REM scaling down shows in Norway and Sweden...
REM are performing in Oslo later this year. I have a ticket for their show. I saw them at Ullevål Stadium a while back, where they were scheduled for the Sept 3 show this year as well, but now it is moved to the much smaller indoor arena Valhall. Scaling down the show from 25.000 into less than half the capacity.

People have been saying the Stones are loosing out when they sell 45,000 out of 50,000 tickets, but they are still selling out stadiums in most parts of the world. Bruce is still doing stadiums, and U2 as well, but are there no new bands that are able to fill up stadiums? Coldplay? What happened to rock 'n' roll?

Bjornulf

Personally, I don't think that REM can carry it off in stadiums in anything like the way that the Stones (or others) can. They just don't have the right aura or presence about them.

In fact, the last time I saw REM in a stadium, they didn't even use big screens!

REM is playing in my neighborhood later this year in a festival setting.
I agree they are more an "arena" band than "stadium."

[www.thetenthritual.com]

All music comes and goes....It's ironic and funny as well as sad, that MTV, in my opinion, ruined music and was/is responsible for Rock dying out and being replaced by shit music. Hell, MTV doesn't even have music on it's station anymore.

Video did kill the radio star.

I just want to know what ever happened to rock n roll MUSIC. In the past twenty years, I can't hear a proper Chuck Berry rhythm in any "new" band. I mean, it's OK if you want to have the new bands and whatever type of music it is, but what about rock n roll?

May be Rock and Roll isn't generating as much money as other genres of music but Rock and Roll is still alive and well. I am sure there are hundreds of bands around the world that are dedicated to playing Rock and Roll. If REM doesn't sell out a couple of shows, that is not the end. Rock and Roll is too good to die!!!
Rock and Roll,
Mops

The Times They Are A Changin' It's nothing more than that. I look around me and see a completely different attitude, mood and world than I knew as a youngster. Then again, the generations before me probably said the same thing. Anyway, in my opinion we are the lucky ones that got to enjoy Rock N' Roll. With a little luck we'll have a few more years with our heroes. After that it's sitting in a rocking chair listening to our records. Ha-ha.

well basically what i think happened is that music evolves but there is such an aura to the term "rock and roll" that people still want to call modern popular music rock and roll when it no longer is..

its hard to call prog rock from the 70s rock and rolll....for example..

rock and roll to me is a music that started developing in the late 40s and reached its height when chuck berry gave it its final characteristics.. its a music that is usually about fun, sex, parties, teenagers, getting in trouble, rebellion.. and it features that classic up front guitar with the classic "rock and roll solo".. chuck berry gave it that (and of course there were very big contributions form others like fats domino, little richard etc).... in the early 60s the key british invasion bands like the beatles and stones and more picked up on that rock and roll sound which in the US had gone dormant in the wake of 1. elvis going to war 2. buddy holly, big bopper and valens dying on same day 3. chuck berry going to jail 4.jerry lee lewis marrying cousin and being considered garbage... so rock and roll sort of went underground....anyways thanks the british invasion the rock and roll came back. then american bands started playing it again and it was no longer considered the devils music...

there have been bands that have been clear rock and roll bands... ac dc ..flaming groovies...

but more often people think of bands as "rock and roll" that are really more ROCK than anything else.. .or as i call it rock without the roll.. rock without that beat..without that sense of fun..

when you listen to a band like radiohead or coldplay its impossible to call it rock and roll...

what has happened is that people refuse to let go of the term..

think of jazz... it evolved from classic new orleans to chicago to swing to be bop to hard bop to free jazz etc etc.... the name changes but its still jazz...

well rock and roll to my mind forms part of popular music but the name people keep using is rock and roll...

i guess what i'm saying is its a problem of nomenclature... people just can't let go of the phrase but there really isn't anything rock and roll about 99% of modern popular music... yet people still call it that..

personally i think people are hungry for real rock and roll music but modern bands just don't deliver it.... what we need are more j geils/ac dc/stones type bands but they just don't seem to be out there anymore....

i want to add that bruce springsteen always has had large elements of rock and roll in his concerts....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-07-06 17:13 by stoned in washington dc.

I'd agree with you on terms of pure statistics and there may be many reasons eg ticket prices and related costs such as transport to gig,cokes and hot dogs, t-shirts etc. Another factor may be familiarity, the last time I saw The Stones was at Hampden Park and I had to think long and hard about going. Not that I didn't want to see them but of the 11 times I've saw them that was the 9th stadium gig.
I don't read too much in to this this whole 'sell-out'concept with stadia. I'd bet The Stones (as an example) could do a British Tour and sell-out most medium sized halls throughout the country making it easier for local people to gravitate to. I can only relate to Scotland but in recent years a lot of major acts have been playing concerts at outlying areas in smaller stadia and arenas.

On broader terms regarding 'stadium shows' I remember reading the liner notes on Roger Waters' 'In The Flesh' album and quite interestingly he stated that massive stadia was the worst possible type of venue to have shows as they were never designed for such events. He went on to say that at such shows the last thing to be celebrated 'was the music' now I have enjoyed stadium shows but I know where Water's is coming from. Big venues can be deemed to be meatmarkets simply for squeezing more people in and more dollars out.
But I still think Rock n Roll's in pretty good shape.

'Yeah it's a mighty long way down rock'n'roll From the Liverpool docks to the Hollywood Bowl.'
All the way from Memphis,
Mott The Hoople.

if you're talking about popular music having less appeal then thats a different question....


the answer would probably be that in the old days kids only really had music but now they have the internet, video games, dvds, movies,... there's just so much for kids to do that going to music shows is only one of many entertainment options...

in the old days.. kids basically could go to a diner or restaurant with their friend or go see some music.. now kids have many other things they can do..going to concerts is just one part of it..

another explanation woudl be that modern popular music just doesnt connect with kids the way rock and roll used to or in a way that makes kids want to see it live.. this is easy to think of when we think that rock and roll used to be about rebellion and partying and having fun which would make people want to see it live.. whereas modern popular music has become more about describing negative things and people don't want to go to a concert to relive that pain.. not as much anyways... at least thats my theory..

modern bands are too much into the "oh my life sucks" and people dont' want to pay 100 bucks to have that shitty experience...bring back AC DC! thats what the world needs..

somebody above me posts a quote from mott the hoople..now thats a rock and roll band! but there just aren't that many anymore.....music has changed.... the name should change too but since rock and roll was the first music to have widespread appeal to white teenagers and the term has been in use for 45 years plus..well there's an inbuilt bias.. so its hard to stop calling new bands rock and roll bands but they are anything but....when you go to clubs to see new indie bands people often just stand around with their hands in their pockets.. thats not rock and roll!!!!!!!!

the global 'credit crunch' is probably partly to blame.
The ridiculous ticket prices of Stadium/Arena shows, is partly to blame.
Touts buying up all the tickets, online, with multiple stooges in their'employment', with multiple credit cards - thus squeezing out genuine fans, is also, in my opinion to blame.

And maybe, just maybe, the thought of watching a pop/rock concert in a souless stadium/field, in an overpriced seat, quite possibly 400 metres - 800 metres, from the stage, paying for crap food, over-expensive, tat, merchandise, waterered down beer, transport queues, just doesn't have the appeal for music fans it once did.
You can only rip people off so much, before they get wise.
Watching live music in pubs, small clubs, discovering new, exciting bands, pushing the boundaries, is often a much more rewarding experience.

'new' bands capable of filling stadiums???
depends on your take on the word 'new'.
Do you read NME magazine, for instance, and keep abreast of new music?

Some 'newish' bands of the 'non classic' variety, that fill stadiums/Fields
in my part of the world, the UK, would include:-

The Foo Fighters
Muse
Coldplay
The White Stripes

pop music:-

Take That
Robbie Williams
The Spice Girls

The term "Rock and Roll" may seem dated for some and today's kids probably prefer to use "Rock" to describe the same music. Personally I stick with Rock and Roll because it is an awesome term; it rolls in the mouth. R&R first name was "Rythm and Blues". Although I understand that some may be picky and would make musically a distinction between the genres I prefer to call it Rock and Roll.Rock and Roll music is anything that has a good beat(backbeat), electric, accoustic guitars, or a piano,vocals and all of that produces music that turns the audience wild, a music that turns you on, that makes you want to move and shout. Yeah !! @#$%& yeah That is rock and roll and it ain't dying soon.
Rock and Roll,
Mops

I don't agree with your analysis.

Precisely, Rock and Roll may be back to where it is belonged: smaller places.

I hate huge stadium, especially when it is heated and crowded with people load of beer. I tend to panic. That is why I did not saw more Stones shows. That is why out of my 47 Stones shows, I count about 30 gigs in arenas or theaters.

As long as the festivals live on, I'm pleased. And they seem to do so.

CREDIT CRUNCH

Everythng is getting more expensive. People are making cuts.

Quote
bv
REM scaling down shows in Norway and Sweden...
REM are performing in Oslo later this year. I have a ticket for their show. I saw them at Ullevål Stadium a while back, where they were scheduled for the Sept 3 show this year as well, but now it is moved to the much smaller indoor arena Valhall. Scaling down the show from 25.000 into less than half the capacity.

People have been saying the Stones are loosing out when they sell 45,000 out of 50,000 tickets, but they are still selling out stadiums in most parts of the world. Bruce is still doing stadiums, and U2 as well, but are there no new bands that are able to fill up stadiums? Coldplay? What happened to rock 'n' roll?

rock n roll doesnt belong to big stadiums. it's a club thing! you'll find many fantastic bands touring their ass off and some of them are @#$%& amazing!

Quote
bv
REM scaling down shows in Norway and Sweden...
REM are performing in Oslo later this year. I have a ticket for their show. I saw them at Ullevål Stadium a while back, where they were scheduled for the Sept 3 show this year as well, but now it is moved to the much smaller indoor arena Valhall. Scaling down the show from 25.000 into less than half the capacity.

People have been saying the Stones are loosing out when they sell 45,000 out of 50,000 tickets, but they are still selling out stadiums in most parts of the world. Bruce is still doing stadiums, and U2 as well, but are there no new bands that are able to fill up stadiums? Coldplay? What happened to rock 'n' roll?

Rock n roll has nothing to do with stadiums.

I'll second what Adrian says above. People are maybe starting to wise up.

Bingo is spot on about MTV as well.

Rock n roll has become too sterile and corporate and with a few exceptions, its dying on its arse.

i think bv's point is that "rock and roll" as he calls it just doesnt have the appeal it used to have.. in the 70s dozens of bands would routinely sell out stadiums..

the best gigs i've seen in my life were all small venues (max.500 cap.)

The triple evil of MTV, rap, and grunge killed blues based rock that we know and love.

A bunch of interesting comments and opinions. To me, rock began waning during the disco craze of the late 70's. Many people, particularly young kids that hadn't really made a bond with any kind of music yet, attached themselves to disco. Another thing is that many bands that were strong in the 70's didn't transition well into the 80's (the 80's are what I think of is the worst decade ever for music). Additionally, bands were losing and adding members, and they simply didn't generate the kind and quality of music that put them on the radio in the first place. I am appaled at how many kids gravitate to the tuneless garbage hip-hop crap. I am a teacher and I have loads of 70's music on my computer which I generally listen to before the kids come in. Once they arrive, they tell me to put on some good music, which to them is Chris Brown e.g. I can't even think of any other names because there is no identity to the music - it all sounds the same, with repetition of the same few lines of lyrics - and, they're all "goin' to the club". When I listen to what is considered to be current day rock, there's nothing there that attracts me to it. No riffs, licks, chops - everyone's strumming chords. Enough from me. Enjoy that relic rock 'n' roll!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-07-06 20:31 by UnionHall.

Grunge killed rock? Elmo, whaddayamean?

Brian Epstein killed rock and roll when he put the Beatles in suits.

"The wonder of Jimi Hendrix was that he could stand up at all he was so pumped full of drugs." Patsy, Patsy Stone

No new bands playing in stadium ? Well, it is the best news for rock and roll for years !

Rock And Roll is a music for clubs and festivals, not for big tours in which the only performance that counts is the audience. Let's keep on playing Rock and Roll in indoor clubs like the White Stripes or the Bob Dylan I saw last month in Toulouse.

The Stones never play betten than in club, just remember the 2002-2003 tour ! When they play in front of 80,000 people in a time, they can't do anything really risked. When they play in front of 2,000 fans, they can try something new, remember She Smiled Sweetly, Dance, That's How Strong My Love Is, Brand New Car ...

At least, the best tour by the Stones (1972) was a tour club with just few dates and many people couldn't manage to get a ticket for a show. That's Rock And Roll ! It has become too polished with those big stadium last years ! Rock And Roll coming back as a private music for fans ? That's what I was waiting for !

---

Sorry for my english ; I'm a french little boy (but I like it)

Quote
The Menace of Mayfair
Brian Epstein killed rock and roll when he put the Beatles in suits.

Or going back further then, when they put Elvis in an army uniform? As Mr.Lennon himself intimated.

Please do not misunderstand me. I don't mind being at a club gig with any blues or rock hero at the right format for rock, but what I am asking is really about what people do care about these days. What you call the cat does not matter. It's only rock'n'roll and that is what I like. What I mean is The Beatles and The Stones filled up stadiums in the 60's. The Stones have continued to make millio ns excited all along. They sell records. The radio play their music. And people go to stadium shows in rain or in 40 C + hot weather without water top see them. Pink Floyd had the same magic ages ago. They played rock or whatever you like to call it. Certainly it was not rap music. Then Bruce have been around. And U2 and may be some others. But where are the legends of the 90's and these days in the new millenium? The Stones debuted in 63 and were megapopular in 1-2 years. It should not take decades to get megapopularity if you are unique. Are there no more unique artists around. Or doesn't people care anymore? I just can't see a world stadium tour with Coldplay or any other newcomer, but I may be wrong.

PS. I just read a great definition of the term festival. It's a place where you have accomodation on site. Simple as that. I saw the Stones at Newport, Isle of Wight last summer. I stayed on the mainland, took the ferry in the morning and back after the show. I stayed in a nice and clean hotel. I did not suffer. Others were there as part of the festival, but I could not do that, would not do that. Can't post reviews or be on IORR from a tent, at least not comfortably. A festival is not about music but being with other people over time. With food, music, drinks etc. But festivals and being a major rock band is two totally different discussions.

Bjornulf

I think, Bjornulf, the problem is that in the TV and celebrity obsessed era we live in now, artists become famous and have hits before theyve learned how to perform.

The artists youve referred to - the Stones, Bruce, U2 etc - have honed their performing craft for decades and have earned themselves a reputation as great performers (they werent always playing in huge venues, but built their success to the level where doing so became something of a necessity. And they learned how to play those sort of shows too, which isnt easy). If an artist can keep doing that, they'll keep an audience. When you exclusively target a teenage audience (which is the most fickle market there is), you'll soon become old hat.

Its also part of the reason why theyve lasted. As John Lennon once said "a pretty face will last a year or two/but pretty soon we'll see what you can do.."

Nothing happend to Rock`n Roll, your´re just getting old. The younger people don´t give a damn for those stadium shows. Take a look at the clubs, that where Rock`n Roll is still alive. It`s hard to accept, but baby baby baby you´re out of time...

They took the roll out of the rock after the death of top 40 format of the mid sixties. At one time music was meant for dancing and the clubs provided this esp Sunset Strip. Pressure from the LAPD and civic authorities enforced curfews resulting in closing of a once vibrant scene.
Music changed direction literally heading up to San Francisco where the extended jam became the norm in concert. This may be okay live but signalled the death of garage rock and the two minute dance single.
Rock 'n' Roll is meant for dancing but instead they took the roll away and put such terms as Art, Heavy, Progressive, Folk but no more roll