If BJ can set up a show like the stones
 

Then maybe they would be the best live gig around.

I've been to 14 BJ shows and this week to my first 2 Stones concert.
First of all, i've seen two completely different shows. The stage was amazing, especcially the idea for a 2nd stage in the middle of the stadium with a long board going to it, where they did a few songs. Maybe a good idea for BJ acoustic set?
The interaction with the crowd was excellent. Jagger actually learned a lot of dutch phrases he kept saying wich was fun and showed his interest to the crowd, other than that he did an excellent job entertaining the crowd.
Big Fire during Sympathy for the devil and at the end, at the top of the stage was really cool. We could feel the heat coming from it throughout almost the whole stadium. The confetti at the encore that stayed in the air for almost a whole song, the fireworks and the big, big screen in the middle. Other than these a few other things that made it on heck of a show. Also a big difference it Mick Jagger compared to Jon. Altough he is a lot older he just seems to have more fun performing, seeing the reaction of the crowd and running and moving. With Jon i had the idea it was more a routine thing the last few tours.
But they werent as good as BJ (IMO) live, both instrumental as the singing part.

So my thought were, if Bon Jovi can pull of a show as the Stones with their own performance they would be one of the best if not the best live act around. The stones proved me that they aren't.

I think you're trying to say that the whole spectacle of a Stones concert is better than Bon Jovi even though the performance of the songs isn't.....

You're not going to change Bon Jovi. When you go out and perform as many gigs in a tour as they do, you need to be comfortable with what you're doing on stage. If you're trying to be someone you're not, the whole act will come across as contrived and forced, which isn't good. They need to keep to their own style.

Besides, when I go to a concert, I don't go to watch some flames, or two stages, or even Jon running around. I go to listen to the music, and if Bon Jovi are doing that well I don't care about the aesthetics.

brainwashed... did you copy and paste that from one of jon's interviews or is that really your own wording?

do you understand what the aesthetics of a BJ show are to most people in the audience?

I have to admit that aesthetics (I had to copy and paste that word to write it correctly :oops: :roll: ) mean a lot to me! Watching the encores from the back of the pit in Manchester wasn't exactly my best experience in a BJ show... For the first time in Wolverhampton it was ok but I wouldn't want to do it in every show. Front row is the place I wanna be in a BJ show, anyone can say and think what they want!!

Hmm, reading my answer back, it sounded a bit weird. When I say aesthetics, I mean all the extra stuff i.e. fireworks, a second stage etc etc.

Yes, it is my own wording. If I go to a concert I ain't going to see fireworks, or some guy running around, or to look at a second stage, or a laser show, or anything extra like that. I'm going to hear the music.

For example, if Jon does more running around than he naturally he does, he might get out of breath and concentrate less on the music, and I'd rather hear a near to perfect performance rather than get all these extras. It's just my opinion.