One of the points that always gets brought up in the debates about the setlist is that many people are seeing the Stones for the first time and therefore the band feels compelled to play a large percentage of "the hits" to please the newbies.

I generally buy this arguement. I remember my first show in '89 and know I would have been disappointed if they hadn't done their most well known songs at that one (which they did). It does seem like there are a lot of audience members who are casual fans, as in, they only own a few greatest hits CDs, maybe Hot Rocks and 40 Licks.

But I wonder, what is the percentage? Is it half causal, half diehards, or more like 90/10 or 80/20? I don't suppose there is any real way to know, short of hiring a professional poling agency to interview a cross section of the audience after the show and publish the results. Does anybody have any insight into how many audience members are newcomers or relative newcomers on an average night? Educated guesses will also be accepted.

Considering how poor sales have been of Bigger Bang (which is so amazingly terrific) we can assume that it's more like 95% Casual/5% medium/hardcore fans. How anyone can plunk down $500 for a Stones Ticket and not have the cash to plunk down $12.00 for a CD from the very same band - This I cannot comprehend. I am willing to bet that our friends the Stones can't comprehend it too well either.... It almost seems that they made this album as a private gift to their fans. I realize that this was not the original plan - but it does appear to be the reality. As gifts go - it's an extremely good one! Thanks, guys!

When I saw them on the ABB tour, it was indeed my first time.

And I'm still a "set-list moaner" . . .

I'd say the percent is probably between 75 to 80% casual fans and/or corporate give aways....and the other 20 to 25% is made up of hardercore to hardcore fans....remember what happened in Columbus...they played Sway and 50 people stood up and clapped! See Chuck Levall's toru diary on his website and you'll see where he tried to talk Mick into doing it again and Mick said no because people want to hear stuff that they know.

X



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-05-10 00:31 by Erik_Snow.

X



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-05-10 00:31 by Erik_Snow.

Well,how many people know You Got Me Rocking and Respectable that don't know Sway and I Go Wild?I think just as many people knew the latter two songs before they put the first two into heavy rotation on recent tours.I think a major factor is that the Stones just like coasting.

i believe the official number is 8

ohnonotyouagain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One of the points that always gets brought up in
> the debates about the setlist is that many people
> are seeing the Stones for the first time and
> therefore the band feels compelled to play a large
> percentage of "the hits" to please the newbies.
>
> I generally buy this arguement. I remember my
> first show in '89 and know I would have been
> disappointed if they hadn't done their most well
> known songs at that one (which they did). It does
> seem like there are a lot of audience members who
> are casual fans, as in, they only own a few
> greatest hits CDs, maybe Hot Rocks and 40 Licks.
>
> But I wonder, what is the percentage? Is it half
> causal, half diehards, or more like 90/10 or
> 80/20? I don't suppose there is any real way to
> know, short of hiring a professional poling agency
> to interview a cross section of the audience after
> the show and publish the results. Does anybody
> have any insight into how many audience members
> are newcomers or relative newcomers on an average
> night? Educated guesses will also be accepted.



there would have been a high % of first timers in 1989 because it was the band's first tour in 8 years, their fanbase would still have been of an age where they were still going to concerts regularly and the tickets were affordable to almost everyone

Its a completely different scenario now

The Stones tour every couple of years. This is their third world tour inside the last decade (you could almost argue that its their 4th because the BTB/No security tour visited their two main markets (America and Europe) on at least two occasions each. In the last ten calendar years for example, there have only been 3 years (2000, 2001 and 2004) where they did not play shows in North America.

In short, as far as MOST of their markets are concerned, their fanbase has had ample opportunity to see the band at least once in the last decade. They're not really bringing in that many young fans in the last few years because of several reasons - an unhealthily long period without making any records which means that a generation of younger fans are increasingly ignorant of their music, a music/TV/radio industry which isnt going to promote nostalgia or play music by 'old' acts and most importantly a policy of inflating ticket prices which means that most younger fans will not be able to afford to go and see them

As a result, I dont believe for a minute that more than about 10% of the average Stones audience in 2005/2006 are seeing the band for the first time. There are obviously going to be exceptions when they play areas that have not seen the band in many years, if ever (Moncton, Omaha, Puerto Rico etc) but these are few and far between

Compared to the late 80's/early 90s the band are playing more expensive shows in smaller stadiums/arenas and generally not playing multi-night stands in one city anymore (on the occasions they do, its for shorter periods than before) - however, theyre playing more actual cities (as one night stands) than before. The audience is ageing and the show is targeted to an older and more affluent type of fan that it was previously. The less affluent and younger part of the audience has gradually been replaced by a higher percentage of corporate attendees, who have a higher disposal income but who - as can be seen by the record sales - are much less likely to be hardcore fans with much knowledge of the band's work beyond their greatest hits (more evidence of this can be seen in the commercial success of 40 Licks, which was the band's biggest selling record in over two decades). The show in 2005/2006 is therefore targetted towards this type of audience, hence the more 'greatest hits' style flavour to the setlists on this tour.

The audience demographic has definitely changed. You have the scenario on this tour where the band played "Sway" (a song from one of their biggest selling albums) once and immediately dropped it because the audience didnt respond to it. That wouldnt have happened on other tours prior to this one. Even on the BTB tour (the last tour before the ticket prices went crazy) they were still playing stuff like Sister Morphine, Memory Motel and the like in stadiums and were seemingly unafraid of getting a 'dead' reaction from the audience. Even on the Licks tour, the band would routinely play 4-5 songs in a row in each arena show from a 'classic' album - this tour in contrast sees very few old songs that werent on "40 licks".

Theif in the Night Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well,how many people know You Got Me Rocking and
> Respectable that don't know Sway and I Go Wild?I
> think just as many people knew the latter two
> songs before they put the first two into heavy
> rotation on recent tours.I think a major factor is
> that the Stones just like coasting.


Interesting choice of songs. The main crux however is that the first two songs you mentioned are on 40 Licks or Jump Back whereas the second two aren't.

Recent compilations seem to be the audience's point of reference to the Stones back catalogue as far as the band are concerned

this is my second time, so i love to hear warhorses

thats understandable, SeNdEr, its quite natural that if theyre playing somewhere like Argentina which hasnt seen a Stones show in 8 years, there would be a lot of people who would not have had the chance to see many Stones shows before.

Its a bit of a different scenario in somewhere like New York, Boston or Chicago for example, however

IF we accept that the sales of ABB -as HopeYouGuessMyName says- is something like a measure of haw many "new faces" would like to see the Stones for the first time, then we can assume that between USA and the rest of the planet there are big differences. Also, there are different situations in the rest of the planet too. As Gazza says, the conditions are not the same in the european countries where the Stones did a lot of shows in 1990, 1995, 1998, 1999 and 2003 and wherever in Europe -and everywhere in the planet- they haven't played since 1998 or 1995. Or wherever they performed only once in many years (for example Italy). BUT we have a fact: With the big exception of the US, ABB sells well. Probably in the rest of the planet it will surpass B2B. So, (IF album sales is a figure- i repeat it because i know the Stones as live act is a self- existent story) i suppose a significant number of "new faces" will go to see them, including the "saturated" countries/markets.

Insightful analysis from Gazza, as always.