Erik_Snow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Eh...besides, who gives a rats ass on what the
> journalist writes? I've been to shows were one
> journalist gives it 1 of 6 stars, while the other
> gives 6.
> Opinions on IORR is a lot more trustworthy.

Well we like those journalists when they do reviews like the ones after the concert yesterday :-)
I don't know if IORR is more trustworthy, if you go the reviews page, you can read reviews from the same show, that are really opposite eachother. One telling you that Keith and the band were on fire and another telling you that Keith didn't play a single note or only played bum ones.
So maybe the IORR reviewers is just like newspaper reviewers ;-)

wow, Rocks Off, Dead Flowers, Ruby Tuesday, CYHMK,......in the same show!!!!

svendborg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well we like those journalists when they do
> reviews like the ones after the concert yesterday
> :-)
> I don't know if IORR is more trustworthy, if you
> go the reviews page, you can read reviews from the
> same show, that are really opposite eachother. One
> telling you that Keith and the band were on fire
> and another telling you that Keith didn't play a
> single note or only played bum ones.
> So maybe the IORR reviewers is just like newspaper
> reviewers ;-)


Well but of course reviews differ here - but usually you understand what angle the IORR-reviewer sees it from - as it's written in a more 'open' and 'unprofessional' manner.....besides the important fact, that one know this persons opinion allready. In other words - one can overlook certain reviews here; and depend on others. Papers only show one side of story - and the journalist try his best to not sound subjective....therefor hiding his stand on this old rockers - and pile his emotions up as a fake 'concert-review only'



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-08-07 01:50 by Erik_Snow.

Also....people posting on IORR have some knowledge on RS - while a reporter can be a total RS ignorant....which could mean total bashing or prasing over the firework, any way he chose to look at it.

Erik_Snow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Also....people posting on IORR have some knowledge
> on RS - while a reporter can be a total RS
> ignorant....which could mean total bashing or
> prasing over the firework, any way he chose to
> look at it.

Yeah...your right. My point were that all danish reviewers were positive and as it were a great show, I'm glad that they aggreed :-)

came just back to my home from copenhagnen,

enjoyed it graatly,as did every icelander that were there, prob around 300 people that flew over.

bet regards

6853

Both Gothenburg and Copenhagen were great shows. Both with great intensity in the crwod and the band. Hard to say which was the best one as you can't really compare shows, only due to personal preferences due to set list, where you were etc. Still when reading the press it looks like two different bands which tells more about the press than the band. For some journalists it is more important to please the editor with a sensation story that is selling 10,000 extra papers than telling the facts. That's the story of the tabloids. I do assume they have more desperate rock journalists in Sweden than in Denmark.

Bjornulf

[sydsvenskan.se]

Got back in Belgium last night after two great shows Gothenburg and Copenhagen
which were in my opinion much better than Werchter and / or Frankfurt.
I have a slight preference for the Gothenburg show as i believe they were a
bit more on fire there. On the other hand we had Dead Flowers in Copenhagen
which gave me shivers.

I would also like to take the opportunity to give a big thank you to the
Nordic Stones Vikings for letting me joining them , great people all of
you ....special thanks to Jack and Micke for helping me out with the ticket
hope to see some of you again in London , and if not in London maybe at the
2008 tour.

kind regards,
black&blue

bv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Both Gothenburg and Copenhagen were great shows.
> Both with great intensity in the crwod and the
> band. Hard to say which was the best one as you
> can't really compare shows, only due to personal
> preferences due to set list, where you were etc.
> Still when reading the press it looks like two
> different bands which tells more about the press
> than the band. For some journalists it is more
> important to please the editor with a sensation
> story that is selling 10,000 extra papers than
> telling the facts. That's the story of the
> tabloids. I do assume they have more desperate
> rock journalists in Sweden than in Denmark.

Is there any possibility that they (=journalist) just write what they feel about the show?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-08-07 12:46 by TooMuchAlcohol.

Well, MrAlcohol, in that case anyone can write a review.
No knowledge or competence whatsoever would be needed.

What do you mean? If their opinion differs from your opinion then they don't have knowledge and/or competence?

Mind you I haven't seen or hear Göteborg or Copenhagen shows so I don't have opinion myself. I just wonder why is so simple: either you agree with me, or you are wrong.

mickijaggeroo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was front row in Copenhagen, and while the
> setlist was good, the gig in Gothenburg was so
> much more aggresive and well played. In Gothenburg
> there no f-ups in the riffing section, in CPH
> there were some misses, like playing in the wrong
> key sometimes, especially in the opening riff to
> BS. Overall it was a good show, but not
> outstanding. One good thing was that during the
> Toots set, we just walked in and got places agains
> the fence in the FOS-section, Ronnies side, plenty
> of space to dance in!

Aha, so that's where you were. We were looking for you lot but couldn't spot you. We were in the seats, section A9 right up front overlooking Keith's walkway - about a dozen rows up off the pitch. Great spot, we had an absolute blast. I think (hic ??) we concluded that this show was in our top 3, it was Beast's 12th and my 10th so far. But then I can't quite remember (hic ??) why we concluded that !!

Great to have met up with you at the Hardrock, and thank you so very much for the Viking shirts, they shall be worn with pride as the tour continues ... in 2007 and beyond !!

Another great review from Denmark's intellectual newspaper, Information : [www.information.dk]

Unfortunately you need to subscribe to read the whole article. I'll try and get the whole text later. But what I've heard so far is that this old rocker writing claims it's his best Stones-concert since 1970.

Yesterday I heard the same over and over again from people who were there. So did my wife and daughter.

nnb if ya post it to me I could maybe translate it?

Guess who's not banned anymore.
Copenhagen was absolutely fantastic. This concert ranks as high as Horsens last year for me. And that's saying a lot. I won't give a review of either Brno, Copenhagen or London 3 at the moment. I'm working on a very big review of all three gigs in one post (I've yet to see the London show of course).

JumpingKentFlash

>> if their opinion differs from your opinion <<

... hm. if someone's opinion is different from someone else's that's one thing,
but sometimes there are factors other than opinions at work.
some reviewers/reporters have an agenda that affects what they report.
some have biasses that affect how they interpret things.
some have better/worse powers of observation, and/or a better/worse grasp of what's happening on stage.

BV mentioned one obvious agenda that might well affect what newspaper journalists write: sensationalism sells.
and as Erik Snow pointed out, one way in which iorrian's own reviews can be more valuable than media reviews
is that at least in some cases, we know a bit about one another's foibles, preferences, etc,
so it's easier to grasp what sort of perspective the review is coming from.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-08-07 14:44 by with sssoul.

ahhh welcome back Kent! good to see your typeface :E

with sssoul, to me opinion is OPINION. There is no such thing as "more valuable opinion". I really don't want to say that for example Copenhagen show wasn't great. I am really happy to to hear when someone says it was excellent. But to me is equal value to hear when someone else says that the shows wasn't so great at all.

What are those factors you mentioned what makes the show great or bad? The rock music is not math. You can feel/sense it in many level. How can you say that someone else feels it incorrectly?

for f's sake, Mr Alcohol - where did i say anything about "feeling the music incorrectly"
or "factors you mentioned what makes the show great or bad", whatever that means?

you're perfectly free to value all opinions equally, that's no skin off my nose whatsoever.
meanwhile, to ME - ie in my equally valuable opinion - people are capable of having agendas,
and of misperceiving things, misinterpreting things and/or misreporting things -
including things that are going on on a rock & roll stage.
which is why i find some reviews more valuable than others. now go your gentle way, okay? thanks



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-08-07 14:31 by with sssoul.

About the Swedish/Danish press:
I read that there was bad reviews of Gothenburg, but when I was sitting outside Parken and talking to Wild Sliwowitz (Also met Heartbreaker and Per-Arne ) he told me that the fans thought Gothenburg was smokin'. Now the Danish press gave great reviews of Copenhagen. The thing is that also the Danish press talked about a bad show in Gothenburg (Without being there mind you). So what have we? A Swedish press that was TOTALLY off in their reviews and a Danish press that was RIGHT ON, but weren't an inch better themselves as they actually believed the bad reviews of Gothenburg. I loved the Copenhagen show, but I think that Gothenburg was probably just as good (And also probably with a wilder audience, since they had to wait for so long to get the Stones on this tour). Copenhagen was probably the best audience I have seen with my own eyes btw.

BTW: Toots & The Maytals should be the warm-up act for every show. I've never seen an opening act get the people jumping and having a good time as much as Toots did. Keith even paid his respects to them in his set.

JumpingKentFlash

Flash! I thought you'd got the boot?

The bootleg of Copenhagen or the ban on IORR Ablett?

JumpingKentFlash

good to see you back here Kent.
hope you've enjoyed your recent shows.

Hi Monkeytonkman

Hope you liked your concert in Copenhagen. It was nice to meet you in Gothenburg and Copenhagen. Have a good trip back home to UK in your cool car







Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-08-07 14:32 by Harlix.

Nah, I thought ol' Flash got his marching orders from IORR?

Good to see you back!!

Adrian-L Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> good to see you back here Kent.
> hope you've enjoyed your recent shows.


Yep. I really did. And with the help of Gazza I can now tell you this: "SEE YOU IN LONDON MATEY"!!!!!




Ablett: I'm baaaaack.

JumpingKentFlash

Welcome KentFlash - so you finally got a London ticket? See you there then

Kent is back and the whole site is already rocking a bit more... : )



Baboon Bro Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> nnb if ya post it to me I could maybe translate
> it?

Yeah, sure thing. I've noticed all of your fine tranlations so far. Thanks for helping the lazy ones ( : eg me ) : )

Well, I can't imagine why you got the boot but good to see ya back.

Enjoy london but be careful of Gaz and that Guiness!