Won't be much longer before one of them drops over dead in the middle of a set.
>>63837815
I feel Mick could definitely last into his 80s. The other guys...I'd be surprised if one of them doesn't go in the next 5 years.
>>63837815
>72 years olds
Hell be fine
That Glastonbury show was actually pretty good; they even dusted off 2000 Light Years From Home which hadn't been played live in years and years.
http://www.setlist.fm/setlist/the-rolling-stones/2013/worthy-farm-pilton-england-23c624cf.html
20 song setlist actually is pretty good for guys that old; many bands by their 60s can't manage a show that long anymore.
Don't they all hate each other at this point?
>still playing shows
I think they'll be fine
>>63840681
They've hated each other since the 80s desu.
>>63837815
They made a pact with Satan.
I've literally seen 90 year olds who had better-looking hands than this.
They'll all be fine.
how did the rolling stones become so popular?
>>63841316
They were in the right place at the right time.
>>63841316
and what can you tell me about Kiss?
>>63841633
why do they wear the facepaint?
>>63841650
because they are ashamed of their music
>>63841650
It was sort of an amalgamation of British glam rock and Alice Cooper.
I saw them live a month ago. Keith Richards would sprint across the stage like every 4 songs. If he can muster up that kind of stamina... I'm guessing they'll be around for a while.
>>63842018
>Keith Richards would sprint across the stage like every 4 songs
Good for him his legs still work. Kind of a shame about his hands though since that's the one part of his body he needs to do his thing.
>yfw Keef trying to play the solos in SFTD now
>>63837815
we can only hope soon
>>63842080
He did them at my show. He fucked up one solo, though, don't remember which song.
>>63842129
TBF, Keith probably mangled live solos in 1971. Live music isn't supposed to be studio-perfect.
>>63842129
keith literally has his guitars tuned to sound good on open strings for every song, he barely plays along
>>63842520
Yeah, he's been doing that for 40 years now. That's why he took out his sixth string.
Gee, I thought you guys would have known about Keith's patented open G playing. He's only been doing it since like 1969.
>>63842454
They do that with Metallica as well and those guys are much younger than the Stones.
>every time Kirk flubs one lick
>"Oh no he's lost it he can't play anymore!"
>yfw when Kirk flubbed something in the 80s, people just laughed it off and said stuff like "Hey that actually sounds better than the album damn were those guys ever wasted at tonight's gig."
>>63841981
>>63841650
Supposedly Kiss wanted to look like British glam rockers, but being relatively burly, hairy guys, they couldn't pull it off so they instead went with a leather and studs look.
>>63839113
>Hell be fine
>hell
he keeps playing music like hell, he'll get there
>>63841650
They've always said they want to make their shows fun to make people get their money's worth. I guess that could be true, although another explanation is that it's good fucking marketing.
There's a fun story out there about their first few shows where Paul went to a dump and bought a bunch of fucked up amp grills/carcasses so they could pretend they had a wall of them, but then they had to tell the lights guy to not shine the light on them so they wouldn't cast shadows and reveal the sham.
why are they still going anyway
they all hate each other and they surely don't need the money
>>63844808
They probably just enjoy it. They do like 20 dates per year, so it's probably just like those grandpas that start fixing stuff around the house and build stuff.
At this point they just play because they like doing it and because it's the only life they know.
>>63844808
what else are they going to do? sit at home and watch tv? or play to millions of fans
>>63844802
They were dirt-ass poor in the beginning. They literally had to live off their manager's credit card and borrow his suits for the Dressed To Kill cover. In fact they couldn't even afford an actual producer until album 4.
What first brought Kiss to widespread attention was the Alive album that ended up being their best-selling recording (although it was heavily doctored and far from a real live album).
Mick is spry as hell; if you're standing far enough back from the stage that you can't see his face, you'd guess he's in his 40s.
oh hey, literally any excuse to post this and i'm there:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G4jnaznUoQ
>>63837815
we should all be so lucky
>>63846075
What this guy said.
>it would be a greatly disappointing finale to drop on stage doing something you love when you're a living legend worth millions of dollars who has a long, colorful life to reflect on and you've had more sex than many people get in several lifetimes
>>63839874
I know Kiss don't do 20 song setlists anymore and they're younger than the Stones plus Gene and Paul have always stressed how well they take care of themselves.
>>63846410
Doubt it. Paul's voice is totally gone by now and Gene is so fat he can barely move on stage.
>>63846410
I think the Stones have not done anywhere close to as many shows as Kiss desu.
>>63846937
according to Setlist.fm:
>Kiss: 2419
>Stones: 1952
>>63847279
And that's with the Stones being active 10 years longer than Kiss. I think only Bob Dylan rivals Kiss for sheer number of shows performed.
>>63839874
2000 Light Years was picked specifically because it was Glastonbury and they wanted something psychedelic-flavoured.
>>63846317
Greatly disappointing? Man, I want to go out whilst doing something I love.
>>63847656
Yeh although the Rolling Stones always seemed slightly un-fitting for a hippie event since they were always about blues rawk rather than Grateful Dead California granola bar stuff. The album that 2LY was on was a failed experiment with psychedelia.
Appropriate Glastonbury acts would be some shitty jam or folk band.
>>63847589
yeah setlist.fm has him at over 3400
>>63847970
The amount of shows Dylan has done is insane. He's done 70+ a year every year since 1986 if the site is accurate.
>>63847727
What are you calling a failed experiment? You wanna' fucking fight?
>>63848053
>shows
Propping up a mumbling corpse on stage is not a "show."
>>63841650
It would be extreamly painful after the show to take it off
>>63849333
http://reviews.ticketmaster.com/7171/734972/bob-dylan-reviews/reviews.htm?sort=rating&dir=asc
LOL
>>63849393
Man. I went into that thinking you were trying prove me wrong.
>>63849393
That's...almost as bad as Chuck Berry now.
>>63849462
Dylan seriously just needs to give up the live stuff and confine his efforts to the studio, which he's still good at.
