| 11th August 2006 07:00 PM |
|
|
| Poison Dart |
I'm sure a lot of you got to read the article by Paul Sexton from the Times Online.
There ere are some really positive statements in there from Mick,Keith and even Charlie.
Mick- At one point hints that the dates in Europe that they have "not YET been able to reschedule" will be rescheduled for some time in 2007.
Charlie- Kind of implies that he is not going to retire contrary to reports that came out earlier this year. When Keith asks him what he is going to do when he retires? Charlie replies "I'm speechless, because all I actually do is play the bloody drums"
Keith- When asked if a new Rolling Stones cd was possible. Keith respondes with a very positive "absolutely"
So great news all around. Potential new dates in Europe next year. Charlie is not going to quit. Plus a new "back to the basics cd"
You can't really ask for more from the Stones at this point. |
| 11th August 2006 07:01 PM |
|
|
| Some Guy |
sadly, wide open. |
| 11th August 2006 07:15 PM |
|
|
| glencar |
We can ask them to do arena shows & vary the set list a bit. |
| 11th August 2006 07:37 PM |
|
|
| Mikey |
from a fan's standpoint, why continue?
This new paradigm of continuous touring, coupled with absolutely flat and dull setlists with accompanying soaring ticket prices has sapped the "Ladies and Gentlemen, The Rolling Stones" experience for me, IMO.
I applaud you all who take it upon themselves to see 10-12 shows during these legs, but for me, the lust is clearly waning based on the above conditions. |
| 11th August 2006 07:41 PM |
|
|
| glencar |
As for some of us who ahve gone to many shows. At this point it's more about meeting other Stones fans. |
| 11th August 2006 07:42 PM |
|
|
| Poison Dart |
I can't see the Stones continuing in the same fashion they have since 1989.
I think if the Stones do record anew cd and tour it will be very different than what we have seen over the last 17 years.
I'd think we'd see a stripped down blues/mature cd. And concert dates in small (small by Stones standards) venues.
I would also think this new direction would be the best thing for the band at this point. |
| 11th August 2006 07:58 PM |
|
|
| mrhipfl |
quote:
Poison Dart wrote:
I can't see the Stones continuing in the same fashion they have since 1989.
I think if the Stones do record anew cd and tour it will be very different than what we have seen over the last 17 years.
I'd think we'd see a stripped down blues/mature cd. And concert dates in small (small by Stones standards) venues.
I would also think this new direction would be the best thing for the band at this point.
yeah, I would love that: simple small shows with no fireworks or giant balloons, Mick having a stronger voice because of saving energy due to a small stage, Keith and Ronnie improvising over a blues progression... |
| 11th August 2006 10:27 PM |
|
|
| Poison Dart |
These guys are pushing 70 at this point. If they are serious about going forward I don't see any other realistic way of doing it. |
| 11th August 2006 11:16 PM |
|
|
| Some Guy |
new album watch starts... now!! |
| 12th August 2006 12:21 AM |
|
|
| Dan |
quote:
Mikey wrote:
from a fan's standpoint, why continue?
These type of fans make up a small minority at Stones shows.
quote:
This new paradigm of continuous touring, coupled with absolutely flat and dull setlists with accompanying soaring ticket prices has sapped the "Ladies and Gentlemen, The Rolling Stones" experience for me, IMO.
High ticket prices and market saturation, maybe. But I don't think continually playing Start Me Up, Satisfaction and Jumpin' Jack Flash will repulse the masses any time soon.
quote:
I applaud you all who take it upon themselves to see 10-12 shows during these legs, but for me, the lust is clearly waning based on the above conditions.
It waned a long time ago but it has nothing to do with the setlists. |
| 12th August 2006 12:23 AM |
|
|
| Some Guy |
pug predicted this all. |
| 12th August 2006 12:37 AM |
|
|
| Left Shoe Shuffle |
New album?
I think Keef was probably referring to the inevitable live release... |
| 12th August 2006 01:15 AM |
|
|
| pdog |
I predict this, if it happens!
|
| 12th August 2006 02:00 AM |
|
|
| Zack |
I feel a Bangkok show coming on! |
| 12th August 2006 03:57 AM |
|
|
| danielharris627 |
Great news!  |
| 12th August 2006 03:59 AM |
|
|
| danielharris627 |
Great news! |
| 12th August 2006 09:23 AM |
|
|
| Poison Dart |
Left Shoe:
Keith was talking about a new Stones cd. He was talking about "making another back to the basic's" cd.
He was not talking about a live cd. |
| 12th August 2006 09:36 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Poison Dart wrote:
I can't see the Stones continuing in the same fashion they have since 1989.
I think if the Stones do record anew cd and tour it will be very different than what we have seen over the last 17 years.
I'd think we'd see a stripped down blues/mature cd. And concert dates in small (small by Stones standards) venues.
I would also think this new direction would be the best thing for the band at this point.
Undoubtedly. however, as I've said before, it would require the Stones to have a HUGE ego check to wean themselves away from the obsession with playing to the biggest audiences/making the most money/playing for the masses instead of themselves or the fans that has taken over so much in recent years.
We've expected that direction since the late 90's when most experts were predicting that the bottom would fall out of the 'stadium rock' industry. It still hasnt REALLY happened for the Stones, although they'll no doubt have seen the signs in recent months that the appeal for that sort of event at the prices theyre charging is waning.
I'm not so convinced they'll follow the path youre choosing however because I dont think the motivation is there. I dont think Mick has any interest in doing anything thats too 'retro', musically. And whilst demand will end up forcing them to play more non stadium shows, they'll just simply charge more and more money to play intimate venues because they know they can get away with it as shown by the fact that the promised "$50 theatre shows" on this tour didnt happen at all and the only theatre shows so far are corporate or gala events where they can charge four figure sums for tickets.
Five years or more ago, I'd have given your scenario a strong chance of happening. However, I just think that in the last few years they've become too cynical and set in their ways for it to be likely.
[Edited by Gazza] |
| 12th August 2006 11:04 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Poison Dart wrote:
So great news all around. Potential new dates in Europe next year. Charlie is not going to quit. Plus a new "back to the basics cd"
You can't really ask for more from the Stones at this point.
well..something definitive would help. "Potential" new dates in 2007, Charlie still threatening to quit but not doing so because he cant find anything else to do and Keith saying "absolutely" merely to whether a new CD is "possible" arent exactly indications that the band's future as a working band are set in stone.
certainly encouraging signs in many ways, but I wouldnt take everything they say at face value. With the Stones everything is subject to change and driven by business decisions - and lets face it, Keith isnt going to tell an interviewer that they'll never make another record and Mick, in the middle of a European tour, is not going to commit the ultimate faux-pas by saying that they wont be back because theres not enough money in it for them. |
| 13th August 2006 12:20 AM |
|
|
| Poison Dart |
I agree to a point about the demand not being there in recent months.
BUT, lets look at what the Stones are trying to do. They are not selling that well in Boston. Which on the surface of things says the Stones as a stadium act might be done.
But, what people fail to mention is that it will be their 5th show in Boston in a year. 3 stadium shows and two arena shows. After all is said and done the Stones will come close to having played to 150,000 people in Boston alone in one year. And don't forget the 40 Licks tour where they played 3 other concerts (at least one was at the stadium)was not that long ago. 8 concerts in the last few years at big money is what is keeping intrest low thus far.
What makes that number all the more impressive is the amount of tickets sold at the ridiculous prices they are charging. Sorry, but the Stones (or anyone else) are not worth $600. Or $350 or $150 for stadium seats for the 5th time around in less than a year.
The Stones are simply oversaturating major markets like Boston at prices that are simply too high.
I don't think it's a lack of intrest in the Stones. It's more of an attitude like I've seen them twice in the last couple of years and their concerts are far too expensive for me to go again after such a short time.
[Edited by Poison Dart] |
| 13th August 2006 12:35 AM |
|
|
| Poison Dart |
Also, don't forget that on the whole the A BIGGER BANG tour has been a massive worldwide success.
For all the bitching some people do it is easy to forget that the ABB tour is going to go down in the record books as the highest grossing tour of all time.
That is simply amazing when you take into account it's 2006 and the Rolling Stones are just about the only stadium band left in the world.
With the exception of mediocre sales in the US. The entire ABB project has been a major triumph for the band.
The cd got to #1 on the Global and Euro charts. Plus #1 in about (forgot exactly how many) 10 countries. They dominated media outlets. Forbes magazine named them the biggest musical act of 2005/2006. They played to an audience of over a billion people at the Superbowl. And played to their largest crowd ever (1 MILLION PLUS)in Rio. They got mostly great critical reviews and their singles charted fairly well (not in US)AROUND THE WORLD EX: SOL #1 in Italy. Top 20 in UK etc.
So it is not the end of the world if on their 5th time through a city in a year sales are a little slow.
Maybe the Stones are still a stadium act?
But with that said going forward they would be wise to drop the whole stadium thing. They need to have a huge commercial hit in the US. I'm sure there is another great album in there somewhere if they were to put their ego's aside and work w/ a producer that is not a yes man who can produce a Johnny Cash like comeback.
The next Stones album needs to cut to the bone with mature lyrics and music. They need to stop talking about their cocks at 65 years old.
They need to prove to the world (not the die hards)that they are still artists not accountants. |
| 13th August 2006 09:48 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
I wouldnt say theyre the only stadium act left in the world. I think a certain Irish band who shall remain nameless may have some grounds to dispute that, for starters.
It'll go down as the biggest grossing tour ever because by the end of it all they'll have spent two years on the road and played over 150 concerts, more than half of them in their main market where they can charge the most money. Its my belief that they wont do a tour on this scale again and their main motivation for staying on the road for 2 years on this tour is to generate a highest ever grossing record that will probably never be equalled in their lifetime (and which U2 wont be around long enough to surpass)
the appeal to see them and their ability to generate lots of cash as a result is still huge by anyone else's standards, but as they're tailoring the event to an audience who have a lot of disposable income but who dont really buy many of their records (if the disparity is any indication) theres a limit to how much saturation a potential audience will put up with at those prices. If you live in the US for example, in the last ten calendar years, the Stones have played there in all of them except for 2000, 2001 and 2004 - and in some of those years theyve passed through some markets more than once. basically, by the time this tour ends, almost everyone who's wanted to see them in recent years has had a realistic opportunity to do so, and as they're not exactly fan-friendly and likely to attract new fans, that audience (and type of audience they're appealing to) is aging and is not going to be replaced.
Basically, the ability to fill stadiums while charging a week's wage for a mediocre ticket is something which isnt going to last much longer because the novelty value of seeing them disappears for many, and after a while most people catch themselves on and realise its overpriced. The Stones and Cohl are obviously going to be aware that its been harder to fill large venues this year than ever before - BOTH in America and in Europe, so whether they'll attempt to do it again on that scale is debatable. |
| 13th August 2006 09:54 AM |
|
|
| gimmekeef |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
I wouldnt say theyre the only stadium act left in the world. I think a certain Irish band who shall remain nameless may have some grounds to dispute that, for starters.
It'll go down as the biggest grossing tour ever because by the end of it all they'll have spent two years on the road and played over 150 concerts, more than half of them in their main market where they can charge the most money. Its my belief that they wont do a tour on this scale again and their main motivation for staying on the road for 2 years on this tour is to generate a highest ever grossing record that will probably never be equalled in their lifetime (and which U2 wont be around long enough to surpass)
the appeal to see them and their ability to generate lots of cash as a result is still huge by anyone else's standards, but as they're tailoring the event to an audience who have a lot of disposable income but who dont really buy many of their records (if the disparity is any indication) theres a limit to how much saturation a potential audience will put up with at those prices. If you live in the US for example, in the last ten calendar years, the Stones have played there in all of them except for 2000, 2001 and 2004 - and in some of those years theyve passed through some markets more than once. basically, by the time this tour ends, almost everyone who's wanted to see them in recent years has had a realistic opportunity to do so, and as they're not exactly fan-friendly and likely to attract new fans, that audience (and type of audience they're appealing to) is aging and is not going to be replaced.
Basically, the ability to fill stadiums while charging a week's wage for a mediocre ticket is something which isnt going to last much longer because the novelty value of seeing them disappears for many, and after a while most people catch themselves on and realise its overpriced. The Stones and Cohl are obviously going to be aware that its been harder to fill large venues this year than ever before - BOTH in America and in Europe, so whether they'll attempt to do it again on that scale is debatable.
Hey!...150 shows at minimum $4 million a night....theres my half a billion!!!..lmao |
| 13th August 2006 09:59 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
LMAO - dont forget taxes and overheads, my friend..LOL |
| 13th August 2006 10:12 AM |
|
|
| gimmekeef |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
LMAO - dont forget taxes and overheads, my friend..LOL
I'm only counting.."GROSS".....jb school of accounting... |
| 13th August 2006 10:14 AM |
|
|
| Jumping Jack |
Moooo |
| 13th August 2006 10:57 AM |
|
|
| Bitch |
If the Stones go out with A Bigger Bang, then I'll go out with them, to as many shows as possible. If they ever do another tour, I'll go out again, because sooner or later it will have to end. And that's when we'll all stop going to see them. Agreed a varied setlist would be more exciting, and as far as the prices go, you can always buy a cheap seat if thats all you want to spend. The point is, it's not going to last forever, so be thankful for the many opportunities that the RS have given us to see them. |
| 13th August 2006 11:09 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
Sure. As Andrew Oldham put it on the sleevenotes for the first album its "more than a group - its a way of life". Whether we want it to be or not!
I'll keep going too, although the amount of shows I choose to attend will be less than before and dependent on size of venues, how local they are and how much they cost |
| 13th August 2006 12:04 PM |
|
|
| aladdinstory |
i don't know if keith would be the best source for rather there will be another Stones album, if were up to him there would've been at least two new releases between B2B and ABB. as always, it will be up to mick and his "wandering spirit". i did see on the video of the euro tour press conference mick state a desire to record a new CD, which, frankly is a bit out of character, usually he is non-commital on such topics. ABB does beg for a follow-up, it is a nice step away from the mellow maturity sound of VL the schizophrenia three EPs in one sound of the brittle B2B, and the less said about the Forty Licks new material the better. ABB has lapses of generic simplicities and insipid balladry but overall roars pretty damn strong for a group of sixtysomethings. IF they can take the raw qualities of ABB and strip them down further, have the full band record, "wake up Woody!" and find a producer who will push them then it could be a very interesting recording future for the Glimmer Twins. But IMHO it will ultimately be Jagger's call if there will be future Stones recording projects. |
| 13th August 2006 12:18 PM |
|
|
| Gazza |
yep. I think you're right. I think its also quite evident in the last few years who the creative driving force in the band is these days. |
