When the Rolling Stones announced their Zip Code tour on March 31, 2015 it was to be their first stadium tour of North America since 2007. I had been skipping the stadium shows since even before that, preferring the band as an arena act (and in clubs and theatres, when they did those), but Stadium Stones is way better than No Stones, so the only question for me was "Which city?"
I like to wait to decide, especially if the band is not playing my immediate vicinity or if the closest venue is not one I like to go to. I see where I am going to be for business or personal travel, pull up the tour schedule and if the Stones are there when I am, I head to the gig.
For this tour, our paths were not going to cross organically so I had to be more intentional. Living in Astoria, Queens, at the time, Pittsburgh was about the closest they were going to be. It was the perfect distance for an early Summer road trip. I rented a car, booked a funky little Airbnb, and set my sights on Pittsburgh.
Pennsylvania is always bigger than one remembers, especially when driving through it, and more especially if you come from the Northeast. In the seven hours it takes to get to Pittsburgh from New York City, an intrepid traveler can put a foot in every state that makes up New England. It's just a different scale.
But no matter. The weather was perfect, there was at least one Cracker Barrel along the way, and I like to pretend that the Stones were counting on me to be there.
I had not seen a show in Pittsburgh since 1990: the Grateful Dead at the old Three Rivers Stadium. Crosby, Stills and Nash were the opening act and, amazingly, I had front row seats. I suppose that is a recollection for another day, though...
Heinz Field (now called Acrisure Stadium, which I am not sure I can even pronounce), where my date with the Stones was, opened in 2001, but somehow it still had a little of that "new car smell". With its modern stadium feel, it was easy to get in and out of, easy to move around, and did not sound too shabby (though that probably had more to do with the Stones production than the venue itself).
Every time I see the Stones (the first time I saw them was back in 1989), I approach the show as though it will be the last time I see them. I used to try to see them on the last date of a tour or a leg before a break just in case it turned out to be their final show, but I gave up on that fixation. This mindset is rooted not in fatalism but in both existential and practical concerns, which as the years pile up start to become indistinguishable. A result of this thinking is that I appreciate every Stones show in a way I otherwise might not. I bring no inner critic. I am not thinking about what they do not play, what they are not, and instead focus on the wonder of what they are still doing and the level at which they are capable of doing it.
The Stones in concert do not require any asterisk. If you have seen them since their 50th anniversary shows back in 2012, you know what I mean. If you have not and are holding out for anything other than practical considerations, there really is not much either of us want to hear from each other on the topic, I would bet.
What does is take for them to stand on a stadium stage in front of tens of thousands of people with any kind of confidence at this point? Hubris? Preparation? Discipline? Experience? Sobriety? Commitment? Just don't say "greed" because it is not like they need the money or the exertion. And since when does that disqualify a rock band from touring?
Just one of the many amazing things is that the Stones live band gets smaller and more pared down, when adding back up players would give Mick, Keith and Ronnie more places to hide. No. Instead, they are more and more out front with each year. There are basically no "extras", just some backup singers, horns and musical director Chuck Leavell on keyboards. The headcount of the 2015 live band resembles the 1975 one more than even the 2005 one.
There are two songs that are reliably "best in show" for me: "Jumpin' Jack Flash" and "Tumbling Dice". "Gimme Shelter" is usualy up there, too. On this night, we were treated to a very rare performance of "Moonlight Mile" from Sticky Fingers. It was more than good enough for me.
I've seen conflicting numbers ranging from six to twelve miles. That is the distance Mick Jagger apparently covers on stage during the course of a show. How high would it have to be to be impressive? How low could it be and still be a Stones show?
For more than 20 years I have questioned why they don't just do residencies in smaller venues, charge a lot more money and play at a smaller scale. Fans would certainly love it but it seems completely at odds with The Great Rolling Stones Experiment, which Keith once described as seeing what's out there, in that they are pioneers, astronauts. No rock band has been where they are at the scale they are at and they keep going to see what's next.
In March 2022, he told Nick Reilly in Rolling Stone that, "I just keep going and by now, both my body and mind is attuned to going on the road. The year we didn’t go on the road, I just felt terrible. It’s what I do and I still love it. I wouldn’t know what else to do without this and it still fascinates me, playing with these guys and what goes into putting a band together, what makes it work. It’s a fascinating subject and I see no reason to quit at the moment."
I will show up as long as they do.
Dig in:
A YouTube playlist of videos from the show (including the versions of "Tumbling Dice" and "Moonlight Mile" mentioned above)
