How come all those people who visit Stones concerts hardly buy their latest albums? Both VL and BtB just sold average and sales of ABB are just very disappointing. While ABB is a decent (it's nonsense to state 'next to Exile' but fore sure it's better than SW, DW and probably also ER) album (I would rate 3,5 out of 5).
Fans of Springsteen, U2 and also Dylan still buy the latest albums and espec. the first two bands also play lots of songs from their last album (mostly 7/8 songs per gig) during the concerts.
Is it because of lack of good singles, is it because not many new songs are played during the concert, is it because people who visit Stones concert are not ' real' fans like U2/Springsteen/Dylan fans and just want to see the band once in their lives?
Any ideas?

I wish I knew the answer Kees. I have no idea why it is, but people just dont' care about the new stuff. And it's sad b/c whenever I expose my friends (i'm 21 so my friends are about the same age) to new Stones music they love it. I had a friend last night come up to me and bring up A Bigger Bang and how good it is. MY best female friend in high school probably couldn't name more than 2 Stones songs but I let her hear Goddess In The Doorway and now it's one of her favorite cds. It's just gettign the message out. The radio and MTV/Vh1 won't play it. I blame them I guess. If MTV would play the video and more radio played the songs they'd get more attention. I don't know why the radio picks out Aerosmith and U2 when they have new music but overlooks the Stones. Makes no sense to me.

kees Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> is it because people who visit Stones
> concert are not ' real' fans like
> U2/Springsteen/Dylan fans and just want to see the
> band once in their lives?

I'd have to say that one kees. Some people probably only go for the 'single on the radio' or for that 'classic song' (Satisfaction comes to mind) or maybe even the opening act. It sounds ridiculous but it could be true. There's no doubt in my mind that a lot of people would go just to catch the opening act (depending on who it was). When I saw them in 2002, No Doubt opened. It wouldn't surprise me if people just went to see them and then left. I myself wouldn't but you never know how peoples' tastes are these days, at least musically.

a lot of people just don't buy albums at all - and the main demographic that would fit that profile is more or less the average Stones concert-goer. I see nothing particularly mystifying by that.

If the Stones release anything like the following, I'll be the first to buy it:

Sticky Fingers
Get Yer Ya Yas Out
Stripped
Let It Bleed...
or even the 40 Licks DVD...

As far as I can tell, neither ABB or especially Rarities is on this level.

"It's just that demon life has got me in it's sway..."

Lots of "Dinosaurs" have this problem. Nobody really cares for a new Macca album or want to hear new songs at the concerts. They're there because he was a Beatle. Period.

Same with Kiss. They haven't released a new album in 8 years though the band is touring constantly but most people don't care for a new Kiss album except the die hard fans who are in the minority. They average concert goer want to hear Rock 'n Roll All Nite and that's it.

Same with Deep Purple, Black Sabbath...you name it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-01-01 20:52 by Aucoin.

kees Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How come all those people who visit Stones
> concerts hardly buy their latest albums? Both VL
> and BtB just sold average and sales of ABB are
> just very disappointing. While ABB is a decent
> (it's nonsense to state 'next to Exile' but fore
> sure it's better than SW, DW and probably also ER)
> album (I would rate 3,5 out of 5).
> Fans of Springsteen, U2 and also Dylan still buy
> the latest albums and espec. the first two bands
> also play lots of songs from their last album
> (mostly 7/8 songs per gig) during the concerts.
> Is it because of lack of good singles, is it
> because not many new songs are played during the
> concert, is it because people who visit Stones
> concert are not ' real' fans like
> U2/Springsteen/Dylan fans and just want to see the
> band once in their lives?
> Any ideas?
>


your last sentence is probably the closest to the truth

Most people who like the Rolling Stones cant afford to go to many of their concerts (especially younger people who are less likely to have the disposable income required to buy tickets). And a higher proportion of tickets for a Stones show are ciphoned off for 'business' fans than for any other act. So, whilst they can still fill an arena or stadium even with high ticket prices, the result is that they do so with a higher proportion (compared to the other acts you mention) of attendees with only a basic grasp of the band's material. the proportion of ticket sales vs number of people who bought ABB would certainly bear this out

the band's increasing reluctance to play much of anything beyond their best known songs is a consequence of the type of audience they now aim their shows at. They dropped 'Sway' from the set after one performance in Columbus because only a few hundred people out of 20,000 seemed to know it. Considering it was released on the 3rd biggest selling studio album of their career, which sold about 7 million copies, that would suggest that in general the people who have bought Rolling Stones albums down the years arent the same people who are attending their concerts in 2005

I think Stones mostly play for girls and women between 25 - 50 and for well-educated men in their 40+. These are fans who don't primarly go to the record-shop. The hard-core fans buy the new records the same day of release and that's why The Stones often top the charts the first week and then drop like an anchor into the sea. Another reason is that both local and nationwide radiostations on regular basis play Macca, The Boss, Stevie Wonder, REM, U2 +mm, but seem to neglect Stones. No air-play, no record sale, it's as simlpe as that.

Kees, I think the answers lie somewhere else. If there ever has been a band that has fans grow up along with them it is the Stones. But how long have they beena around? They have had fans grow up, mature, quit, return and die before U2 even came along. In 69 all the fans had grown up with them and were there to listen for real the first time. At the end of the 70's the fans stuck with them through Keith's dope days and Taylor's departure. And then the horrible 80's with Jagger going nuts, Dirty Work, the No-Tour-years, the return of 89. There are many many elder fans here who have grown up with the Stonmes. I myself have never known a world without the Stones.
It is just that today one doe not feel the need to buy an album anymore. with the Internet, downloading, the vast exposure to TV, Live shows and video/DVD it is just not such a holier than thou event whne the new Stones record is rekleased.

"...no longer shall you trudge 'cross my peaceful mind."

The sales of ABB are truly disappointing ONLY in the US market: just the 19-20% of the worldwide sales! We have discussed a lot about the US sales and US market, i’m a bit tired of this subject. But worldwide ABB sells much better than the last albums of Macca, N. Young, Santana, Clapton and Simple Minds (and, sorry, but i hardly saw Bob Dylan on the worldwide chart). Clearly better than the last albums of Sheryl Crow, Depeche Mode. Better than the last albums of new bands supported by strong “hype”, like Franz Ferdinard or System Of A Down (I mean “hypnotize”).

Very often we forget some important things coming from the past:

(1) The Stones NEVER had been top album sellers. They were and they are a “monster” live act, but not “huge” albums sellers. Some Girls (9 million copies) and Tattoo You (8 million copies, if my memory is correct) were the exceptions, not the rule. Remember a Mick’s statement, in 1978, before Some Girls: «Our albums are selling about 2 million copies, some guys do it better, some guys do it worst than us”. ABB sells better – i mean worldwide- than Dirty Work, Undercover, Black and Blue and IORR. Do you think the worldwide sales of ABB are disappointing in comparison with 7-8 their older albums? With this logic even Vertigo is “unsuccessful” record in comparison with the sales of a few older U2 records. First of all in comparison with the sales of "The Joshua Tree" (18 million units) and "Achtoung Baby" (15m). And every Bruce's album, of course, has "disappointing" sales in comparison to "Born In USA" (24 million copies). But i don't think this is the right "logic"...

(2) The top selling Stones album since 1981 is a compilation: Forty Licks (about 7+ m units). If you consider this as a tragedy of the last years, think that the most successful album in the history of the Stones is a compilation too, from the early seventies: Hot Rocks (15m copies).


(3) In every dacade since early 70s there were at least 2-3 rock acts which were selling - always or usualy- much better than the Stones (Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Bruce, etc). We have to add 5-6 more acts which were selling much better than them sporadicaly (like Fleetwood Mac in 1977, with their “Rumours”). Today i see a situation proportional to the "old days". Yes, now Green Day ("American Idiot") are selling 15 million units and Coldplay 9 million, but i want to see them, both, in a few years. Oasis were the “Green Day of middle 90s”, but their last album sold only 160,000 units in US, where last Pearl Jam’s record sold just 450,000 (atleast ABB still sells!)

After all i think the stability of the Stones after so many dacades is truly admirable.

I think many of people go to concerts because of the Stones legend. I rember during the last tour even a friend of mine went to see Stones. He owns no of their record, he has a terrible taste in music. I was suprised and asked him why he goes to the concert? He says because it's a historical event and he wants to say his future kids he has been there. When I heard this I felt sorry for guys having to play for such @#$%&...

Brno 22.07.07 & Warsaw 25.07.07

"Some people probably only go for (...) or maybe even the opening act. It sounds ridiculous but it could be true."

Stones89, i don't think this could be a "massive phenomenon". I cannot imagine that a lot of persons being into a band are prefering to pay the most expensive ticket prices in the rock touring history, why? To see their favorite band playing an hour as opening act...
Also, i think sometimes all of us overrate the contribution of the opening acts. OK, i am sure that Mettalica helped the Stones to fill SBC Park for second night. OK and ...thanks, but nothing more. Sometimes we are speaking as if some famous opening acts are on the same lavel of popularity as the Stones. I mean as live acts. Let me remind of some numbers from the 2002 -03 tours (Billboard). Number of tickets and percentage of the whole capacity of the venues:

Rolling Stones 3,470,945 (98.6%), Bruce Springsteen 2,804,169 (97.2%), Dave Matthews Band 1,201,011 (94.4%), Dixie Chicks 1,050,516 (97%), Fleetwood Mac 809,464 (93%), Bon Jovi 788,607 (97.3%)

AND...

Mettalica 692,563 (ONLY 71%), Aerosmith-Kiss 696,693 (ONLY 82.3%), Pearl Jam 743.772 (ONLY 82.9%, sadly, i like them) and Red Hot Chili Pappers 665,247 (ONLY 80.3%). Oh, yes, probably the only reason is that RHCP don't attract "lawyers"!!

>1) The Stones NEVER had been top album sellers. They were and they are a “monster” live act, but not “huge” albums sellers. Some Girls (9 million copies) and Tattoo You (8 million copies, if my memory is correct) were the exceptions, not the rule. Remember a Mick’s statement, in 1978, before Some Girls: «Our albums are selling about 2 million copies, some guys do it better, some guys do it worst than us”. ABB sells better – i mean worldwide- than Dirty Work, Undercover, Black and Blue and IORR. Do you think the worldwide sales of ABB are disappointing in comparison with 7-8 their older albums? With this logic even Vertigo is “unsuccessful” record in comparison with the sales of a few older U2 records. First of all in comparison with the sales of "The Joshua Tree" (18 million units) and "Achtoung Baby" (15m). And every Bruce's album, of course, has "disappointing" sales in comparison to "Born In USA" (24 million copies). But i don't think this is the right "logic"...


The sales of all of those records (including those 'lesser' selling latter day albums by Bruce, U2 et al) are still substantial enough to tour behind and to play large chunks of in concert every night. In this day and age, I think most audiences of MOST major acts are not so unsophisticated that they go to a show and EXPECT an artist NOT to play a sizeable selection of the album that theyre touring behind. Two or three million copies for an 'average' Stones album sale is not a figure to be sneezed at. Its on a par with the amount of people who are seeing the show worldwide. And a Stones album is a fraction of the price of a concert ticket.

Steel Wheels wasnt one of the Stones' biggest selling albums. Didnt stop them playing 5-6 songs from it per night plus several other "non hits" in their show on that tour.

The difference between now and then is the demographic of the audience has changed. And thats because its now more of a corporate event than a rock n roll show played to the band's regular audience

Huh!!....never had a problem...actually grow several inches every time I hear a Stones song



ROCKMAN

kees Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How come all those people who visit Stones
> concerts hardly buy their latest albums? Both VL
> and BtB just sold average and sales of ABB are
> just very disappointing. While ABB is a decent
> (it's nonsense to state 'next to Exile' but fore
> sure it's better than SW, DW and probably also ER)
> album (I would rate 3,5 out of 5).
> Fans of Springsteen, U2 and also Dylan still buy
> the latest albums and espec. the first two bands
> also play lots of songs from their last album
> (mostly 7/8 songs per gig) during the concerts.
> Is it because of lack of good singles, is it
> because not many new songs are played during the
> concert, is it because people who visit Stones
> concert are not ' real' fans like
> U2/Springsteen/Dylan fans and just want to see the
> band once in their lives?
> Any ideas?
>

Simple, the last two Stones albums have been crap.




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-01-02 00:58 by Nikolai.

Crap?

Gazza, setlists make always your favorite subject!

You say: "Steel Wheels wasnt one of the Stones' biggest selling albums. Didnt stop them playing 5-6 songs from it per night plus several other "non hits" in their show on that tour."

(1) Yes, SW wasn't one of the Stones biggest selling albums judging by the standards of the whole level of the sales 15-16 years ago. It had sold 6 million units, that means something like 3 - 3.5 million copies nowadays. Anyway.

(2) If my "elements" and "books" are correct, during the first 30 shows of the american tour the Stones were playing only three songs from SW per night. Sad Sad Sad, Mixted Emotions and Rock And A Hard Place. The band added Can't Be Seen, October, 25, at Shea Stadium (NYC). After that they were playing 4 or still 3 songs from SW per night (sometimes Keith was performing Can't Be Seen + Happy and sometimes Before They Make Me Run + Happy). The band played 5-6 songs from SW only at the last 13 american concerts. They added two more during the same concert (Nov 26, Death Valley Stadium, South Carolina). Almost Hear You Sigh and Terrifying.

Don't forget, then were 3, 4 and at last 6 new songs out of 25-28. On this tour they played 3 out of 20-21. The longer than nowadays lists were of course a very strong point of 1989 tour. But it's very weak point was the fact that rarely the lists have been changed. No variety.

If the Stones will add one more song from ABB in Europe -i mean per night- i'll be very happy. Two more would be a ...risky miracle! More than 5 songs to me would be problem, with 20 or 21 songs lists.

setlists may be one of my favourite subjects but statistics are certainly yours..lol

For what its worth - I stand by my point. For most of the world tour they played quite a few songs from the new album. Steel Wheels didnt sell that well in Europe (especially in the UK) yet by that part of the tour they were playing more from it per show than they had done in the US.

Main crux of the argument though is what they played during the REST of the show. They certainly dug deeper than they do now. These days, if youre going to a Stones show, you only basically need to own two albums to familiarise yourself with practically everything that they'll play - 40 Licks and A Bigger Bang.

Agree with you that the main weakness at the minute is the lack of variety. Thats what I'm hoping for in the upcoming few months.

"These days, if youre going to a Stones show, you only basically need to own two albums to familiarise yourself with practically everything that they'll play - 40 Licks and A Bigger Bang."

Do you count a compilation of 40 years career? Unfair, Gazza! Remember "Rewind" (just a simple observation, not statistics!). Only 13 songs from 1971 - 1984 period but the lists of SW tour were including ALWAYS 6 of them and sometimes 7 (Angie). Adding an older compilation (for example "Through The Past Darkly") you could consider the lists of SW tour as "three albums lists". But it would be unfair too...

90% of the people at the shows are going because it's like a hip museum to say you've been to before it inevitably closes down. They don't care about the music, the band, the songs, or anything else. If the STONES hadn't been as well managed as mythic legends by Jagger, then the Stones would be nothing more than the best band ever playing in mid-size arenas for however long they want. Right now, the size of the venues drastically reduces the quality of the show for someone who actually loves their music. No one cares about the music. At the 40 LICKS tour, I sat next to 4 obnoxious teen girls who did nothing but talk the entire time (especially through a tender LOVE IN VAIN) and only jumped up and down during SATISFACTION. It was brutal. Never seen that at any other 'legend' show I've been to. Not Springsteen, Dylan or U2.

Sad truth, a Stones show in America is like a dinosaur museum or something.

Now agree with you, Gazza...

i wonder how many fans simply lose their passion for music along the way for whatever reason

"How come all those people who visit Stones concerts hardly buy their latest albums?"

Who are you people kidding? The albums don't sell well because so many people download the tunes for free on the Internet or get copy CDs from friends.

Hell, this very board points you to all kinds of free MP3s that you would otherwise have to pay for.

The day will come when all music is free. It will radically change how people listen to music and how recorded music is made and distributed. When musicians and songwriters no longer get royalties from their work, what will happen?

Millions of garage bands will flood the Internet with their work. State-supported music -- that's classical kids -- will make a big comeback.

Baboon Bro Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Crap?


yes. Crap.
Boring "let's make a rolling Stones song" songs.
Crap. That's what it is. I've been to every tour since 82, but won't go this time. The prices for a ticket for a show this time really put me off, same with the quality of the songs on this album.

iFox Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think many of people go to concerts because of
> the Stones legend. I rember during the last tour
> even a friend of mine went to see Stones. He owns
> no of their record, he has a terrible taste in
> music. I was suprised and asked him why he goes to
> the concert? He says because it's a historical
> event and he wants to say his future kids he has
> been there. When I heard this I felt sorry for
> guys having to play for such @#$%&...
>

But the sad point is that Jagger & co are playing for HIM, not for you, iFox... People like your friend is their audience. People like him fill up the stadiums, not people like you (or me).

The worst Stones show I've ever seen was Helsinki 2003, the mother of all possible autopilot shows, all the people here in IORR who have attended the show do agree with that. But: nearly all the non-Stones fans who were there say that it was a great experience, that song "Satisfaction" was so great to sing-along, etc., Who cares about the music, it's the legend, big stage, the live presence of Jagger and Richards (+that funny drummer, was he Bill or something?), etc... ONCE IN LIFE TIME!

- Doxa

<<Simple, the last two Stones albums have been crap.<<<

the sentence is crap!

I think it has something to do with the fans in the early days(60/70) who still attend the concerts. They are now considered conservative while early on they were considered progressive by the public thought in those days

A new stones album is really great and often underrated, but the press does not seem to appreciate a new album because they were the initially fans considered progressive in the early days and only like songs made in the sixties and seventies. The general opinion is founded on the opinion from newspapers and magazines who write the critics for any new album released by the rolling stones.

It's the fault of those who not have an own opinion after day heard a new rolling stones album............sad, and they should be shamed of themselves......

i think its pretty simple.People just dont care anymore.people doesn´t buy
cd´s,or even bloody vinyls for that matter.And i personally hate downloading.
Specially if its official stuff.Musicians are getting their money from it.No
matter how rich they are,or poor.its their work.
Todays people needs/wants everything in a nano second.
And stones play for the audience,who can afford to buy their tickets.