|
|
| Mikey |
I was at the Oakland Arena show when Sheryl Crow opened and prior to her coming on, I was talking to her sound man at her mixing board. She had her own seperate, huge board and the Stones had their own in front of hers. He was talking to me about how they have to adjust various levels for being indoors, etc.
When she came on, she kicked her set off with "Steve McQueen"(title?) and the guitars were crackling and the sound was very good and as such, was hopeful that the sound quality would continue once the Stones hit the stage.
However, when they appeared, the sound was muddy and echoing. Very disheartening.
Also, there is a clear distinction between the sound on stage and at the B-stage. At the Pac Bell shows, the B-stage guitars were VERY loud, but much less so while on stage. |
|
|
| Sir Stonesalot |
I know Gazza...I'm just throwing possibilities out there. As for not loud enough, I agree with that. I think maybe they tried to get away with using the indoor arena gear outside? Just not big enough. Perhaps they are afraid if hearing loss as they get older?
And weather does play a part outside...but what about indoors? Doesn't explain the spotty sound in an arena.
You know, the Stones can afford the absolute BEST sound systems...and they can afford the absolute BEST people to run said systems.
I thought the best sound of the shows I saw was at Roseland. On the house PA, with the house techs. Now what does that say?
JB, I don't dislike you...I just want you to stop being such a fuckwit. You are not fooling anyone with your boohoo poor me I'm misunderstood hogwash.
You & I both know EXACTLY what you were trying to pull. You deleted that post to try and make Gazza & I look silly. I can make myself look silly enough without your help.
Now, do you have an on topic post to make? If not, then shut the fuck up, and go hijack the Happy thread again. |
|
|
| Gazza |
Ah yes, of course. The b-stage sound is never as good as the main stage (plus with the sound system being about 50 yards behind the band, what youre hearing is a bit out of synch with what youre seeing them sing and play). Whether they can improve on that problem, I dont know.
Steve McQueen is indeed the title of the Sheryl song youre referring to.
Oakland was probably my favourite show of the entire tour (based on the shows I have copies of as opposed to the shows I was at). I'd have loved to have been at that one. The Stones always seem to play very well in the Bay Area (and sell a lot of tickets too!) |
|
|
| jb |
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
I know Gazza...I'm just throwing possibilities out there. As for not loud enough, I agree with that. I think maybe they tried to get away with using the indoor arena gear outside? Just not big enough. Perhaps they are afraid if hearing loss as they get older?
And weather does play a part outside...but what about indoors? Doesn't explain the spotty sound in an arena.
You know, the Stones can afford the absolute BEST sound systems...and they can afford the absolute BEST people to run said systems.
I thought the best sound of the shows I saw was at Roseland. On the house PA, with the house techs. Now what does that say?
JB, I don't dislike you...I just want you to stop being such a fuckwit. You are not fooling anyone with your boohoo poor me I'm misunderstood hogwash.
You & I both know EXACTLY what you were trying to pull. You deleted that post to try and make Gazza & I look silly. I can make myself look silly enough without your help.
Now, do you have an on topic post to make? If not, then shut the fuck up, and go hijack the Happy thread again.
I deleted the thread primarily b/c Gazza got pissed and it was in poor taste to blame my not traveling on what happened to the two people I referred to....not to make either you or Gazza look silly...believe what you want.
P.S.-please don't talk to me anymore as you are no longer a friend....
[Edited by jb] |
|
|
| Sir Stonesalot |
>believe what you want.<
I believe that I asked you to shut the fuck up unless you had something to say about the topic of this thread...the sound at Stones shows.
I believe that you are full of shit. That is not an insult...it's a compliment. I'm full of shit as well. JB, you can't bullshit a bullshitter.
Now, please, can this thread proceed without further interuption from you? Unless, of course, you have a valid ON TOPIC post to make. If you do, please feel free to do so.
>P.S.-please don't talk to me anymore as you are no longer a friend....<
Friends? I don't even know you! How the hell were we "friends"?
Look, I'll make you a deal. You stop hijacking threads, staying on topic, and I'll leave you alone. I will make exceptions for the nonsense threads like the drinking thread, the FU thread, and the like. I'm talking about serious discussion threads...leave those be and I'll leave you be.
Or, don't take my offer, and I will hound you every time you go off topic. Every time. I will make your Rocks Off existence as miserable as I possibly can. I may even run a contest where the prize is one of JB's business cards!
Now, back on topic.
Does anyone know how the Stones decide on what sound systems to use on tour? Do they try them out ahead of time? How do they hire the sound techs?
[Edited by Sir Stonesalot] |
|
|
| jb |
The sound in Atlanta was the best I ever heard and it was a stadium show. |
|
|
| F505 |
Ever been to the Amsterdam ArenA to see a Stones concert? No? Thank God for it! It's the worst place to be to visit a concert. I swore never to enter that doomed temple again! Even the grass is bad. |
|
|
| Sir Stonesalot |
There were TONS of complaints about the sound at the Amsterdam Arena show...yet the bootleg doesn't sound all that bad.
This is really a puzzling question.
Are we to determine that that there are only certain spots in any given arena or stadium where sound will be good, and you are just fucked if you are not in one of those spots?
Or, even worse, are we to determine that it's the Stones and their system that are to blame?
We keep getting conflicting info from people that were at same shows, or bootlegs of those shows. Someone get Cohl on the line... |
|
|
| Mikey |
Gazza wrote: Oakland was probably my favourite show of the entire tour (based on the shows I have copies of as opposed to the shows I was at). I'd have loved to have been at that one. The Stones always seem to play very well in the Bay Area (and sell a lot of tickets too!)
I know a girl who works at Bill Graham Presents (now ClearChannel) and works and is friends with Shelley Lazar (the MFTQB according to the Stones website) and you should hear some of the stories this girl has that Shelley has told her.
Apparently, Shelley and Charlie are very close and I asked this girl to ask Shelley about the 1989 Amsterdam incident where Charlie punched out Mick ("I'm not your fucking drummer, you're my singer!") Shelley said that story is an absolute falsehood, although I think everyone agrees that it happened.
Also said that at last year's Willie Nelson tribute concert that Willie and Keith went through about a pound of pot! I always got a kick out of that one. |
|
|
| ThatsWhatISay |
I'm not sure where I heard/read it, but someone said that for the Licks tour the band decided to go on a sound system that has lower quality, but more power, something like that. The word "array" was used in this respect, can't recall anymore. But since this problem doesn't apply only for the Licks Tour this thing I mentioned might be pointless.
As I visited the Robbie Williams concert I found that his sound system looked very much the same as the one from the Stones (at least the boxes), maybe because they both called Mark Fisher for stage design. However he had no sound probs at all.
I really begin to wonder, if the Stones' sound techs are the problem...I would be curious how they would sound if they go on road with another sound crew.
[Edited by ThatsWhatISay] |
|
|
| UGot2Rollme |
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
You know, the Stones can afford the absolute BEST sound systems...and they can afford the absolute BEST people to run said systems.
I couldn't agree more.. The biggest dissapointment for me on the Licks tour was the sound. And don't tell me that it was always good in front of the soundboard because I was at the SB for the Manchester show and we COULD NOT HEAR RONNIE. And the B-stage was even worse - I was 15 feet from the band, but it sounded like someone had stuffed cotton in my ears...In DC, it was a windy night, and, until the end of the concert, when they really turned it up fucking loud (probably busting a few eardrums on the field), it was terribly week fade'in, fade'out...
So, bottom line is the Stones need to spare no expense on the next tour to make sure that everyone in the house can hear it damn clearly.. if U2, Springsteen, R. Will can do it, the only reason the Stones wouldn't is if they didn't feel proud of playing it loud!
N. Berg RIP
[Edited by UGot2Rollme] |
|
|
| Gazza |
>Ever been to the Amsterdam ArenA to see a Stones concert? No? Thank God for it! It's the worst place to be to visit a concert. I swore never to enter that doomed temple again! Even the grass is bad.
yeah..Ajax havent had quite as good a team since they moved there! That might be a good excuse!
To be honest, I thought about going to Amsterdam last August as I can fly direct from here and its very cheap to get there. However, I remembered the numerous complaints about the sound from the 1998 shows and thats what put me off in the end.
I enjoyed the shows at De Kuip/Feyenoord in Rotterdam in '95. I prefer Amsterdam as a city but Rotterdam has a much better venue for a stadium concert.
|
|
|
| BillyBoll |
Yeah. Sound was shit the night I was at the A'dam Arena. And the band werent too good either!
But the gang I was with had a blast. It was the first Stones show for many of them. And my big sister who had grown up listening to them in the sixties was on fire! It may have had something to do with the 5 or 6 nights in Amsterdam before but it was great night for all.
We actually saw the guys wandering around with their mikes and PCs but they didnt seem able to anything about it. Just a barn purporting to be a concert venue I suppose! |
|
|
| Stonesthrow |
I wasn't at a lot of shows as Jb claims he was, so I don't personally know the quality of sound at given shows. However, a possibility comes to mind that has not been discussed. Most people seem to like the Stones sound to be dirty/ grungy along the lines of Exile. Many also seem not to like precise, clear tight-sounding music such as Sticky Fingers or Aftermath as much. If that is valid, then perhaps the Stones have been trying to cater to the audience in that way. Other possible reasons:
1. The Stones are cheap so their Radio Shack wireless mikes pick up NBC programming along with their voices and instruments
2. They can't fire the soundmen because they know where the bodies are buried or where the drugs are to be bought
3. The places they play were not built for acoustical perfection
4. They know that the majority of people who attend concerts are not music critics and will like the music no matter what it sounds like
Pick a reason.
|
|
|
| Snappy McJack |
I'd probably go with #4.
But with the type of bucks people are shelling out to see them, I think that a great or perfect show is in the minds of a lot of these customers. |
|
|
| Mr Jimmy |
quote:
jb wrote:
I think a lot of the sound techs were from Canada-nuff said.
I'll bite... what the fuck is that supposed to mean?
"nuff" wasn't said, so please feel free to elucidate.
|
|
|
| Mr Jimmy |
The quality of the sound changed show by show but I agree with Gazza that it definitely wasn't loud enough. |
|
|
| marko |
I think they are using the same sound equipments on Licks
tour and on BTB-No security.Ac/Dc has also used the same.
And MANY others.
they changed them after VOODOO tour.And i don�t remember
anyone complain about sound quality on that tour,or Steel
Wheels either.And they did mostly stadiums.They did play LOT
louder in 1994 than in 2003.Sound had more power back in 1994.
One problem might be,they keith&ronnie uses OLD amps&guitars, and PA�s are the latest moderns,so,maybe they
don�t work together so well.But thats the only way,how they
can sound Rolling stones in 2003,and the stones 1977 or whatever.... |
|
|
| Moonisup |
What surprised me, was that the sound in the Amsterdam Arena was pretty good! Maybe even better then in The Kuip. And most of the time the sounds gets better after a few songs
|
|
|
| parmeda |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
Pam - you mentioned about great sound in the UC in Chicago when you saw them there, which I found interesting as every show I've read reviews of that theyve played in that venue since their first date there in 1998 has seen numerous complaints about the horrible sound. I guess either those folks were just unlucky or else YOU were fortunate!
Gazza, I've sat in almost every section in the UC, for one type of an event or another...it's true about "where you sit" there. It was built for sporting events and the roars of the crowds... I've learned for concerts, you need to be "dead-on" with the sound systems. That, and it depends who's playin'  |
|
|
| mac_daddy |
it is a mix of factors...
where you sit (this has been pretty well covered)...
building design - as a general rule, the higher the ceiling, the poorer the sound, but there are always exceptions. Worst case, you will get echoes. Sit in the top section at staples ctr and you will hear the snare bounce of the rear wall all night...
band sound system (and engineers) - the stones travel with their own, so there is no excuse for this to be a negative, but it is. I agree the Stones are the greatest band ever, but historically, their sound system certainly has not been. Chip Monck might have been alot of things, but an audiophile he was not. One of the reasons that the many of the AUD recordings suck is because the sound coming through the PA sucked, too. It was overloaded, and just didn't sound that good. Compare it to what the Dead (the real Dead) sounded like with their Wall of Sound in 71 and 73...
These acts also have/had people that could HEAR tuning the board, and this makes all the difference. If the mix is muddy, or too bright, or overloaded, etc. - this is the fault of the sound guy(s), usually at the board and FOH. There is no excuse for not hiring the best sound guys and using the best equipment. I have seen bands like the Dead and Phish (and Dave Matthews) play the same arenas and stadiums, and the sound has been great. Some spaces sound better than others, but all of them can sound good. Listen to the tapes; they never lie. And sound quality-wise, the GD AUD tapes from the 60s, 70s and 80s and the Phish tapes from the 90s and beyond blow the doors off the Stones recordings from the same periods and venues...
now as far as boots go, the number one factor that will effect sound quality is taper gear. And alot of the stuff used to run tape on the Licks tour was not quality gear. There are some notable exceptions, but the majority of sources from that last tour were done with mics and decks that left alot to be desired in the quality dept.
Couple this with a trading community that could care less about lineage, and the source pool becomes very messy. This means that there are alot of CDs that circualte that have been sourced from mp3. This causes audible artifacts that degrade the sound. There are sources that have been EQ'd by bootleggers who have no idea what they are doing, and no audiophile listening skills or talents of their own. This permanently damages the recordings (that crculate), and this damage cannot be undone, so it just propagates from CD copy to CD copy...
Which brings up the issue of people burning CDs who don't know what they are doing. That is where the gaps between tracks come from - but there are a number of other technical issues that get fubar'd when every yahoo with a CD burner offers to be a branch of a trading tree (no one here, speaking in generalities)...
So while architecture and seating loaction have something to do with the sound quality, many of the negatives are frstrating because the are avoidable, and the occur in spots where they really shouldn't - the decisions of what PA gear to tour with, or the mixing abilities of the sound crew, or the taper's gear and skills (if applicable), or the myriad of things that happen at the distribution stage.
when you think about it, it's a wonder we have anything good to listen to at all .
_____
and while the "sweet spot" tends to be just in front of the board (FOB), this is not always the case. The "spot" really is the location where, after accounting for all the aforementioned factors, you can catch the fullest and richest sound, with a minimum of distortion...
for instance - at the Thomas and Mack in Vega$, the section tapes (from the rear lowest lodge) came out better than my FOB sources pulled less than 100 ft. from the stage, DFC and FOB. But there, the stacks are hung so high, that it actually sounds better higher up and towards the rear (this was taping Phish last month).
[Edited by mac_daddy] |
|
|
| littleredrooster |
I wasn't disappointed with the sound in Amsterdam at all despite the many complaints. The Netherlands is the GREATEST country to witness a Stones concert. The Dutch fans are rabid with enthusiasm. Their energy at the shows is without equal. I finally lived my dream in 2003, 3 concerts in Holland, everyone should be so lucky!
The first concert attended in Licks was UC in Chicago, my opinion is that the sound indeed sucks at this venue. I was 20 rows and slightly right of the main stage. I thought that I had made a dreadful mistake purchasing all those tickets for that tour because the UC sound was terrible!
Best Arena show, I'd have to agree with Gazza, Wembley 29/8 was the best with Oakland Arena a close second.
And then there are the club shows, but, that's another thread!
JB, with all of your talk about your personal riches, you missed the boat! You would be lauding the merits of many European shows had you decided to participate in their grandeur!
Roostah CROWS! |
|
|
| Moonisup |
quote:
littleredrooster wrote:
Best Arena show, I'd have to agree with Gazza, Wembley 29/8 was the best with Oakland Arena a close second.
Roostah CROWS!
yes that was a great show and a great sound except for the Bstage, I was right next to the Bstage with SSC, but we couldn't hear it very well!! A real muddy sound, I don't know the setlist, but I could have been every song above 90 beats a minute!
Rik |
|
|
| L&A |
quote:
Moonisup wrote:
� I don't know the setlist, but I could have been every song above 90 beats a minute!
Rik
I'm sorry for you, Rik, that was the setlist:
Shake Your Hips
Casino Boogie
Turd on the Run
Just Wanna See His Face
Let It Loose
Soul Survivor
Lol |
|
|
| Nasty Habits |
This is an interesting thread -- I have never been fully satisfied with the sound at a Stones concert and always have wished it was better.
Is it possible that one reason for the wildly inconsistent sound is that the sound guys are constantly playing with levels attempting to mask certain technical deficiencies in a certain segment of the on stage population?
|
|
|
| ThatsWhatISay |
lol :-) I deleted this posting. I just glanced over Nasty's post and didn't get it right ;-)
[Edited by ThatsWhatISay] |
|
|
| mac_daddy |
quote:
ThatsWhatISay wrote:
Actually this is an interesting point...but the Stones background singers are just a handful unlike at many other concert shows. I can't imagine they have to adjust the sound all the time because of the on stage population.
Is it because of the nature of their songs? Are they so versatile and different that the sound has to be re-adjusted over and over again??
I don't think Nasty was referring to the backup singers/musicians... 
[Edited by mac_daddy] |
|
|
| Gazza |
maybe thats what made Wembley such a great show, both in sound and performance - because the musician of whom I think you speak played his arse off that particular evening |
|
|
| kahoosier |
I agree with Gazza to a point, every show I saw in the UK had marvelous sound. I have to also say that at Chicago in the stadium I was almost ready to leave early. I just could not hear anyhting except Mick over this big booming noise, and I was between the b stage and the main stage on the ground. The sound in Australia was good in the arena shows I saw, but the Enmore was awful. Now that may have been because of my location stage right in the FOS area; because there Keith overpowered the whole band. Maybe as another poster has suggested, we were hearing a lot of Keiths monitors. Certainly I could not hear Ronnie there.
Poor ronnie can seldom be heard anywhere though. |
|
|
| nankerphelge |
Licks was the worst sound since the dreadful 1981 tour!
SS is right -- we are forking over big dollahs to see and HEAR our band -- if the system or the operators are not up to the task
SACK THEM!
If the sound isn't perfect at the opener, I swear to god I will not go to another show.
Okay, I lied.
I'd go to another show.
But I would not be happy about it!
That's a lie too!
I'm always happy at a Stones show.
How can you not be!
But it would ruin the night!
No, not really...that's a lie too...
No matter how bad the nite, it is still a Stones show.
Better than anything else on the planet. |
|
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]