Jump to content

Rolling Stones Eternal Touring Thread


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Powderfinger said:

The

Stones website. Check for the lucky dip option. They usually appear at the general on sale time.

I just checked on the tour dates section, it only says tickets and vip. So it only shows up when they are actually available? At which time would that be, when tix go on sale initially or sporadically between that and the show?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Chicago setlist: 1. Street Fighting Man 2. Lets Spend The Night Together 3. Tumbling Dice 4. Sad Sad Sad (First time since 2002) 5. You Got Me Rocking (Song vote) 6. You

They are the most consistent rock n roll band there ever was.  With the exception of The Beatles, they are probably the best to ever do it.  Musically, lyrically and all levels superior to any band I

Went to last night's show. Incredible. It was so awesome and for the first 15 minutes or so, surreal feeling, to be seeing The Rolling Stones with my naked eyes. I had nosebleeds because money is tigh

Posted Images

53 minutes ago, PatrickS77 said:

I just checked on the tour dates section, it only says tickets and vip. So it only shows up when they are actually available? At which time would that be, when tix go on sale initially or sporadically between that and the show?

Yes when tix go on general sale. Not presale or anything like that. Someone else may be able to answer the question about sporadically appearing up to the show. That I’m not sure of. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Powderfinger said:

Yes when tix go on general sale. Not presale or anything like that. Someone else may be able to answer the question about sporadically appearing up to the show. That I’m not sure of. 

Thanks. I will do that, should they come back to Europe. 3 years ago, I heard that most of the lucky dip tix were in the expensive section up front.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PatrickS77 said:

I just checked on the tour dates section, it only says tickets and vip. So it only shows up when they are actually available? At which time would that be, when tix go on sale initially or sporadically between that and the show?

 

2 hours ago, Powderfinger said:

Yes when tix go on general sale. Not presale or anything like that. Someone else may be able to answer the question about sporadically appearing up to the show. That I’m not sure of. 

They do drop more LD's as gigs get closer, but I'm not sure if the band posts the LD links again when they drop. Last year for the rescheduled dates you just had to know the TM link for the LD's and keep checking it. IORR usually does a good job of keeping tabs on those. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Powerage5 said:

 

They do drop more LD's as gigs get closer, but I'm not sure if the band posts the LD links again when they drop. Last year for the rescheduled dates you just had to know the TM link for the LD's and keep checking it. IORR usually does a good job of keeping tabs on those. 

Thanks. So I will go check there. Have to know how it works, just in case they come back here. 

PS: And how about someone changing the thread title? The tour is not postponed anymore.

Edited by PatrickS77
  • GNFNR 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EvanG said:

The Rolling Stones are terribly overrated.

Discuss.

I agree with you to an extent.

In our groups growing up, we always debated who were the better out of The Beatles and the Stones. For me, it was always The Beatles, but I'll go as far as saying the very best the Stones have released is up there with the very best that The Beatles produced. Granted, they've been a band for a lot longer, so it's natural that the a sizable portion of their back catalogue is filler (my opinion). 

Both bands are in the shadow of Queen for me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

and Wings, the band The Beatles could have been.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EvanG said:

The Rolling Stones are terribly overrated.

Discuss.

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor punching standard tcp 

1 hour ago, Len Cnut said:

They are the most consistent rock n roll band there ever was.  With the exception of The Beatles, they are probably the best to ever do it.  Musically, lyrically and all levels superior to any band I ever come across.  Displayed an inate understanding of the musical qualities of black American music and managed to pick up that thread in every genre from the 50s right up until the 80s.  They are disturbingly brilliant.  They are about as good as it gets in their particular sphere.  Don't get me wrong, when it comes to the blues I'll take Little Walter and Muddy Waters any day but there's a lot more to The Stones than just the blues, they are a rock n roll band in the purest sense with all the original elements from the Jazz drummer, to the riff-machine rhythm supremo, to the 'art of weaving' combination of two guitars and the lairy big mouthed flamboyant singer.  Their lyrics are fuckin' brilliant too.  Every valuable contribution to the genre after them owes something of a debt to them, you wouldn't have a Jim Morrison or an Iggy Pop without a Mick Jagger.  At their peak they were the definition of subversive bohemian cool, they lived it as they played it and God bless em, I think they are impossible to overrate.  And this is coming from someone who, initially, through ignorance, didn't think much of The Stones without ever really giving them a proper chance.  A zealous convert if you will.

Rock n Roll is pretty much over now as a genre and a cultural phenomenon, its safe to start picking GOATs now...and there is little argument to be made over and above The Stones, with the exception of The Beatles, who were a lot more than a rock n roll band anyway.

:wub::wub::wub:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if it wasn't for their longevity and the fact they were one of the first bands on the scene, if they would have stood out so much or ended up just being one out of many bands to come out of the British Invasion. Not to say they don't have any classic songs, but many bands have that.

1 hour ago, Dean said:

sizable portion of their back catalogue is filler (my opinion). 

Isn't that what they are kind of known for on most records? A couple of really great tunes, a lot of mediocre ones and some filler. 

59 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I think there would be physical violence between you and I if we ever met.

Somehow I think that would happen anyway regardless of what I think about the Rolling Stones!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Stones were just a phase for me. Id still go to a show and all, but as has been said theres so much filler on many of their albums. 

I also find it tacky how they sometimes give out 'thanks for the inspiration' for tracks to Ronnie, instead of a cowriting credit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, EvanG said:

Somehow I think that would happen anyway regardless of what I think about the Rolling Stones!

You have slagged Izzy Stradlin and The Stones off in just a couple of days, and made it be known that you are supportive of a certain corrupt supranational body; I am just waiting for Neil Young, Clint Eastwood and Bruce Lee to be pelted with abuse!

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

You have slagged Izzy Stradlin and The Stones off in just a couple of days, and made it be known that you are supportive of a certain corrupt supranational body; I am just waiting for Neil Young, Clint Eastwood and Bruce Lee to be pelted with abuse!

Don't think I have ever seen a Bruce Lee film, those kind of films tend to bore me, but I have no problems with the first two. In fact, I consider "Tell Me Why'' to be one of the most beautiful songs ever written. 

Is that good enough for us to become besties? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EvanG said:

Don't think I have ever seen a Bruce Lee film, those kind of films tend to bore me, but I have no problems with the first two. In fact, I consider "Tell Me Why'' to be one of the most beautiful songs ever written

Is that good enough for us to become besties? 

''Give with one hand, take with the other''. Oh well!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Beggars Banquet, Let it Bleed, Sticky Fingers, Exile on Main Street. 


Nobody has beaten that run of albums... Maybe The Doors came closest. 

It’s like all bands, you get it or you don’t I guess

I Never understood why them and the Beatles are breathed in the same sentence. Two different bands in different genres. The Beatles (their output as a whole) was never a rock n roll band. Arty, Popy, experimental etc yeah but not a true blue rock n roll band like the stones.

If you don’t like the stones live as they were in 1972, you’ll never like them.


 

 

  • Like 1
  • GNFNR 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Powderfinger said:

Beggars Banquet, Let it Bleed, Sticky Fingers, Exile on Main Street. 


Nobody has beaten that run of albums...

The only run I can think of to rival it was Pink Floyd with Meddle, Dark Side Of The Moon, Wish You Were Here, Animals and The Wall. But Animals was flawed in production and The Wall (despite being absolutely brilliant) is still a little inconsistent and bloated at times. While that particular Stones run is pure killer no filler for me. Those albums are all just absolutely stellar. 

12 hours ago, Powderfinger said:

I Never understood why them and the Beatles are breathed in the same sentence. Two different bands in different genres. The Beatles (their output as a whole) was never a rock n roll band. Arty, Popy, experimental etc yeah but not a true blue rock n roll band like the stones.

As much as I'm a Stones fan and always will be, I have an immense respect (and love) for The Beatles as well. I agree that they ended up in different worlds despite sharing a lot of the same roots. They're not a pure rock and roll band and definitely not a blues band in the way the Stones are, but I love the hell out of them for everything they were and did. Music wouldn't exist in the same way without the Beatles. 

12 hours ago, Powderfinger said:

If you don’t like the stones live as they were in 1972, you’ll never like them.

I'd personally be tempted to agree with this. The Stones around that time were in a complete league of their own in every possible way. However, my dad would disagree. For him Aftermath is the aboslute peak of the Stones. He loves the run-up to it with Out Of Our Heads / December's Children but also the 1965/1966/1967 singles (though he doesn't like the UK version of the Between The Buttons album that much). 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I Never understood why them and the Beatles are breathed in the same sentence. Two different bands in different genres. The Beatles (their output as a whole) was never a rock n roll band. Arty, Popy, experimental etc yeah but not a true blue rock n roll band like the stones.

Yes they were, thats pretty much all they made.  Sure, for Revolver, Rubber Soul, The White Album and St Peppers, most notably Peppers they did some experimental shit but a lot of that (though not all) amounted to just bringing certain innovations to rock music.  Only Pepper is really a pretty stark departure from rock n roll.  And looking at it like that The Stones had jazz and funk and soul and disco to their repertoire.  I think they are totally comparable, same genre, same kind of music, same era.  No two bands are completely the same if you get into details but by and large, yeah, I can't see why The Beatles and Stones are considered too different to compare. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I checked ticketmaster for the price of the tickets for the Cotton Ball in Dallas. There are $650 tickets, but alot of the tickets are reasonable. This show doesn't seem to be selling out so quickly. I would have thought the Stones would have sold out already? Weird.

Maybe the ticket sales are slow because so many amazing bands are touring this year?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, dontdamnmeuyi2015 said:

I checked ticketmaster for the price of the tickets for the Cotton Ball in Dallas. There are $650 tickets, but alot of the tickets are reasonable. This show doesn't seem to be selling out so quickly. I would have thought the Stones would have sold out already? Weird.

Maybe the ticket sales are slow because so many amazing bands are touring this year?

The Stones never sell out immediately. But they always get asses in seats by gig day. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Powerage5 said:

The Stones never sell out immediately. But they always get asses in seats by gig day. 

I'm sure they will do that.

GNR is the same way. Tickets sales are slow but when the concert is here, the place is always sold out!

I think if more 60's bands were still together, The Rolling Stones wouldn't be such a big deal. They are the last 60's band to still have most of their members and they never really broke up.

If the Beatles and Led Zeppelin were still alive and together I think they would be selling out venues quicker.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...