JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, it should be the performance factor alone
> shouldn't it?

not really. thats for a different type of poll and then youre going to get a list that has no consensus with people just voting for shows they were at

Its hardly important to be honest. Every week theres some silly, meaningless poll and you can always bet that within minutes people are going to get all bent out of shape because THEIR band or some gig they were at or liked on a bootleg tape wasnt included. Its nonsense

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Its hardly important to be honest. Every week
> theres some silly, meaningless poll and you can
> always bet that within minutes people are going to
> get all bent out of shape because THEIR band or
> some gig they were at or liked on a bootleg tape
> wasnt included. Its nonsense.

I'm glad to see that I have a partner that hates the music mags polls as much as I do. They're dreadful. Thanks Gaz.


JumpingKentFlash

The Channel 4 list wouldn't have anything to do with what footage was available in the UK, would it?

All those who didn't include in their lists THE WHO LEEDS gig should be burned

[There'll be no wedding today...]

As Gazza has correctly stated, it's not important.
It's easy to list-off, all the "landmark", supposed-seminal gigs, in the last 30-40 years. But unless you actually attended all of these gigs, then its not credible, is it?
You may as well,say you saw Robert Johnson's first ever performance, or you were there when Elvis and The Beatles jammed together ,at Graceland.

Adrian

The Elvis-Beatles jam actually took place at Elvis' mansion in Bel Air - not Graceland

Yours,

a pedantic bástard

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
>
> I'm glad to see that I have a partner that hates
> the music mags polls as much as I do. They're
> dreadful. Thanks Gaz.
>

The main reason why I stopped buying Q about 3 years ago after having bought it almost as a ritual for 15 years

Blatant space filler for lazy, uninspired, know-nothing journalists

"hey heres a great idea..we havent a clue about music - lets get the public to write the magazine FOR us".

Hyde Park was probably the worst gig they've ever played. Historic, yes. Muscially good, no.

The Stones in 1999 San Jose 6th of april last show of No Security was pretty tight after 3 years on the road.

Although I agree with Gazza regarding historical significance of Hyde Park, the SARS concert drew more people and received a better performance from the Stones, even with Ron Wood and Chuck Leavell. No one has mentioned the SARS concert (for good reasons I'm sure) yet it was the largest attended concert in history (paid attendance that is).

Gazza is also right about posters choosing concerts they attended or have a bootleg. In my opinion this poll asks us to list concerts for their impact on the music industry, pop culture in general, and perhaps even economic and political ramifications. If that be the case, Live Aid and Woodstock rank near the top and the SARS concert probably ranks somewhere in the Top 10, yet not one of the best or most famous performances by the Stones.

If you're talking about the most IMPORTANT concerts in Stones history and the significance of these concerts on their career consider the following not in any particular order:

1. Hyde Park 1969 (first full length concert in over two years and the introduction of MT)
2. Altamont 1969 We know what happened here in front of 300,000 people and millions of movie goers.
3. Brussels 1973 regarded as one of their finest performances and one of the last performances with MT.
4. Philadelphia 8-31-89 first Stones concert in 7 years and many of us (admit it) thought we may never see the Stones perform again during the Mick and Keith spat in the mid 80's.
5. The last concert they just played: because they're still playing and for some of them, especially Keith and now Charlie, being above ground instead of pushing up daisies is a good day indeed.

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gazza Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Its hardly important to be honest. Every
> week
> > theres some silly, meaningless poll and you
> can
> > always bet that within minutes people are
> going to
> > get all bent out of shape because THEIR band
> or
> > some gig they were at or liked on a bootleg
> tape
> > wasnt included. Its nonsense.
>
> I'm glad to see that I have a partner that hates
> the music mags polls as much as I do. They're
> dreadful. Thanks Gaz.
>
>
>
> "Better than suicide"

I agree too. They're always very strange. I always wonder how they put them up. Do people vote for them? I got the feeling it's just the editors making their own top 10's or something. This one happened to be a Queen fan. Next one may be a Stones fan or a Hendrix fan or something.

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
> >
> > I'm glad to see that I have a partner that
> hates
> > the music mags polls as much as I do.
> They're
> > dreadful. Thanks Gaz.
> >
>
> The main reason why I stopped buying Q about 3
> years ago after having bought it almost as a
> ritual for 15 years
>
> Blatant space filler for lazy, uninspired,
> know-nothing journalists
>
> "hey heres a great idea..we havent a clue about
> music - lets get the public to write the magazine
> FOR us".
>
>


So true. I sometimes buy Mojo 'cause they haven't completely sold out yet.



JumpingKentFlash

rockdoc8885 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Although I agree with Gazza regarding historical
> significance of Hyde Park, the SARS concert drew
> more people and received a better performance from
> the Stones, even with Ron Wood and Chuck Leavell.
> No one has mentioned the SARS concert (for good
> reasons I'm sure) yet it was the largest attended
> concert in history (paid attendance that is).
>
> Gazza is also right about posters choosing
> concerts they attended or have a bootleg. In my
> opinion this poll asks us to list concerts for
> their impact on the music industry, pop culture in
> general, and perhaps even economic and political
> ramifications. If that be the case, Live Aid and
> Woodstock rank near the top and the SARS concert
> probably ranks somewhere in the Top 10, yet not
> one of the best or most famous performances by the
> Stones.
>
> If you're talking about the most IMPORTANT
> concerts in Stones history and the significance of
> these concerts on their career consider the
> following not in any particular order:
>
> 1. Hyde Park 1969 (first full length concert in
> over two years and the introduction of MT)
> 2. Altamont 1969 We know what happened here in
> front of 300,000 people and millions of movie
> goers.
> 3. Brussels 1973 regarded as one of their finest
> performances and one of the last performances with
> MT.
> 4. Philadelphia 8-31-89 first Stones concert in 7
> years and many of us (admit it) thought we may
> never see the Stones perform again during the Mick
> and Keith spat in the mid 80's.
> 5. The last concert they just played: because
> they're still playing and for some of them,
> especially Keith and now Charlie, being above
> ground instead of pushing up daisies is a good day
> indeed.



I really dont think theres any significance to numbers 3-5 outside of the people who were at them and those who might enjoy a bootleg recording. In the wider world of rock n roll history, they're not important at all

I can see your point with the SARS show, but while obviously it was a big deal to some extent - in Canada anyway - but its hardly the most significant show of the band's history. the fact that it wasnt widely televised doesnt help. The Stones in 2003 - good though they were on that tour - dont have the cultural impact that they had in 1969. Hyde Park and Altamont were high profile events significant to the Stones' history (and rock n roll in general) and which featured a band at a time when they were at the 'cutting edge' and at their most important.

Now, if someone out there happened to be doing nothing on a thursday evening and strolled into the Marquee on July 12th, 1962....


PS - if the list included TV appearances and not just concerts, it would be a different story. What made the Stones in the early days was the impact they had when they were seen on TV. Ed Sullivan Show, Shindig and a few early UK Tv appearances would certainly count (then you'd have to include both the Beatles and Elvis' early US TV appearances too..which had an even bigger significance)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-11-10 21:12 by Gazza.

1. Jimi in Woodstock 69
2. The Who in Woodstock 69
3. The Rolling Stones in Hampton 81
4. Led Zeppelin in LA 72
5. The Rolling Stones in Munich 03 (Krone Bau)
6. Dylan in London (Manchester) 66