ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board

[THE WET PAGE] [IORR NEWS] [SETLISTS 1962-2003] [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: Live album to be released on September (inc. the best from "LYL" to "NS") Return to archive Page: 1 2 3 4 5
July 14th, 2004 10:36 AM
Monkey Woman It's probably different according to how much people earn and can afford... If I was a rich lawyer (!) instead of a poor writer (who has to keep a boring government job in order to pay the rent), maybe I would think $350 is a trifle.
July 14th, 2004 10:43 AM
jb Look, I am the first to admit that the Stones do not come close to band they once were. I remember the excitement I had going to their shows 75-94...but sadly, while I would never miss a tour, I don't get that feeling anymore...., we keep going b/c we love their history and hope against hope that we may witness yet another great performance, and on occassions, it does occur. However, even the most ardent fans cannot defend the lack of new, meaningful product this past 7 years...artistically, they are dead.
[Edited by jb]
July 14th, 2004 10:56 AM
F505
quote:
jb wrote:
Look, I am the first to admit that the Stones do not come close to band they once were. I remember the excitement I had going to their shows 75-94...but sadly, while I would never miss a tour, I don't get that feeling anymore...., we keep going b/c we love their history and hope against hope that we may witness yet another great performance, and on occassions, it does occur. However, even the most ardent fans cannot defend the lack of new, meaningful product this past 7 years...artistically, they are dead.
[Edited by jb]



Sad but true....
July 14th, 2004 11:04 AM
Gazza >Look, I am the first to admit that the Stones do not come close to band they once were. I remember the excitement I had going to their shows 75-94...but sadly, while I would never miss a tour, I don't get that feeling anymore...., we keep going b/c we love their history and hope against hope that we may witness yet another great performance, and on occassions, it does occur. However, even the most ardent fans cannot defend the lack of new, meaningful product this past 7 years...artistically, they are dead.

I dunno, Josh. I really enjoyed the shows I saw on the last tour. I'd favourably compare them to any tour I've ever seen them do (I dont go back as far as you though - just to 1982) so I can't go back on the reviews I gave on the last tour of the shows and say they weren't good. They certainly were, and on some occasions (MSG and Anaheim'02, the first 3 London shows in Aug'03) they were fantastic. When I compare what other acts charge, I just don't think they were worth the extortionate price of the tickets. I don't think any live show COULD be. Maybe to some, but not to me. That's all.
July 14th, 2004 11:07 AM
Some Guy Very soon we will have a new album that will be well worth this wait, and all will be forgotten. Keep chilling, babies!
July 14th, 2004 11:08 AM
Gazza >It's probably different according to how much people earn and can afford... If I was a rich lawyer (!) instead of a poor writer (who has to keep a boring government job in order to pay the rent), maybe I would think $350 is a trifle.

thats true to a point as we're in an industry that feeds on supply and demand. However, personally speaking, knowing that its way above what anyone asks for such a ticket, I'd get more satisfaction giving that money to someone who NEEDED it than someone who doesnt appreciate it and will never spend it.
July 14th, 2004 11:11 AM
Gazza >Very soon we will have a new album that will be well worth this wait, and all will be forgotten. Keep chilling, babies!

yeah, youre actually right I guess. Hopefully by Christmas or just after, the depths of despair that are the Diabolical Duo (and I mean "live licks and "jump Back", not Josh & Joey) will be a faded memory and a bad dream as we have a new studio album to salivate over/whine about (delete where applicable)

[Edited by Gazza]
July 14th, 2004 11:15 AM
jb To me the cost of tickets is irrelevant as almost every major act is charging equal to or more than the Stones(yes, I know Springsteen is the exception).Rather, it's their(the Stones) apparent disdain for anything we, the fans, would like to see. For example, no new album, no release of live stuff from the "Golden Era", a DVD which could have at least included some 72, 75 and 78 performances(See Led Zeppelin), the inability for whatever reasons, to be unable to have Mick taylor or even Wyman show up at a gig for old time sakes..and the list goes on. Instead, we get the same old shit, and astoundingly, we eat it up!!!
[Edited by jb]
July 14th, 2004 11:20 AM
Moonisup
quote:
Gazza wrote:


I dunno, Josh. I really enjoyed the shows I saw on the last tour.



I did too, but was not only because it was a stonesshow, but because I really had a great time with my friends!
July 14th, 2004 11:28 AM
Ten Thousand Motels Moon is up, I've been meaning to ask you a question about that Telstar logo pix? You got my curioisity up. I graduated from a high school called Telstar. The telstar earth station where they did the first transanlantic feed is about 25 miles from me. I was just wondering why you chose that photo. I hope you don't mind my asking.
[Edited by Ten Thousand Motels]
July 14th, 2004 11:41 AM
Moonisup it's a dutch soccerclub, located in my hometown!
July 14th, 2004 11:47 AM
Ten Thousand Motels
quote:
Moonisup wrote:
it's a dutch soccerclub, located in my hometown!



Oh. Well maybe one of the founders or whoever named the club had some connection. Anyway the station that picked up the signal was in France. Anyway I suppose it's neither here nor there. But it did peak my curiosity.
July 14th, 2004 11:48 AM
Moonisup yeah, the club was named after it, and was founded in 1963
July 14th, 2004 12:15 PM
Gazza >To me the cost of tickets is irrelevant as almost every major act is charging equal to or more than the Stones

no they're not! And of the ones that charge in the same ballpark (McCartney, Eagles, Madonna and er...thats about it), they're following the lead that the Stones started about FIVE years or more ago!


July 14th, 2004 12:38 PM
jb
quote:
Gazza wrote:
>To me the cost of tickets is irrelevant as almost every major act is charging equal to or more than the Stones

no they're not! And of the ones that charge in the same ballpark (McCartney, Eagles, Madonna and er...thats about it), they're following the lead that the Stones started about FIVE years or more ago!




I believe the Eagles, Streisand, and Macca actually have charged more....
July 14th, 2004 12:50 PM
Gazza They're all in the same ballpark, give or take a few dollars here and there but if the Stones are trying to tailor their market to the sort of audience that Streisand attracts then they really HAVE lost the plot
July 14th, 2004 01:30 PM
jb
quote:
Gazza wrote:
They're all in the same ballpark, give or take a few dollars here and there but if the Stones are trying to tailor their market to the sort of audience that Streisand attracts then they really HAVE lost the plot

It is, more or less, the same crowd...at least here in the States..
July 14th, 2004 01:46 PM
Ten Thousand Motels
quote:
jb wrote:
It is, more or less, the same crowd...at least here in the States..



Well if they are, then we need another constitutional convention pronto. But really I think that the 2 acts hardly attract the same crowd.
July 14th, 2004 01:50 PM
Baby Steelie
quote:
jb wrote:
It is, more or less, the same crowd...at least here in the States..



That's the sickest f*cking thing I've ever read . . .
July 14th, 2004 01:58 PM
Bloozehound baby steelie is just too damn pretty
July 14th, 2004 02:12 PM
Joey
quote:
Bloozehound wrote:
baby steelie is just too damn pretty



Yeah , but some babies grow in a peculiar way ................................

Mojo Joe !
July 14th, 2004 02:15 PM
Bloozehound
quote:
Joey wrote:

Yeah , but some babies grow in a peculiar way ................................

Mojo Joe !






July 14th, 2004 02:37 PM
Soldatti Like a live act, they still are good at least, but like a studio band they are dead and buried.
I wish that the new album can change this.
July 14th, 2004 02:42 PM
marko They used to live in studios...and this isn�t the STONES i
fell in love in 1980.I still think that voodoo lounge was
their last great tour,Licks was just good.
July 14th, 2004 06:21 PM
stones-addict
quote:
Soldatti wrote:
Like a live act, they still are good at least, but like a studio band they are dead and buried.
I wish that the new album can change this.



It might if the new album was a Winos album. I'm getting so sick of this bullshit recycling! I'm sick of Chuck Leavell! I'm sick of waiting for another Winos album! AAAARRRRGGHH!!!
[Edited by stones-addict]
July 14th, 2004 07:08 PM
Happy Motherfucker!! >>>They're different. The Dead change (d) setlists every night. The Stones change, maybe, 4-6 songs nightly. The Dead are also a highly recordable and tradable act.<<<

This is what truly separates The Stones from The Dead. The Dead generally care about their fans and still care about the music. The Stones are constantly trying to drain the pockets of their fans by releasing bullshit compilation disc, re-releases and crapy fucking live albums. Not to mention the ridicules priced concert tickets and a poor sound system to boot!
On the other hand, The Dead are still bringing the music to their fans at a reasonable priced ticket and are using the highest quality sound system available, kicking the shows into high gear by keeping the music fresh and exciting, playing some great covers and doing shows that last 3 � hours! They allow their fans to tape each and every show, plus sale all shows through an official release at a great price, $20 bucks. The idea of the Stones not allowing the fans to keep the fucking music that they have just paid for is shitty, and then they turn around and want us to buy an album consisting of different tracks from several different tours. There is not one reason in the world that they couldn�t approach the �Live� issue the same as The Dead do. But, as someone else has said, they�ve come to the point of acting like an oldies act by all of these fucked up things that they keep throwing at us. I still love seeing The Stones and it is nothing quiet as exciting as getting geared up for a show, but for all the support that we�ve given them throughout the years, you�d think that they would have the balls to give us something worth while in return. Mick should take a lesson from The Dead about fan respect!
July 14th, 2004 10:05 PM
corgi37 As far as live goes, i will pay whatever it costs. I paid $700 for 2 tickets last year. 8 rows from the front. Worth every cent. My Aussie mate Daethgod sat in front of me. I took some great pics, my wife touched Keith and Ronnie's hands (it should have been me! But, i was getting busted for the camera at the time) and by the end of the show, was 4-5 rows from the front. You cant put a price on that! Seeing them live is a different matter to me, because its still special. Being in Oz, those bastards have really ignored us, so its still a big deal. If i was a Yank, i might feel different. But, as far as this "new" release goes, i will not buy it. I will not encourage them at all. I hope it sells zero and Virgin dumps them. I really do. I hope they get dumped right on their bony old asses. Then, maybe, hopefully, they will have some sense knocked into them and actually record something new and decent. Or, just call it a day and give us a yearly treat of unreleased stuff.
July 15th, 2004 12:11 AM
glencar They need to release new material every few months during this tour.
July 15th, 2004 02:38 AM
F505
quote:
Happy Motherfucker!! wrote:
>>>They're different. The Dead change (d) setlists every night. The Stones change, maybe, 4-6 songs nightly. The Dead are also a highly recordable and tradable act.<<<

This is what truly separates The Stones from The Dead. The Dead generally care about their fans and still care about the music. The Stones are constantly trying to drain the pockets of their fans by releasing bullshit compilation disc, re-releases and crapy fucking live albums. Not to mention the ridicules priced concert tickets and a poor sound system to boot!
On the other hand, The Dead are still bringing the music to their fans at a reasonable priced ticket and are using the highest quality sound system available, kicking the shows into high gear by keeping the music fresh and exciting, playing some great covers and doing shows that last 3 � hours! They allow their fans to tape each and every show, plus sale all shows through an official release at a great price, $20 bucks. The idea of the Stones not allowing the fans to keep the fucking music that they have just paid for is shitty, and then they turn around and want us to buy an album consisting of different tracks from several different tours. There is not one reason in the world that they couldn�t approach the �Live� issue the same as The Dead do. But, as someone else has said, they�ve come to the point of acting like an oldies act by all of these fucked up things that they keep throwing at us. I still love seeing The Stones and it is nothing quiet as exciting as getting geared up for a show, but for all the support that we�ve given them throughout the years, you�d think that they would have the balls to give us something worth while in return. Mick should take a lesson from The Dead about fan respect!



Let's all become fan of The Dead!!!!
July 15th, 2004 03:32 AM
Happy Motherfucker!! Na, it wouldn't suite ya! You don't need to be a fan of The Dead to wish that The Stones would incorporate some of their business practices. These are my favorite two bands; it's apples and oranges man. The Stones give ya what'cha want, but The Dead give ya what�cha need, and that's access to the music on a consistent bases. I just wish The Stones would give us the fucking music when it's done. What's the point of hanging onto it? When the shows over, it's over. Live albums just do not sell worth a shit these days, so why not just sell every show, and make a load of money to boot!
Page: 1 2 3 4 5