Among Friends

[DecorDiva]

All some people can focus on is how they look.  All are incredibly talented musicians.  Anyone familiar with their song catalogue spanning 50 years knows the variety and breadth of their music.  While there were a lot of "grey hairs" in the audience of the concert I attended in 2015, there were a lot of younger people as well.   No one is going to spend an average of $150 a ticket to listen to has-beens.  Every time I would see them, I would think, is this the last time?  

[Frosted Cake]

I think it is cool that they played there free.

I just don't understand why the Rolling Stones were chosen.   Perhaps it's a bit of Americana.   I think I feel this way because I don't think their music resonates with everyone.    You either like that kind of rock 'n roll or not.  I just was curious why they didn't choose a more middle of the road group.

I don't care that the Stones are older.  I applaud them that they can still be relevant and have music to share all these years later.

[ladyroxanne]

i think the stones will always be relevant, regardless of their age.

[Citrine1]

The Rolling Stones have always been my favorite band.  I love them!  

Lucky for those who got to see them for free.  When my daughter and I saw them a few years ago, we paid $600 for 2 tickets.  Well worth it though!

[nrm]

Saw the Stones in Dallas about 25 years ago & they were amazing,! Have been listening to them since they "came on the scene" in the '60's. 

[Kachina624]

---

@hoosieroriginal wrote:

It's amazing!  They all still look the same and are so energetic!  Good going guys!

---

Look the same?  They show every mile they have on them.  A group of wrinkled old men.

[hckynut]

---

@Frosted Cake wrote:

I think it is cool that they played there free.

I just don't understand why the Rolling Stones were chosen.   Perhaps it's a bit of Americana.   I think I feel this way because I don't think their music resonates with everyone.    You either like that kind of rock 'n roll or not.  I just was curious why they didn't choose a more middle of the road group.

I don't care that the Stones are older.  I applaud them that they can still be relevant and have music to share all these years later.

---

@Frosted Cake

Just curious. What group, from the era of The Stones, would you consider as Middle of the Road? Also would they do it pro-bono?

hckynut(john)

[hckynut]

---

@Kachina624 wrote:

---

Look the same?  They show every mile they have on them.  A group of wrinkled old men.

---

I didn't think Sir Paul McCartney looked the same, but he still wowed the audience with a performance that looked the same, as in GREAT.

Live concerts of older performers for me are not based on their looks or their skin. I base them on their performance, and so far I have seen many "old(?)" artists Live in Concert, and have got my money's worth+ out of every single one of those Live Concerts.

Looks who cares? Not me.

hckynut(john)

[PINKdogWOOD]

@hckynut  You are so right John.  These bands from years gone by are SO classic in their music.  There is nothing like the Beatles, Sir Paul, the Stones, and so many more.  We're so lucky to be able to still be enjoying their tunes.

[reiki604]

---

@Frosted Cake wrote:

I think it is cool that they played there free.

I just don't understand why the Rolling Stones were chosen.   Perhaps it's a bit of Americana.   I think I feel this way because I don't think their music resonates with everyone.    You either like that kind of rock 'n roll or not.  I just was curious why they didn't choose a more middle of the road group.

I don't care that the Stones are older.  I applaud them that they can still be relevant and have music to share all these years later.

---

The Rolling Stones were not a middle of the road group in their heyday. They were part of a revolution in music. In addition, they are a British band..........not part of Americana, but part of the "British Invasion" of the 60's.