Quote
Doxa
(Another way to put it is to say that they haven't been a living and breathing band for ages now.)

- Doxa

I wish I could take that literally but I won't. You see Doxa, it's very easy to remain stuck in this type of mind frame when you make these kind of grandiose statements and trust me, I totally get what you're saying but I think your depression with the band has clouded your ability to remain balanced. Time to get out of the funk!

Have you attended any Rolling Stones concerts since Steel Wheels? Or perhaps have you watched any performances from that time period on DVD? Did any part of the performance please you? Did any part make you cheer or smile? A band that hasn't been "living or breathing" won't be able to do that to anyone. Period. A working unit comes together and creates something that no one else can do and the very moment that it happens...they are a band--in the truest sense of the word.

"But Justin, a "true" band gets together to write music because they want to create new sounds and new emotions to challenge themselves and challenge their fans all the while enriching their lives in the process!" Yeah well, when you're as big as the Stones that ain't happening. Its not a mom and pop store anymore..it's a huge corporation with a payroll. So if you were always ready to call them out on how corporate they've become, stop expecting them to be the old band they used to be where they focused on writing new music because they "want to." It's called being fair..but most of all it's called "moving on."

They've predominantly been a live band since Steel Wheels (with a few true shining moments in the studio). The last time I checked, that still constitutes being a band. If you get together to play music and people like what they hearing (yes even the hardcore fans)--you're a band. All this stuff about a "true' or "breathing" band...is all emotional hoopla getting in the way of logic.

Yes

Quote
Send It To me
Even if true, I think we all know that if they go on the road and start (1.) having fun, (2.) making money, and (3.) playing well, that they will add additional dates and additional legs if they feel like it.

I honestly doubt (3) will be much of a factor in such a decision as long as (1) and most importantly (2) apply.

You forgot the (4) aspect, which can be as important as all but (2) - namely the palm tree/library fall/various unforeseen health problems factor.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-17 22:45 by Gazza.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Gazza
Despite the copy and paste and tabloid-ish style way the article is thrown together, the basic gist of the story (a few gigs, summer 2013, final tour and Glastonbury) are a believable and realistic scenario.

The final night of Glasto 2013 will be Sunday 23rd June if thats the case, then.

just got an e-mail to correct this. Next years Glastonbury is a bit later than usual and runs from 26-30 June.

Thaks, Nomen.

You can register for tickets for 2013 already. Saying that, the tickets wont be on sale for several months.

[glastonbury.seetickets.com]

Yep the Glastonbury festival always take place on the final weekend in June.

Tickets normally go on sale on a Sunday in October when registered buyers will need to pay a deposit of £50 per ticket. This ticket sale is before any acts are announced.

The reminder of the ticket price (approx another £150) normally has to be paid in the early new year....,.if you don't want to complete the purchase of the ticket you can cancel and are refunded £40. The other £10 is kept for to cover their costs

Quote
stonesnow
Not unless Keef is about to drop dead. Did BB King stop at 70? Just think, if BB King were 70 now, we'd still have another 15-plus years to look forward to--so do the math and the 2 or 3 new albums and tours that compute into that.

This statement assumes both men are in the same state of health, which the clearly are not.

[www.noise11.com]

The Rolling Stones To Play Last Gig At Glastonbury? Yeah Right
by PAUL CASHMERE on JUNE 18, 2012
So The Rolling Stones are going to play their last ever show at Glastonbury in 2013 are they? Not bloody likely. Just look at the source – The Mirror in the UK.


UK’s trashy rag is notoriously wrong notoriously often and pretty much because they never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Really, just think about what were are talking about here – Mick Jagger making a decision to say farewell at someone else’s gig? It will NEVER happen.

Just imagine what the last Stones show would be worth in merch rights, pay-for-play, movie rights, live TV rights, live streaming rights, DVD rights and ongoing repeats. Hundred and millions of dollars is the answer. Do you really think Sir Mick is going to give a third party like Glastonbury a cut of that Pot O’ Gold.

Then you have another issue. Glastonbury isn’t The Stones event. Do you really think Mick Jagger would do his last Stones show in front of half an audience who aren’t even there to see him?

When The Stones go they will go by their own rules, at their own gig, with their own audience AND keep all the money.

The article in The Mirror today is a joke. Note where the story came from! It was from that well-informed Murdoch news source “one insider”. So “one insider revealed” and the world believes it? People are easily fooled.

That is not to say the end is not nigh for the Rolling Stones. It is well known that Charlie doesn’t want to tour anymore and I still stand by our story of two years ago that reported he was prepared to leave the band instead of going on another world tour. That story has never been disproven by the way…still. He has not done one single show with the Rolling Stones since that story was published over two years ago. The article at the time did state that one-off shows were not out of the question and that now looks like how it will roll-out.

The Rolling Stones turned 50 last April. It passed without a whimper. Keith Richards acknowledges the band recognises the 50th as January 2013 when Charlie joined the band. With just under 7 months before that date, there is still no sign of any Stones activity.

The only thing known to about to happen is a 50th anniversary book ‘The Rolling Stones 50’ coming next month featuring 700 photos with words from the band about the past 50 years of the band.

I expect something will happen in 2013 and most likely include former Stones Bill Wyman and Mick Taylor. But then Bill won’t fly, so that limits his involvement to the UK.

If this is true I got to give Revvy a point here. He talked about festival(-s) from early on. It surprises me a bit though since Stones has never been a festivalband. I don't keep track of every gig they have done but I don't think they have done more than a handful of festival shows through the years.

To the video in the previous post: "...handful of shows in Britain and America..." It amazes me how some people know almost all the details. I am sure that "a reliable source" will let us know the exact dates tomorrow or the day after.

Quote
@RollingStones (Twitter)
Every year the @RollingStones are asked to play this UK festival..but playing Glastonbury is not in our plans.

As found on twitter today: [twitter.com]

I want to get lost in your rock 'n roll and drift away



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-18 14:53 by marcovandereijk.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
MightyStonesStillRollin50
I am glad they are planning on a small scale tour. Just hope we get a new album to go with it.

I am afraid that having a new album is not likely to happen. Since STEEL WHEELS the albums have had an instrumental value in promoting big scale tours. They haven't sometimes been motivated enough to make a new album even for a big scale tour, so I wouldn't hold my breath them having an instant spark of creativity now - to make a record just the sake of it. But, of course, miracles happen. They opened the vaults, etc.

Besides, if what the article claims is true - that they have decided that it will be over next year (I doubt that), why would they bother in that case to make a brand new studio album, full of new material, when The End is known to be so near? Why now when it doesn't really matter much longer? Hard to think how they can motivate themselves doing that, when making new music has been so hard for them for some two decades now.

- Doxa

If the Beach Boys can produce a new album then why not the Stones? No way Mick is going to let that Mike Love have the last laugh. There will be a new album.

Cashmere has a bit of a nerve lambasting someone else's track record for wrong stories considering he was the guy who broke an exclusive 3 or 4 years ago that Charlie had left the band, and then backtracked slightly to say that he was confident that if they ever toured again, Mr Watts wouldn't be there. (Even now he's still saying his story hasnt been 'disproven'. How the hell can you disprove a negative? )

I do agree with him that the Stones will see such a show (if they were to ever announce one) as a massive cashcow and would do it on their own terms - for the same reason that I believed all along that if they were to play shows in 2012 that the notion of them celebrating their 50th anniversary this year with a headlining show at Hyde Park Calling this July was a total non starter. As was a one off gig in a club.

Bit of an embarrassing faux pas for Cashmere though to dismiss the Daily Mirror's source as a 'Murdoch insider'. Rupert Murdoch's News International aren't the owners of the paper, and the political stance of his main UK tabloid 'The Sun' is about 180 degrees to the right of that of Trinity Mirror.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-19 03:48 by Gazza.

cloud cuckoo land

.........now is that the nick-name of 21stcenturies lounge room ????

Yes, "Rockman", and you are welcome for Headcheese and Lone Star beer anytime, clothing optional....

Quote
Stones62

Quote
stonesnow
Not unless Keef is about to drop dead. Did BB King stop at 70? Just think, if BB King were 70 now, we'd still have another 15-plus years to look forward to--so do the math and the 2 or 3 new albums and tours that compute into that.

This statement assumes both men are in the same state of health, which the clearly are not.

You wouldn't know anymore about their state of health than I would, unless you are their primary care physician.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Gazza
Despite the copy and paste and tabloid-ish style way the article is thrown together, the basic gist of the story (a few gigs, summer 2013, final tour and Glastonbury) are a believable and realistic scenario.

The final night of Glasto 2013 will be Sunday 23rd June if thats the case, then.

just got an e-mail to correct this. Next years Glastonbury is a bit later than usual and runs from 26-30 June.

Thaks, Nomen.

You can register for tickets for 2013 already. Saying that, the tickets wont be on sale for several months.

[glastonbury.seetickets.com]

Still well within the 50th anniversary year (July 12, 2012 through July 11, 2013). For what it's worth.

Quote
MightyStonesStillRollin50

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Gazza
Despite the copy and paste and tabloid-ish style way the article is thrown together, the basic gist of the story (a few gigs, summer 2013, final tour and Glastonbury) are a believable and realistic scenario.

The final night of Glasto 2013 will be Sunday 23rd June if thats the case, then.

just got an e-mail to correct this. Next years Glastonbury is a bit later than usual and runs from 26-30 June.

Thaks, Nomen.

You can register for tickets for 2013 already. Saying that, the tickets wont be on sale for several months.

[glastonbury.seetickets.com]

Still well within the 50th anniversary year (July 12, 2012 through July 11, 2013). For what it's worth.

Its 'worth' absolutely f**k all, to be perfectly frank.

[glastonbury.seetickets.com]

a passport photo to register? what's that all about?

[www.virtualfestivals.com]

Quote
BluzDude
[glastonbury.seetickets.com]

a passport photo to register? what's that all about?

They want to make sure that colonial, watchman or stonescrow arent able to get multiple tickets under their various aliases.

Quote
Stoneage
If this is true I got to give Revvy a point here. He talked about festival(-s) from early on. It surprises me a bit though since Stones has never been a festivalband. I don't keep track of every gig they have done but I don't think they have done more than a handful of festival shows through the years.

It's not true, and SuperRevvy's fixation on festivals is just one bizarre manifestation of his posts. You will remember, of course, his perception of a "pre-announcement announcement" of festivals somehow embedded in Mick jagger's recent SNL performance. Apparently only he and the aliens from Zeti Reticula were able to read the signs the rest of us mere mortals missed.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-20 07:27 by 71Tele.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Justin

Quote
Cafaro
I always find it interesting when the Stones are compared to the old bluesmen in terms of longevity and touring etc. Frankly, I see very few similarities.

The reality is that the Stones are amajor corporation. They dont sit there like Buddy Guy and say "I'd sure love to tour Canada - think Ill get a little band together and head out" I mean,the Stones couldnt do that..When was the last time the Stones just went out and played a show without an elaborate stage set up? Even on Shine a Light, they had a very sophisticated set up..

Also, guys like BB, Buddy etc..tour almost every year. They still put out product--as in music---not wine! They stay in the game and are still playing very well . The Stones? Well , Woody did good disc 5 + years ago, Charlie is a Jazzer, Mick did Super Heavy....so in other words they aint doin much.

One of the reasons why BB and Buddy tour every year with ease is because there is no one else they need to coordinate schedules with...it's just them and them alone. They have their hired hands filling out the band and when they put out the call...they follow the leader to wherever the tour itinerary says. The Stones has four MAJOR players in the band that need to coordinate four different schedules. Minus, Keith, you're dealing with practically three solo careers...Mick has a variety of different projects that he likes to dabble in be it music or TV/movie production while Ronnie and Charlie, keep CONSISTENTLY busy.

Look at Paul McCartney. He has remained a very active and productive artist in the last decade. No slagging off from him...steady new music being released and almost yearly touring. And it's the same deal with him...does he really do small shows or one offs? Nope. Every outing he's done has been big elaborate shows.

You can't believe that a BB King tour equals the same attention and media blitz as a Stones tour, do you? Obviously not. When you have that much crap put on you for every little step you take...you have to plan way ahead and plan accordingly. The days of playing one-offs or shows here and there are loooong over. Too much attention and too much criticism from critics and their loving fans. Sure they can soldier on and do it anyway but when you have to coordinate four different schedules...why bother?

With all that said, it's become very easy to slag off the Stones for not being active enough but when you have 1) a blase/disinterested lead singer, 2) a semi retired lead guitar player, 3) a steady touring jazz drummer and 4) a constantly gigging guitar player...isn't it pretty clear why they ONLY do big tours?

Good explanatiosn and excuses... but one crucial explanatory factor is missing: Why to bother to get those 'busy' seniors together, who won't waste a sec with the company of others if not seriously needed? Because of the money. And lots of it. That's it. Ask Cohl more.

(Another way to put it is to say that they haven't been a living and breathing band for ages now.)

- Doxa

Charlie does not play for money. He loves it. It's his life.

Quote
MartinB

Charlie does not play for money. He loves it. It's his life.

Don't be naive. And don't get me wrong, I agree, that he loves it and that it is his life, his ABC&D project is a clear proof of that, he surely doesn't earn money on that.

But with The Stones the money is very important part, he is a Mr. with very high living standards (fully deserved) and some extra millions come always handy. Again, that doesn't mean he does not enjoy it, but I am sure that at this stage of his live he enjoys those little theatre gigs much more than any possible stadium extravaganza. Well, he probably always did, he said it many times...If he does it again, he will do it for fans AND for the money.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-20 12:05 by Happy24.

It's a believable story. They played at the Isle of Wight festival a few years ago so why not Glastonbury?

Quote
Happy24

Quote
MartinB

Charlie does not play for money. He loves it. It's his life.

Don't be naive. And don't get me wrong, I agree, that he loves it and that it is his life, his ABC&D project is a clear proof of that, he surely doesn't earn money on that.

But with The Stones the money is very important part, he is a Mr. with very high living standards (fully deserved) and some extra millions come always handy. Again, that doesn't mean he does not enjoy it, but I am sure that at this stage of his live he enjoys those little theatre gigs much more than any possible stadium extravaganza. Well, he probably always did, he said it many times...If he does it again, he will do it for fans AND for the money.

there's only one way to find out; charlie signs on to donate all his tour earnings to ringo starr...

[www.dailymail.co.uk]

Rolling Stones at Glastonbury ?? In yet another GREAT British summer ??????

Even if it's true ............

Yeah RIGHT !! F**k off !!

[ I want to shout, but I can't hardly speak ]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-23 07:42 by paulywaul.