Jump to content

Are ageing rocker tours really worth our coin?


Recommended Posts

This is in sharp focus at the moment with prices released for the Rolling Stones tour.

Top prices in Perth are $528. Anywhere apart from Hanging Rock will cost a minimum of $200.

My view is that it is just not worth that much money to see these ageing bones perform.

How many LPs could I buy, recorded when they were in their prime, for that money - and get continuous pleasure from?

 

No doubt the tour will sell out. How many will buy to actually listen to the music compared with those who will just want to 'be there'.

 

With the exception of Leonard Cohen, most of these old touring farts can't help bit disappoint.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I concur. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the Stones. But they're not what they were in the 70's. 

 

I think for the most part the tickets will be for 'I saw the Rolling Stones' conversations, not for the quality of the show. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw killing joke this year, they were awesome. Super awesome for a band active for 30 years plus. And from all accounts Sabbath were worth seeing too beyond the I was there factor

But yeah 200 clams is maybe three average priced gigs these days, so you'd wanna be a huge fan

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went to see Rod Stewart a couple of years ago in the Hunter Valley.  His voice wasn't what it used to be but he put on a great show for an old age pensioner.  The prices were nowhere near what you mentioned for the Rolling stones though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw Roger Waters a few years ago for DSOTM, $250.  Money well spent for me, never saw him before and likely never to again.  Stones would be the same if I was into them, which I'm not, but a once off show in my life would be worth it.  Outside of that context, it's too much money IMO.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Compare with Neil Young: cost $130 for good seats playing a lot of recent stuff that rocked as much as any of his classic songs.

Stones: well, when was their last great album? A bit sad really 'cos they are one of the all time greats.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a lot of cases, prices are based on what they reckon they can get away with.

If the demand is there, and the location has the necessary number of cashed up fans, they can jack up the prices all they like.

 

On the other hand there are still enough acts out there that insist on fair prices and giving great value. Just choose wisely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Compare with Neil Young: cost $130 for good seats playing a lot of recent stuff that rocked as much as any of his classic songs.

Stones: well, when was their last great album? A bit sad really 'cos they are one of the all time greats.

 

Big Day Out a few years ago when NY headlined was about the best concert value I've ever had.

Would have still paid the same money for NY alone (he was the last act on the main stage, so went overtime).

The Prodigy, The Living End, Died Pretty, My Morning Jacket, Youth Group, Birds of Tokyo, Little Red, The Drones & Tex Perkins and the Ladyboyz were a real bonus!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Stones from the 60's '70's and 80's would be worth that sort of money. IMO they should have retired 30 years ago and the last 3 decades have been a cynical moneymaking exercise. I have never seen them live and I certainly would not want to see them now in their twilight years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



The Stones from the 60's '70's and 80's would be worth that sort of money. IMO they should have retired 30 years ago and the last 3 decades have been a cynical moneymaking exercise. I have never seen them live and I certainly would not want to see them now in their twilight years.

 

Their performance in Shine a Light ($20 for the Blu-ray) wasn't too bad at all and that was only 5 years ago but they sure did look old. Not sure I'd fork out the sort of money being asked to see them live though for their Oz tour.

Edited by KenTripp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a bloody question

The Stones were or are possibly the greatest band of all time

It's not about seeing them it's about hearing them play

Guitars don't weigh much and Mick Jagger can still sing

It is the sound not the sight that makes the great

In the 60's and 70's it was the sight sound and everything else

There is no music now even vaguely with the marriage of Chuck Berry country and blues in it

As to the money God knows how many times over the decades I have had to justify the price of a cassette player record player amplifier or speaker to some clown that said " Christ that's expensive" code for waste of money

And soon to hear it all again from the family when I announce the purchase of a Mac mini and wide screen monitor

I don't work for nothing but I can't justify the price except to say for rock n roll tragic how much is never too much

And Mick Taylor too

Who care what they look like

Edited by keyse1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No question he Stones circa 1970 were just the effin' bees-knees.  But for how long can they keep playing the same songs, pretending they're still young punks?  Neil Young, Dylan, Springsteen,  all matured in there songwriting and stayed interesting and NY certainly still  knows how to rock. Is Springsteen still passionate about what he does?   Hell yes!

 Mick and Keef's good songs seem to have dried up about the time dinosaurs roamed the earth. 

It is an interesting question, though, are they still a great rock band?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a bloody question

The Stones were or are possibly the greatest band of all time

It's not about seeing them it's about hearing them play

Guitars don't weigh much and Mick Jagger can still sing

It is the sound not the sight that makes the great

In the 60's and 70's it was the sight sound and everything else

There is no music now even vaguely with the marriage of Chuck Berry country and blues in it

As to the money God knows how many times over the decades I have had to justify the price of a cassette player record player amplifier or speaker to some clown that said " Christ that's expensive" code for waste of money

And soon to hear it all again from the family when I announce the purchase of a Mac mini and wide screen monitor

I don't work for nothing but I can't justify the price except to say for rock n roll tragic how much is never too much

And Mick Taylor too

Who care what they look like

I am no fan of The Sex Pistols but I remember in their brief "Rock and Roll Swindle" period they were moaning that the Strolling Bones were old farts and should retire. I find that amusing considering it was the 70's when they said that,

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I am no fan of The Sex Pistols but I remember in their brief "Rock and Roll Swindle" period they were moaning that the Strolling Bones were old farts and should retire. I find that amusing considering it was the 70's when they said that,

And where are the sex pistols today?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am no fan of The Sex Pistols but I remember in their brief "Rock and Roll Swindle" period they were moaning that the Strolling Bones were old farts and should retire. I find that amusing considering it was the 70's when they said that,

 

Indeed. Considering John Lydon is now around 57 years old, and Mick Jagger was in his 30s during the 70s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully down a deep dark hole. As I said I am no fan :)

Actually mentioned the sex pistols briefly in the 70's thread

Will tell you something about their manager The New York Dolls and communism over there at some point

If you think Mick looks old take a look at David Johansen now

Look up New York Dolls on the net DJ is the singer

A great roc n Rollin band and wanna be Stones group

Off topic but it's only rock n roll

Link to comment
Share on other sites



How about I debunk that statement?

 

The Stones haven't released a decent studio album since Tattoo You in '81. IMO.

Partly joking

Since Some Girls I think but they are responsible for some of the best music ever made and have been criticised and praised for 50 odd years

Criticism gets a bit pointless at this age but can't defend the ticket price

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top