to mention the unbelievable, still unsurpassed setlist, well...................... ....and good fun as well, not taking themselves too seriously even though they were in front of one of the biggest crowds since Hyde park '69..........
Also, I did hear myself that it was Skynyrd themselves who first mentioned "Blowing the Stones away"............(I don't really know that that's true......................
Another telling fact, I think, the Stones held everyone's attention from midnight to quarter to three in the morning.............A few might have left early to get trains etc but there were still thousands and thousands making their way to the campsite right at the end, a seemingly non stop parade, so..............shattered but not diminished........
Quote
Rockman
my first experience of the Stones close up and it was magical, but also felt dark & edgy and even slightly satanic.
Hey that's good ta read ......
Quote
Rockman
Love to see an official copy of this and a good few months ago, somebody put a better quality version on YouTube which was really good, but soon taken down.
Quote
mosthighQuote
Rockman
Love to see an official copy of this and a good few months ago, somebody put a better quality version on YouTube which was really good, but soon taken down.
To me, that suggests an official release is on the horizon. A good (?) reason to take a video down (especially in high quality) is because it will interfere with sales from the official release.
Quote
Hairball
Yawn....
Quote
Madcap
Wow that set list looks amazing! I would love to hear this show.