My first big stadium show was Rolling Stones 1982 in Gothenburg, Sweden. The sound was horrible, even though I stood just in front of the stage. It was very strange because The J Geils Band who was the opening act sounded great. Are there anyone out there who was at that concert? I think it was 20 june 1982.

carson99 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 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.

Next time buy closer seats. The Stones sound system is impeccable and the outdoor shows are always much more fun and festive. I LIKE the bells and whistles and since the ticket costs the same inside or out I feel I get more for money with the outdoor show. They play JUST THE SAME. In my opinion they lose something indoors.

Chicago last month, in a 22° windstorm is a memory I'll forever cherish.

I haven't read all the posts here, but enough. The best venues overall for sight and sound are 1) clubs, 2)theaters, 3) arenas, 4) stadiums. I have seen them in all but the first.

Having said that, I love the stadium shows, the lights, pyrotechnics, giant screens, mass audience which gives it an "event" feel (though the others have that as well). Especially the lights. The light show on the ABB tour is incredible and better than on any other tour. It is beautiful, especially when the set itself is lit up with various colors.

At most stadium shows I have attended, the sound has been good whether I am up close or in the second deck (tier). They are state of the art when it comes to projecting good sound in almost any venue.

And while I have been up close on this tour - 13th row (twice), 9th row, 6th row (twice), wherever I have been, I have never been closer to the band than the 3 times I got into the front row of the B stage, right up against the fence/railing and about 8 or 9 feet (2.4 to 2.7 meters) from the band. And you get to see ALL of them as they all move all around the stage to greater or lesser degrees except for Charlie (being that it is his job to protect the Plexiglass) and even he is not far away.

And Gazza, even you think that Twickenham I was an excellent show.

But of course, the most important factor is how well I can see the Plexiglass at any show.


tim from P mont

timbernardis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > And Gazza, even you think that Twickenham I was an
> excellent show.
>
>

I enjoy all Stones shows to some degree, and I thought the 3 UK shows I saw this summer were superb in every way. As I said earlier however, I was in the front 5 rows for each of them which helped. Had I been in the back or high up with shit sound, I may have felt differently, however.

I only go to Stones stadium shows if there's no alternative. The Stones and Springsteen are the only acts I'll even consider seeing outdoors from now on, and only if it means getting good tickets (similar to this summer) at a reasonable price. The vast majority of tickets for the UK shows were horribly overpriced as for most people you're merely looking at a screen and the sound can be a lottery, but you cant go wrong with £60 for the first ten rows.

Given a straight choice though, its indoors every time for me, and the smaller the venue the better. R says earlier that they play "just the same" regardless of the size of venue. They dont. When there's no need to work catwalks or rely on screens to project themselves to people 100 metres away, they can get on with concentrating on the music instead of fannying about with the stage gimmicks. And from personal experience - they do just that.

Giants Stadium last Sept 27! We were toward the back of the 100's section - even with the B stage- a few rows up and the sound was so clean it was like listening through headphones. Check it out on Dime! They did a pretty creative set that night too.

Juiced In NJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Giants Stadium last Sept 27! We were toward the
> back of the 100's section - even with the B stage-
> a few rows up and the sound was so clean it was
> like listening through headphones.



I was at that show also. The sound at that stadium (any stadium probably) ranges from great to awful. First I was sitting in a section around two-thirds of the way back, on the last row. It sound awful... a muddy echoey mush. The culprit is the concrete overhang of a balcony above. If your seat's underneath a concrete slab, forget about it, sound-wise.

At times, I couldn't even tell which song they were playing. When I couldn't take it any more, I moved closer... lucking out with a seat right near the side of the stage. It sounded just fine there.

I am a veteran of roughly 400 concerts over 35 years, so I think I know what I am talking about. Here goes:

1. With a good sound system, a stadium show can have great sound -- wide, open stadiums are the best. Thus, a show at the Rose Bowl, which has no roof, and no tiers can deliver great sound with a good system.

2. US Football stadiums are generally pretty good, but as someone else has pointed out, try to avoid seats under a roof or under an upper tier. The low tones will bounce around, muffling the sound. You may be protected from the elements, but the sound will suck.

3. Same basic rule with baseball stadiums. One thing to remember about baseball stadiums is that the floor seats cover a much WIDER area than football stadiums, so that the seats on the far left/right of the floor are much farther from the stage than in a football stadium, so beware.

4. European football stadiums are more problematic, primarily because they tend to be partially enclosed. Thus, the bigger the "hole" in the roof, the less chance that the sound will be bouncing around -- again the general rule is to avoid being too far under the roof. In other words, you have a better chance of good audio if you are in a stadium that is relatively open, like Twickenham, than in a stadium with a small hole in the roof, like Stade de France.

5. I am sure you can see where I am going with this, but the worst, of course, are domed stadiums. With most domes, you will get alot of echo, and the sound will be muffled as the bass bounces around inside the venue. If you cup your hands around your ears and face the stage, you will get some improvement, but in general, the sound is poor unless you are right in front or to the side of the stage. The soft roofs are not that bad, as they tend to mostly muffle the sound. But a hard roof is a disaster -- Amsterdam Arena has a terrible reputation for good reason -- that roof made of fiberglass or whatever it is creates a huge 60,000 capacity echo chamber. Front of stage is OK, anywhere else, and you struggle.