ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board

Urban Landscape - Acapulco at night April 2005
© 2035 Voodoo Chile in Wonderland
[THE WET PAGE] [IORR NEWS] [SETLISTS 1962-2003] [FORO EN ESPAÑOL] [THE A/V ROOM] [THE ART GALLERY] [MICK JAGGER] [KEITHFUCIUS] [CHARLIE WATTS ] [RON WOOD] [BRIAN JONES] [MICK TAYLOR] [BILL WYMAN] [IAN STEWART ] [NICKY HOPKINS] [MERRY CLAYTON] [IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN] [BERNARD FOWLER] [LISA FISCHER] [DARRYL JONES] [BOBBY KEYS] [JAMES PHELGE] [CHUCK LEAVELL] [LINKS] [PHOTOS] [MAGAZINE COVERS] [MUSIC COVERS ] [JIMI HENDRIX] [BOOTLEGS] [TEMPLE] [GUESTBOOK] [ADMIN]

[CHAT ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [RESTROOMS]

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED) inside.
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: Ronnie says tour starts in September (source Daethgod/ROCKS OFF/IORR/ Virgin Radio) Return to archive Page: 1 2
March 21st, 2005 05:24 PM
christijanus Mick, Keith and Charlie are currently working on the final layout of the next Stones album, due out in the summer. The Rolling Stones will start rehearsing for the next tour in July and August, and the tour will start in September, according to Ronnie Wood, talking to Virgin Radio.
March 21st, 2005 05:25 PM
Joey
quote:
christijanus wrote:
Mick, Keith and Charlie are currently working on the final layout of the next Stones album, due out in the summer. The Rolling Stones will start rehearsing for the next tour in July and August, and the tour will start in September, according to Ronnie Wood, talking to Virgin Radio.



I am now so excited that I am typing this with my penis !
March 21st, 2005 05:46 PM
Bob Tamp Final layout?
Either they recorded a lot on the last tour, or they have picked the 12 or so songs they like to record as a band.
Hope it's good.
March 21st, 2005 05:47 PM
nankerphelge I am so freakin' ready for some Stones.
March 21st, 2005 05:48 PM
Joey
quote:
nankerphelge wrote:
I am so freakin' ready for some Stones.




Nanky .........................................


I am now so excited that I am typing this with me nipples .
March 21st, 2005 06:08 PM
nankerphelge What do you do with your pasties when you type?
March 21st, 2005 06:27 PM
Gazza
quote:
christijanus wrote:
Mick, Keith and Charlie are currently working on the final layout of the next Stones album, due out in the summer. The Rolling Stones will start rehearsing for the next tour in July and August, and the tour will start in September, according to Ronnie Wood, talking to Virgin Radio.



here's the link to the original story which also contains a link to the interview online :

http://www.novogate.com/board/968/209613-1.html
March 21st, 2005 06:30 PM
doo doo doo Dude I will not believe these rumors until they are confirmed by Ian Billen.
March 21st, 2005 08:56 PM
Soldatti They are in Paris still.
March 21st, 2005 10:39 PM
IanBillen

Ronnie never said it was the final layout for the album. He never said the tour is to start in September. He did reference the album and tour however and spoke a little about it but gave no specific info except the songs have some interesting lyrics.

Ian
March 21st, 2005 10:39 PM
wgwalsh Yes, yes, Ian Billen he da man.
March 22nd, 2005 07:25 AM
egon they will never outsell U2.



god i miss jb....
March 22nd, 2005 08:06 AM
Bob Tamp I really dont care if they outsell U2. I just hope the tour is different. Some stadiums, but mostly smaller venues, an emphasis on playing tunes off the new cd etc.

I still think and hope the Stones will play Fenway Park in Boston in late August.
March 22nd, 2005 08:13 AM
T&A
quote:
Bob Tamp wrote:
I still think and hope the Stones will play Fenway Park in Boston in late August.



I don't. Fenway sucks.
March 22nd, 2005 08:16 AM
Gazza I'm somewhat disturbed at the fact that every venue mentioned so far (Boston, Chicago, Tempe etc) is a stadium because I think stadium shows are so passe and at the prices theyre charging they'll do well to fill a stadium in any more than about five or six cities.

I still think the North American leg will mostly be arenas with sporadic stadium shows in the larger cities where the market can support a stadium show AND a smaller venue (be it an arena or a theatre) such as New York, Chicago, etc.

I would imagine they'll use one stadium stage instead of the usual two or three and just play one stadium every weekend or second weekend or so.
March 22nd, 2005 09:25 AM
Joey

I look for an ' arena only ' tour just like U2 are scheduling across North America .

I look .......................

I ...............................................

********** END TRANSMISSION ******************
March 22nd, 2005 11:06 AM
ThatsWhatISay They won't construct a stage as huge as one in the Stones format just to play a few stadiums here and there. You could do that with the settings up for an arena show, but not with a stadium stage. This is nonsense from the economical point of view.
At this point nothing indicates that there will be mostly arena shows. Quite the contrary it seems as if it's gonna be a Stones tour as usual.
And that's good so, because the masses of people a Stones tour attracts just calls for stadium shows.
Too many people would be left unsatisfied with a tour that consists mostly of arena shows, because the prices would be astronomically high and many fans or potential spectators would be left in front of the gates due to the low capacities of arenas.

In the past decade Stones shows sold slow or moderately fast, but consistently, and in the end almost every field or stadium was filled, no matter how bold the ticket prices were or how extraordinary high the venue's capacity was. And I don't count a few thousand empty seats in a stadium as failure.
The next tour won't be any different.
March 22nd, 2005 03:53 PM
Bob Tamp I dont mind a few stadium shows( yes, I do want Fenway Park for the experience) but I think the tour really needs to be mostly arenas and theaters to have a good draw.

The only way the Stones will sell out stadiums nationally is to announce THIS IS IT FOLKS... and then they still might have some trouble.

The Stones have played so much since 1989 that everyone who has had any curiosity to see them already has. I'm a fanatic, and my brother is too. We were just discussing how many of our friends, sister in laws etc have seen them- enjoyed it but who could care less if they see them again.

Saw Springsteen in 1978- loved it but really no desire to see him again unless somebody gave me a freebie. Seen Bowie three times, and I feel the same. So unless you are a real fanatic, there really is no need to go see the Stones.
March 22nd, 2005 03:55 PM
J.J.Flash
quote:
Joey wrote:


I look for an ' arena only ' tour just like U2 are scheduling across North America .

I look .......................

I ...............................................

********** END TRANSMISSION ******************



Oh Joey..... don't forget WE (over here) are mad about Stadium Gigs......WE need 'em so bad.
March 22nd, 2005 03:57 PM
glencar Will this be it, do ya think? I will definitely assume so & plan accordingly. Spain this time around maybe...
March 22nd, 2005 03:59 PM
Joey
quote:
J.J.Flash wrote:


Oh Joey..... don't forget WE (over here) are mad about Stadium Gigs......WE need 'em so bad.



J.J. Flash .................................

I thought you had " Arena's " & " Stadiums " over there ?!?!

Developing ..................................

Shiver ...................................

Jacky ! ™
March 22nd, 2005 04:14 PM
J.J.Flash
quote:
Joey wrote:


J.J. Flash .................................

I thought you had " Arena's " & " Stadiums " over there ?!?!

Developing ..................................

Shiver ...................................

Jacky ! ™



As you may know we have a bunch of them, some as fancy as yours (you better believe me) - See Brand-new Spanking, State of The Art - Quest Center Arena.

Gotta go home now!

Good rest brothers and sisters!

March 22nd, 2005 04:16 PM
J.J.Flash Damnit.....15012.......this number.... man.... yesterday I told you.... but I didn't know it would be THAT fast..... you know.....
March 22nd, 2005 06:18 PM
Gazza >ThatsWhatISay wrote:
They won't construct a stage as huge as one in the Stones format just to play a few stadiums here and there. You could do that with the settings up for an arena show, but not with a stadium stage. This is nonsense from the economical point of view.


not really. On a stadium tour they use about two or three different stages and "leapfrog" them around. So the same stage might get used for the first city and then not again until the fourth city which may be about 10 days later. They need to have that number of stages because of the time it takes to build it and to take it down again. If they're playing a stadium show say every weekend or every other weekend, they could do it economically by only using one stage. They could use an arena set up for the shows in-between



>At this point nothing indicates that there will be mostly arena shows. Quite the contrary it seems as if it's gonna be a Stones tour as usual.

I dont know what you mean by "as usual". The last two US tours the Stones did (1999 and 2002/03) were mostly arena shows.

>And that's good so, because the masses of people a Stones tour attracts just calls for stadium shows.
Too many people would be left unsatisfied with a tour that consists mostly of arena shows, because the prices would be astronomically high and many fans or potential spectators would be left in front of the gates due to the low capacities of arenas.

eh? They charge the same high prices in stadiums that they do in arenas!

>In the past decade Stones shows sold slow or moderately fast, but consistently, and in the end almost every field or stadium was filled, no matter how bold the ticket prices were or how extraordinary high the venue's capacity was.

not on the last tour they werent. While most shows were filled to over 95% capacity, many stadium shows (including the first one in Boston and other stadiums in major cities such as LA) still had plenty of seats left.

> And I don't count a few thousand empty seats in a stadium as failure.
The next tour won't be any different.

I disagree for the same reason as Bob Tamp did. A Stones tour is still a big draw and a huge event but they now tour so frequently that practically everyone who has ever wanted to see them has had ample opportunity to do so. Every tour since '89 has seen it easier to get a ticket than the tour preceding it. The next one wont be any different, especially with those prices and due to the fact that other major acts will already have put their tickets on sale before the Stones did for a tour at around the same time. If youre touring with that amount of regularity, theres a limit to how many times people are going to pay those prices.

They got away with it last time because many of the stadium gigs took place in cities where they also played an arena show or in many cases a theatre. If you're given the choice between paying the same price for an arena, theatre or stadium, most people would go by "smaller is better". The stadium shows last time were compensation for a lot of people who missed out on the scramble for theatre and arena tickets

I think if they were to announce a "final tour" and do stadiums, they'd do well enough, but I think an almost exclusive stadium tour would struggle in many cities other than the biggest places. Especially at those prices.
March 22nd, 2005 07:47 PM
corgi37 Well, regardless of all our bickering and wondering, i just hope the new stuff is ok and they tour Oz.

Dont care 'bout nuffink else.

Oh, except St.Kilda winning the flag this year. 1st game of AFL starts tomorrow night. We have to play Brisbane up in Brisbane. Temp is 30c today! This could be our year! We've only won 1 flag since 1897! That was in '66. I was too young to even know, but my dad went. We won by the barest margin (1 point) against the most hated team in history (Collingwood).

My dad, 6ft 4, tough cop - cried.

I did the same in 95 at my 1st ever Stones show.

And, again in 97 when St.Kilda lost the Grand Final.

March 22nd, 2005 11:03 PM
VoodooChileInWOnderl This is great news, I edited the thread title to give credits to our friend Daethgod from Australia as he posted the news on March 15, one week ago
March 23rd, 2005 01:41 AM
IanBillen
The Stones will do stadiums this tour as I always said.
And yes, as was also stated here the stadiums will be placed
wisely.

I seen them on both the arena and stadium shows last time out and The Giants stadium show was awesome!

Cleveland's arena show was great. Pittsburgh's arena show was not as well as the first two but was still very good.

*I don't know what folks got against The Stones in the stadium these days Geeze... They are The Rolling Stones. Their name says "spectacle" written all over it. When you see them in a stadium that is exactly what you get with a much bigger production than an arena or club venue.

I love seeing the Stones in a huge open air stadium with that mammouth stage and them being the spectacle that they are. What a rush.

I also love the more intimate arena gigs for the true picture of their sound and a little bit better view of what they are all about on that particular tour.

Each type of Stones gig has a purpose.

If this was the eighties folks would be complaining if they didn't do stadium shows and would wonder what the hell is going on with them.

Ian
March 23rd, 2005 03:49 AM
Monkey Woman
quote:
Soldatti wrote:
They are in Paris still.


Not in Paris, no. At Fourchette, Mick's "house" in France. See this thread:

http://novogate.com/board/968/209837-1.html

March 23rd, 2005 06:53 AM
Gazza IanBillen wrote:

>I seen them on both the arena and stadium shows last time out and The Giants stadium show was awesome!

didnt know you were at that one. Thanks to the great Scope we had a fun tailgate party at that show. An enjoyable evening. I thought personally that the show was the weakest of the three stadium gigs I saw (Anaheim and Twickenham I being the others) by some distance. A question of taste, I suppose. It wasnt a patch on the MSG show two nights previously.

>Cleveland's arena show was great. Pittsburgh's arena show was not as well as the first two but was still very good.

To my ears, Cleveland was one of the best "non theatre" shows of the entire tour.

>I don't know what folks got against The Stones in the stadium these days Geeze... They are The Rolling Stones. Their name says "spectacle" written all over it.

Thats the point. Its spectacle and theyve done it probably better than anyone else and theyve done it to death. It's old. It's more spectacle than substance. The larger the show, the more important the 'event' becomes than the music. The more they mug and the less they play. And the more lame the setlists.


> When you see them in a stadium that is exactly what you get with a much bigger production than an arena or club venue.

Nonsense. There's no comparison. In a stadium for most of the audience, youre watching something on a TV screen. I cant believe anyone who has seen the Stones PLAY up close and personal in a theatre would compare a seat 70 yards away in a stadium with that experience. I refer back to my previous remark about them concentrating more on a spectacle in a large venue than actually playing. In a theatre they barely have to worry for a second about "production". Pure rock n roll. A stadium show is NEVER that because it relies too much on other factors that aren't musically-related.

>I love seeing the Stones in a huge open air stadium with that mammouth stage and them being the spectacle that they are. What a rush.

I've enjoyed it too, when there was no alternative. I think that to charge huge prices to see a stadium show on a video screen is crap, though.


>I also love the more intimate arena gigs for the true picture of their sound and a little bit better view of what they are all about on that particular tour.
Each type of Stones gig has a purpose.

well,,yeah, although the main purpose for us is entertainment. Its just on a somewhat different level according to the size of the venue.

>If this was the eighties folks would be complaining if they didn't do stadium shows and would wonder what the hell is going on with them.

personally, I've always maintained that the smaller the venue the better the show. Others may prefer the spectacle. Each to their own. In my eyes, playing more and more smaller shows allowed the Stones to re-discover themselves as a band and as musicians. They re-wrote the book as a stadium act years ago. No need to re-tread the same path every tour. And play the same bloody songs too.


[Edited by Gazza]
March 23rd, 2005 07:18 AM
Mr Hess Gotta agree with Gazza.
Page: 1 2
Rolling Stones Forum - Rolling Stones Message Board - Mick Jagger - Keith Richards - Brian Jones - Charlie Watts - Ian Stewart - Stu - Bill Wyman - Mick Taylor - Ronnie Wood - Ron Wood