For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
IrixQuote
hockenheim95
What's the advantage of hearing Wembley 82 on CD than hearing it on Spotify?
Sound quality, because Spotify is vastly data-compressed (lossy)?
Quote
IrixQuote
hockenheim95
If something like this would ever happen then I can still download those albums.
It happened e.g. with GRRR!, the Abkco Singles 1963-71 or the Singles 1971-2006 (173 Tracks).
Listening via Streaming until the physical releases are on clearance for a good price works of course too.
Quote
hockenheim95
But The Abkco Single Box Sets are there complete but for the 1971-2006 there is only a Sampler.
Quote
24FPS
Isn't it strange? The less you get, the more you pay. I'd pay $300 USD to see the '72 Stones in concert. I wouldn't pay $100 USD to see the current version. I didn't go near the bloated prices at Sofi when they played Los Angeles. Just like I won't go near there for the upcoming McCartney concert next month. Paul's voice is just about gone, but you'll pay exorbitant prices to hear it.
It's all relevant. Someone paid $5,300,000 for a copy of Superman Comics #1. Not the first appearance, which was Action Comics #1, but a book that was a reprint of early Superman stories.
The Rolling Stones no longer have relevance. They're a commodity. There's no novelty, no surprise. You don't even get what you paid for. All these vintage acts are just vacuuming up all the money they can before retirement.
Quote
24FPS
Isn't it strange? The less you get, the more you pay. I'd pay $300 USD to see the '72 Stones in concert. I wouldn't pay $100 USD to see the current version. I didn't go near the bloated prices at Sofi when they played Los Angeles. Just like I won't go near there for the upcoming McCartney concert next month. Paul's voice is just about gone, but you'll pay exorbitant prices to hear it.
It's all relevant. Someone paid $5,300,000 for a copy of Superman Comics #1. Not the first appearance, which was Action Comics #1, but a book that was a reprint of early Superman stories.
The Rolling Stones no longer have relevance. They're a commodity. There's no novelty, no surprise. You don't even get what you paid for. All these vintage acts are just vacuuming up all the money they can before retirement.
Quote
NashvilleBlues
Economics 101. Supply and demand.
Quote
24FPS
Isn't it strange? The less you get, the more you pay. I'd pay $300 USD to see the '72 Stones in concert. I wouldn't pay $100 USD to see the current version. I didn't go near the bloated prices at Sofi when they played Los Angeles. Just like I won't go near there for the upcoming McCartney concert next month. Paul's voice is just about gone, but you'll pay exorbitant prices to hear it.
It's all relevant. Someone paid $5,300,000 for a copy of Superman Comics #1. Not the first appearance, which was Action Comics #1, but a book that was a reprint of early Superman stories.
The Rolling Stones no longer have relevance. They're a commodity. There's no novelty, no surprise. You don't even get what you paid for. All these vintage acts are just vacuuming up all the money they can before retirement.
Quote
NikkeiQuote
NashvilleBlues
Economics 101. Supply and demand.
Except that it's not. When even John Oliver reports on the scam that's equivalent to the sparrows shouting it from the rooftops
Quote
NashvilleBluesQuote
NikkeiQuote
NashvilleBlues
Economics 101. Supply and demand.
Except that it's not. When even John Oliver reports on the scam that's equivalent to the sparrows shouting it from the rooftops
Are you saying that if people didn't buy tickets/records at such prices, they wouldn't drop the prices? C'mon now. It may be a bit more nuanced than simple supply and demand, but without the demand, these prices simply would not be so high.
Quote
NikkeiQuote
NashvilleBluesQuote
NikkeiQuote
NashvilleBlues
Economics 101. Supply and demand.
Except that it's not. When even John Oliver reports on the scam that's equivalent to the sparrows shouting it from the rooftops
Are you saying that if people didn't buy tickets/records at such prices, they wouldn't drop the prices? C'mon now. It may be a bit more nuanced than simple supply and demand, but without the demand, these prices simply would not be so high.
There's no answer to that because for a minority of buyers there is no upper boundary. This market is an anomaly as the prime objective now is drying up the secondary market.
Quote
NashvilleBluesQuote
NikkeiQuote
NashvilleBluesQuote
NikkeiQuote
NashvilleBlues
Economics 101. Supply and demand.
Except that it's not. When even John Oliver reports on the scam that's equivalent to the sparrows shouting it from the rooftops
Are you saying that if people didn't buy tickets/records at such prices, they wouldn't drop the prices? C'mon now. It may be a bit more nuanced than simple supply and demand, but without the demand, these prices simply would not be so high.
There's no answer to that because for a minority of buyers there is no upper boundary. This market is an anomaly as the prime objective now is drying up the secondary market.
I agree. But, IF those few buyers in the minority didn't pay that amount, the prices would drop. It is a big IF, but that doesn't make it not true. The fact that the masses don't get together and choose to stop buying high priced tickets in order to stop the inflation, is one of the main problems. It'll never happen, but it'd do the trick, at least temporarily.
Quote
georgie48Quote
24FPS
Isn't it strange? The less you get, the more you pay. I'd pay $300 USD to see the '72 Stones in concert. I wouldn't pay $100 USD to see the current version. I didn't go near the bloated prices at Sofi when they played Los Angeles. Just like I won't go near there for the upcoming McCartney concert next month. Paul's voice is just about gone, but you'll pay exorbitant prices to hear it.
It's all relevant. Someone paid $5,300,000 for a copy of Superman Comics #1. Not the first appearance, which was Action Comics #1, but a book that was a reprint of early Superman stories.
The Rolling Stones no longer have relevance. They're a commodity. There's no novelty, no surprise. You don't even get what you paid for. All these vintage acts are just vacuuming up all the money they can before retirement.
A rich relative paid some $4000 to entertain us. Earlier we spent some €500 on him and his wife. We thought it was a too big a difference, but he said that it wasn't was fair to compair. It's about the feeling of being entertained and the amount of money is not important.
Some pay millions for a piece of art, which I maybe think is only worth a few thousand bob. The Rolling Stones are still very relevant. With the upcoming tour many young people talk about them, based on TV commercials about the tour. "wow, they must be a big thing, want to see them, but can't afford them". Even after 60 years they can still be the "talk of the day"!
Why are you on IORR if you think they are not relevant anymore. Get yourself a relevant act or thing that makes you happy instead of wining about the Stones, I'd say.
Be happy
Quote
StonedRambler
I would suggest to everyone doing a blind listen if they really can differentiate Spotify from a lossless file (don't forget to put Spotify on the highest quality setting). I'd say for the average user of this forum (who isn't the youngest anymore) it really does not make much of a difference or it is that small that is doesn't matter to you in your daily music listening. Will save you lots of money surely (and you can still buy stuff of not so rich artists you want to support)
Quote
24FPSQuote
georgie48Quote
24FPS
Isn't it strange? The less you get, the more you pay. I'd pay $300 USD to see the '72 Stones in concert. I wouldn't pay $100 USD to see the current version. I didn't go near the bloated prices at Sofi when they played Los Angeles. Just like I won't go near there for the upcoming McCartney concert next month. Paul's voice is just about gone, but you'll pay exorbitant prices to hear it.
It's all relevant. Someone paid $5,300,000 for a copy of Superman Comics #1. Not the first appearance, which was Action Comics #1, but a book that was a reprint of early Superman stories.
The Rolling Stones no longer have relevance. They're a commodity. There's no novelty, no surprise. You don't even get what you paid for. All these vintage acts are just vacuuming up all the money they can before retirement.
A rich relative paid some $4000 to entertain us. Earlier we spent some €500 on him and his wife. We thought it was a too big a difference, but he said that it wasn't was fair to compair. It's about the feeling of being entertained and the amount of money is not important.
Some pay millions for a piece of art, which I maybe think is only worth a few thousand bob. The Rolling Stones are still very relevant. With the upcoming tour many young people talk about them, based on TV commercials about the tour. "wow, they must be a big thing, want to see them, but can't afford them". Even after 60 years they can still be the "talk of the day"!
Why are you on IORR if you think they are not relevant anymore. Get yourself a relevant act or thing that makes you happy instead of wining about the Stones, I'd say.
Be happy
I am happy. This is also a nostalgia site. The Stones may no longer be relevant as artists, but where else would I hear about El Mocambo, something I'm truly interested in? Anything 1990 and before I like to hear about. I pretty much separate them into two Rolling Stones groups. The second one, starting with Voodoo Lounge is not even near the same level as the earlier, better incarnation. Although the exception was the No Security Tour, where they were on fire from touring so much, and took it from stadiums to arenas.
Quote
Stoneage
It's mainly the prices on concert tickets that have skyrocketed. In 1990, for example the price for a concert ticket was about 1,5 that of an LP. In other words affordable for most.
Quote
ribbelchips
But back then, you went to the stadium or arena early, you sprinted to the front of the field and you were in 'the pit' for free. Fans who were willing to put in a some effort stood in front. Now those seats are for fans with the biggest wallets..
And indeed, you pay more and more for less. The Stones are not getting any better (to put it mildly) and the overall concert experience just isn't what it used to be. Instead of singing, dancing and clapping, half of the crowd is constantly filming of taking selfies
Quote
NashvilleBluesQuote
Stoneage
It's mainly the prices on concert tickets that have skyrocketed. In 1990, for example the price for a concert ticket was about 1,5 that of an LP. In other words affordable for most.
You got that right. In 1994, I bought a pit ticket for Pearl Jam for $19.
Quote
slewan
in fact it's hard to say what I hate more – people singing along or people filming/taking selfies
Quote
NashvilleBluesQuote
Stoneage
It's mainly the prices on concert tickets that have skyrocketed. In 1990, for example the price for a concert ticket was about 1,5 that of an LP. In other words affordable for most.
You got that right. In 1994, I bought a pit ticket for Pearl Jam for $19.
Quote
georgie48Quote
NashvilleBluesQuote
Stoneage
It's mainly the prices on concert tickets that have skyrocketed. In 1990, for example the price for a concert ticket was about 1,5 that of an LP. In other words affordable for most.
You got that right. In 1994, I bought a pit ticket for Pearl Jam for $19.
Pearl Jam ????? Jeeeeeeez*s, this isn't even comparing apples with pears. We're talking about a proud, beautiful Siberiaan tiger next to a poodle dog. They're okay, Pearl Jam (I know them well because one of my daughters used to be a fan), but get real here.