Okay ... I'm not trying to start a fight here or belittle anyone's concert experience, but, it seems to me that it is nearly impossible for a stadium show to provide any of the intimacy (let alone good sound quality) that a smaller venue can give. (yes, I've been to many stadium shows: '78 Anaheim (2), '81 L.A. Coliseum (2), '89 L.A. Coliseum (2) & Oakland Coliseum, '94 Denver Mile High, Pasadena Rose Bowl (2), '97 Dodger Stadium) ... The absolute worst shows were the Rose Bowl shows ... I was so far from the stage that the Stones could have been hand puppets for all I know. Anyway, even though I live in L.A., I was happy to drive to Las Vegas to see the Stones earlier this month at the MGM Grand rather than seeing them locally at Dodger Stadium. I only wish that I had done the same thing in 1994 and skipped the two shows at the Rose Bowl. My suggestion to the Stones for their next U.S. tour: ensconce yourselves at one venue for a month playing every third night ... let the fans come to you ... MSG, the Forum, or a similar (older arena) venue.

Yes, Bigger is not always better in this case..I think baseball stadiums are a worse concert experience than football...home plate is the worst seat in the house!
Arenas and theaters are great.

The best shows I have seen are stadium shows. If you don't like the Stones in a stadium then take a break for 10 years before you go see them again in a stadium, and you will love them.

Bjornulf

i agree with bv....the stones sound, look and feel better in a stadium...
they are too big for anything else..plus it becomes one big party...

an event like a stones show comes off better in a big stadium like a super bowl.

I will never go see them in a stadium again unless I am in the first 20 or so rows. My worse expereince was in 2002 at Giants Stadium, you could not tell what most songs were until Mick started singing and even than the sound was so muddy, just horrible. Has nothing to do with being sick of them, just really bad sound depending on where you are sitting. And I also prefer to hear them try some different tunes which they are more likely to do in an arena or theater.

How can the Stones or anyone 'sound' and 'look' better in a stadium than in a theatre?

I can understand the enthusiasm for the sound and spectacle if youre in the first few rows, but if youre in a nosebleed looking at ants on a stage and hearing distorted sound, its hard to be a part of the concert experience.

When you say they 'look' better in a stadium, do you mean the band or the enlarged images you see on a video screen?

Please. theres no comparison.

Its a rock n roll show first and foremost. The substance is more important than the spectacle.

With all due respect Bjornulf, you must be kidding ... What is it that you like about seeing little dots about a half a mile away and watching a giant video screen? The sound in these stadiums is usually atrocious or worse ... There is simply no way of fixing or adjusting the acoustics (or lack thereof) in an open-aired stadium ... The whole point of a live show is to experience the immediacy of the musicians ... to view them playing with the naked eye ... to see their technique ... to watch each musician performing his or her part and simultaneously hear the result of his/her actions ... There is a reason that these stadiums are called "Baseball" "Football" or "Soccer" stadiums and NOT "Concert" stadiums ... Yes, I would probably go see the Stones play in the middle of the Sahara Desert, but neither the Sahara Desert nor any Stadium is an ideal or even appropriate place to see/listen to any musical group ...

i had 'nosebleeds' at Cardiff, back in August.
the atmosphere was non-existent, the sound appaling,
99.9% of the audience, in the upper decks, were sitting on their hands throughout, talking into their mobile phones and drinking beer/hotdogs.

If i cannot purchase pitch seats/standing, or lower level stand seats, at a reasonable price, i will not attend in future.

In the past two years I got to experience them in a baseball stadium (Fenway), football stadium (Hartford), arena (MSG) and a theater (Beacon). There is really no way to compare them. MSG and the Beacon were 100 times better. The stadiums may be great for a big spectacle with the lights, fireworks, big stage and all the gimmicks. But for the sound and a great rock concert... arenas and theaters are way above the stadium shows. I won't even get into the set list aspect of it.

I have only seen Stones at stadiums and each time have been special moments in my life. Of course I want to see them in a club ( that would be the last bit in a puzzle), but it could be difficult to get ticket. I think stones, compared to other big band, are extremely good to make stadiumshows intimate.

well i like it but i try to be in the 1st 20 rows....which makes it cool..

i remember back in 1978 being in the very back...ha..i didn't like that...but i took it as i'm seeing the best show on earth and i'm with 70,000 other fans who agree.. it was fun working my way up front...

i've seen 2 arena shows / 2 ampitheater shows / 3 stadium shows and had a great time at all........but as far as getting A BIGGER BANG for your buck.....unless you have great seats at the stadium...save your money and go to a city where they're playing in an arena. I agree with Hound Dog.

I agree with Peter Wolf, formerly of the J. Geils Band, who when asked which venue - stadium, arena, theatre, or club - is best to see the Stones answered...

arena!


I've seen and have had some great times at stadium shows but there is something special about arena shows...

I am done with stadium shows...the crowd, the traffic, the sound...

...Stones are only group I would put up with to attend

Peter Wolf also said..."You can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit"

Or..."Shake what mama gave you"

Also..."Brush your teeth with Rock and Roll"

the question was not which is better..but can a stadium show NOT suck?

and if you want to be in a big party...and have it be a real event then a stadium show is the best and doesnot suck.. like going to a footballgame you can get a better view by looking at it on tv but if you want to really be in it....you got to be there!

Just any place is fine for a stones concert, as far as you are in FOS section (and the FOS section is general admission).

All I can say is that from the FOS perspective, it does matter if you have 70,000 people instead of 10,000 behind your back.

C

Yes, they can not suck.
Saw them in Nashville [Bridges to Babylon] at Vanderbilt Stadium. The sound quality was tremendous, better than most indoor venues I've ever been to.
The worst I ever heard, was at the Pyramid in Memphis.

5 ants on a stage......better?....and the sound is floatin out into the stratosphere..............no way..........the smaller the better....no two ways about it



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-11-28 20:20 by Leonard Keringer.

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How can the Stones or anyone 'sound' and 'look'
> better in a stadium than in a theatre?
>
> I can understand the enthusiasm for the sound and
> spectacle if youre in the first few rows, but if
> youre in a nosebleed looking at ants on a stage
> and hearing distorted sound, its hard to be a part
> of the concert experience.
>
> When you say they 'look' better in a stadium, do
> you mean the band or the enlarged images you see
> on a video screen?
>
> Please. theres no comparison.
>
> Its a rock n roll show first and foremost. The
> substance is more important than the spectacle.


You nailed it. That said, The Stones have gone to great lengths to bring the stadium show to the masses and make the experience "smaller" (louder, clearer sound; larger, clearer video; the B stage). Nothing beats an arena show, though. Except of course a theatre show, but I've never been so lucky.

Atlantic City was the perfect venue..not too big..not too small...just right
the sound was great due to the slope shape of the roof;

liddas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just any place is fine for a stones concert, as
> far as you are in FOS section (and the FOS section
> is general admission).
>
> All I can say is that from the FOS perspective, it
> does matter if you have 70,000 people instead of
> 10,000 behind your back.
>
> C



Correct. I was lucky to have been in the front five rows for the 3 UK shows this summer (also had FOS standing for Berlin and opted for seats in Nice just because my wife, whose only show it was, preferred that option)

Wouldnt have bothered with the Twickenham and Glasgow shows had I been way back. That doesnt hold any interest for me any more, regardless of how many bells and whistles they choose to dress the event up with

I would never set foot in a stadium to see a show other than the Stones - and only then if I am near the stage.

Last stadium show I saw was in '97..Carrier Dome...never again in any stadium. Sound sucks and if you're not in the first 30 rows or so, you might as well throw your money in the trash can.

You don't have to be at 200's or 300's levels to see a stadium shows. I mean if you go to one show per tour then spend your 150-200 Euro or Euro on a stadium show ticket at the lower level or anywhere on the floor. Then you will have great sound most of the time. I do agree that there are bad acoustics some times at stadium shows, but that is the same for the upper seats at the Beacon, no difference really. By the way if the theatre shows are so great why did it take 12 songs i.e. until TUMBLING DICE before the crowd really got into the show? While at the B.C. Place Vancouver show the crowd was into the show from long time before the show started until far into the streets after the show?

I am 100% sure that if you have a normal ticket at a stadium show and you are totally bored then you have seen too many stadium shows.

Bjornulf

The stadium shows are huge spectacles and for people with good seats, they're awesome. A friend of mine went to the Vancouver Voodoo Lounge show and she was on the endzone upper deck and said the concert wasn't very good. I was at the same show, row 2 on the floor and thought it was awesome.
Similar situation last Saturday. She had tickets but on the endzone and I was near the front again. I'll have to ask what her opinion of this show was. Also, had friends who had floor seats but towards the back, near the B stage. I'll have to see what their opinion was.
It would be nice to see the Stones play strictly arenas but the reality is that most venues like MSG are booked up quite a bit so to book it for 3-4 shows and play every other night would be impossible. I believe even the New York Rangers have to practice elsewhere since it's booked up so much.

I was in the upper section at the Beacon and thought it sounded 100 times better than where I sat (200 section) at Giants stadium. And my ticket cost $24 as opposed to what I paid at the stadium. Not to mention my friend who thought he had decent seats in the 100 section could only see Mick's feet since he was at the top of the 100 section.

People getting into the show doesn't ruin the performance for me and the fact that they stuffed the Beacon with lots of movie extras might have something to do with that.

Also I have seen many shows at MSG and sat at the way top, never had a seat where there was a bad sound problem.

I have never seen The Stones in a theater or a club, I guess that would be the optimal live experience - at least if you have seen a lot of stadium shows.
The stadium live experience depends much on where you are located or seated in the stadium. I think nothing can beat a FOS ticket, I have had that about 6-7 times. The ultimate way to see The Stones, you got a close view and the sound is always good. If you are seated at the first lower level, as I have done 3 times, it gives you a perfect view of the stage and the show. Actually the only arena show I did attend on the licks tour (wembley arena 13/9/03) was the most boring show I did see on that tour. However MSG '05 was a killer.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2006-11-28 21:21 by The Worst..

I won't go to more than 3 or 4 stadium shows next tour. Yes, I've seen them enough there. I only hope to see them in a few cool, smaller venues and hear songs I've never heard before like She was hot, Little T&A,...Ventilator Blues.

I liked Anita Pallenberg's answer. She said she only went to stadium shows, because if you get too close the Stones are "really old".

Karl