U2 vs AC/DC

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
gman said:
You are clearly in a better situation financially than the average person then! Some of us arent so fortunate!
Click to expand...

IMO, I hate seats anyways (only doing seats because of what I stated before otherwise I wouldn' of spent that kind of $) and have always done GAs since elevation tour. And for the US shows I am doing only GA so that I can go to more shows because the GA tix prices are cheaper. I am in the minority compared to the number of shows some people here do.. I can't afford to follow them around all over the states.. I am only seeing local shows that are within 3-4 hr drive from my house. I am not flying to the west coast cuz I can't afford to. I am going to Ireland because its a vacation and a wedding anniversary present for both of us. We saved up for this.. Both of us work hard to do these kind of things because this is our favorite thing to do in our spare time.. We love music and concerts are just a major high for us especially when it comes to great live bands like U2, Muse, Radiohead, The Killers etc...


that's it I am not gonna try and explain myself anymore and not sure why I did anyways.. :huh:
 
I am clearly in the minority (on this thread) regarding this matter. Still amazed by the u2 snobbery that exists tho. To say another act is not in the same league as u2, just coz it doesnt cater to your musical palette is laughable, and slightly ignorant. Still....wen i was a teenager...i wouldnt have a word sed against U2, they were the biggest, they were the best etc etc in my eyes..no matter what anyone said.....but i grew out of it!
 
U2Fanatic4ever said:
IMO, I hate seats anyways (only doing seats because of what I stated before otherwise I wouldn' of spent that kind of $) and have always done GAs since elevation tour. And for the US shows I am doing only GA so that I can go to more shows because the GA tix prices are cheaper. I am in the minority compared to the number of shows some people here do.. I can't afford to follow them around all over the states.. I am only seeing local shows that are within 3-4 hr drive from my house. I am not flying to the west coast cuz I can't afford to. I am going to Ireland because its a vacation and a wedding anniversary present for both of us. We saved up for this.. Both of us work hard to do these kind of things because this is our favorite thing to do in our spare time.. We love music and concerts are just a major high for us especially when it comes to great live bands like U2, Muse, Radiohead, The Killers etc...


that's it I am not gonna try and explain myself anymore and not sure why I did anyways.. :huh:
Click to expand...

Hey...dont get me wrong, ad love to do what your doing. am not knocking ya! maybe its just coz i am on a very low income, i am struggling to justify/accept some of the u2 ticket prices!
 
gman said:
Am amazed at the ignorance on here. Ac/Dc arent relevant in whos world..... Yours?

ok, in the interest of relevance, lets compare recent releases...

Black Ice, No1 in 29 countires, 1st week US sales 784 000, 1st week uk 110 000
NLOTH, No 1 in 30 Countries, 1st week US sales 484 000, 1st week uk 100 000

Thats the like for like figures i can find. Doesnt seem to reflect what you were sayiing!

Also "The Interscope album (NLOTH) sold a brisk 484,000 copies in the U.S......But the number everyone will talk about is 840,000. That’s what U2’s “How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb” sold when it debuted at No. 1 in 2004"

According to that...maybe its U2 whos relevance is waining!
Click to expand...

Ooo I'm glad to be able to amaze you with my ignorance. Relevance doesn't stem purely from sales figures, if that were the case you'd have Jonas Brothers and Hannah Montana being the most culturally relevant acts around today. And I think you and me both would disagree there.

For me, I fully appreciate AC/DC's popularity but you can't say that they are not a band defined by their huge success in the 1980s?! Yes they are a top concert draw but - like The Rolling Stones - they have long since become a nostalgia act. Whereas U2 have shifted and evolved numerous times since their initial 80s success with more and less success depending on the time period.
 
Has NLOTH allready sold more copies than Viva la vida like everyone said it would?
well not everyone.

:wink:

please let the tour begin, I am sick of waiting
 
MikeyJB said:
Ooo I'm glad to be able to amaze you with my ignorance. Relevance doesn't stem purely from sales figures, if that were the case you'd have Jonas Brothers and Hannah Montana being the most culturally relevant acts around today. And I think you and me both would disagree there.

For me, I fully appreciate AC/DC's popularity but you can't say that they are not a band defined by their huge success in the 1980s?! Yes they are a top concert draw but - like The Rolling Stones - they have long since become a nostalgia act. Whereas U2 have shifted and evolved numerous times since their initial 80s success with more and less success depending on the time period.
Click to expand...

I wasnt to happy with my terminlogy there on reflection. Was going to substitute the word "ignorance" with the word snobbery!

Mikey....am sorry bud...but i cant agree. Firstly....i cant disagree with the facts. which are...Ac/Dc are everybit as relevant, on record sales, tours whatever you want, as u2. One of them evolves as you put it, the other doenst. facts are, both remain as popular as ever. So there is obviously no obvious advantage with having the ability to musicaly reinvent, sucsess wise!
I cant believe am sitting here banging on about ac/dc. I dont even own one song of theirs!
 
u2 make's those seat MAGIC !

and.... because they need to make up the 35,- seats. u2's production is far bigger that AC/DC for sure.
Its jjust financial, and u2 fans want to spend more money i guess. Its their own choice.
 
MikeyJB said:
Ooo I'm glad to be able to amaze you with my ignorance. Relevance doesn't stem purely from sales figures, if that were the case you'd have Jonas Brothers and Hannah Montana being the most culturally relevant acts around today. And I think you and me both would disagree there.

For me, I fully appreciate AC/DC's popularity but you can't say that they are not a band defined by their huge success in the 1980s?! Yes they are a top concert draw but - like The Rolling Stones - they have long since become a nostalgia act. Whereas U2 have shifted and evolved numerous times since their initial 80s success with more and less success depending on the time period.
Click to expand...

well... hannah montana and the jonas brothers probably are the most culturaly relevant acts around today. they are the two acts that future music customers most listen to and associate with.

sorry.

and hey look, again... another shot at the rolling stones.

u2 fans have an issue with other classic rock acts for some reason... i've yet to figure it out.

u2 has an album that isn't selling yet a massive stadium tour that's selling out everywhere... which is exactly what the stones do, but u2 aren't like the stones, because apparently the stones aren't cool anymore.

whatever.
 
acdc rocked toronto and the same seat cost me more to watch acdc as it will for U2.

people get really drunk and/or high at acdc concerts and in effect per capita spend more at concerts than U2 fans (personal observation).

it's more about cost/benefit and disposable income at the end of the night for any particular fan. i'll go and hide now :reject:
 
headache in a suitcase said:
well... Hannah montana and the jonas brothers probably are the most culturaly relevant acts around today. They are the two acts that future music customers most listen to and associate with.

Sorry.

And hey look, again... Another shot at the rolling stones.

U2 fans have an issue with other classic rock acts for some reason... I've yet to figure it out.

U2 has an album that isn't selling yet a massive stadium tour that's selling out everywhere... Which is exactly what the stones do, but u2 aren't like the stones, because apparently the stones aren't cool anymore.

Whatever.
Click to expand...

A-f*@%-MEN!!!
 
zwervers2 said:
Has NLOTH allready sold more copies than Viva la vida like everyone said it would?
well not everyone.

:wink:

please let the tour begin, I am sick of waiting
Click to expand...

Yep, those wankers from Coldplay should charge 300 euros per seat according to their popularity :madwife:

To be honest, yes 150 euro is too much for a concert ticket, but if I don't want to pay it, I don't buy it. I don't think the tickets I bought were too expensive. I go to a lot of concerts and I know the average ticket prices. I do GA mostly and only take seats if I'm not able to pull GA. I have seats in a good sector in Milan II and they cost 75 euro. Considering that there will be center stage in Milan I'd say those are very good seats. I've never even thought about taking any of these very expensive seats.
 
gman said:
Having done some investigation.......i can start to see why the ticket prices are so expensive. For starters...its gonna take 120 trucks to transport the stage. That canna be cheap!
Click to expand...

You've always been one to ignore facts, I'm glad you are finally coming around and looking at them...
 
gman said:
Mikey....am sorry bud...but i cant agree. Firstly....i cant disagree with the facts. which are...Ac/Dc are everybit as relevant, on record sales, tours whatever you want, as u2. One of them evolves as you put it, the other doenst. facts are, both remain as popular as ever. So there is obviously no obvious advantage with having the ability to musicaly reinvent, sucsess wise!
I cant believe am sitting here banging on about ac/dc. I dont even own one song of theirs!
Click to expand...

Yeh I see you're point. I like to think that I have a broad idea of whats going on in current music scenes (I'm 19 so kinda think I oughta!) and I guess because I'm not a fan of AC/DC or that area of rock music it doesn't register on my radar as much as others. I do know actually that Black Ice was thought of as being quite a big deal amongst their fans. At the end of the day, its such a grey area and doesn't really matter at all :sexywink:

Headache in a Suitcase said:
well... hannah montana and the jonas brothers probably are the most culturaly relevant acts around today. they are the two acts that future music customers most listen to and associate with.
Click to expand...

Oh come on now. We live in truly sad times. :huh:

[/quote]
and hey look, again... another shot at the rolling stones.

u2 fans have an issue with other classic rock acts for some reason... i've yet to figure it out.
[/quote]

I have no problem at all with the Rolling Stones, but you can't possibly tell me that they are as relevant or significant as U2 is in this day and age?! U2 still summons a great deal of media and public attention as the result of a new album release. Rolling Stones are a circus act now - a great circus act don't get me wrong, and I'd love to see them on their next tour (better start saving though) - but a circus nonetheless. Not a going-concern and a rival to modern up-and-coming bands in the same way that U2 are.
 
I don't really think you can easily compare AC/DC to U2, but let's give it a shot, anyway.

AC/DC's career hasn't been nearly as steady as U2's throughout the years. They've gone through long periods of not recording and touring, and they've also had albums that haven't been nearly as successful as others. They're currently on an upswing, experiencing some sort of massive retro/nostalgic popularity, but it hasn't always been that way for them over the years (and I'm not talking a mini-blip in the radar that U2 experienced with Pop). The fact is, their career has not been as consistent as U2's has over the years.

As far as value of tickets, that's all relative. I wouldn't pay $10 to see AC/DC if they were performing across the street from me. Obviously, a lot of other people disagree. I'd go to great expense to see U2 though, because to me (and to many others), their live show is worth it.
 
AC/DC tickets near me were $90 plus fees. That's probably close to the average ticket price for U2 this tour.

Saw AC/DC in 1986 and they rocked!
 
i heard someone blasting "Thunderstruck" in their car today. i laughed and actually thought less of the person.
 
U2 (and when I say U2, I really mean Paul McGuinness) have been "greedy" for some time now. Pure supply and demand - taking advantage of the '00's resurgence. If fans refused to pay, they wouldn't charge as much. Maybe AC/DC could charge more too, I don't know. I don't have the time to break down economic demographics stipulating which types are going to each show. But it's no secret that U2 has been as much of a business as artists for quite some time now.

The $250 U2 ticket is quite extreme in my opinion. That's why I chose not to buy it. At least they offer the $55 GA as well as the $30 crap seats. I believe AC/DC's cheapest seat is around $65. The prices probably average out to be quite comparable in the end.
 
This thread got me thinking. I am not a fan of AC/DC at all. They thrived at a time when metal was the king. They havent changed. What hair band has changed? Off the top of my head, not many. Most of the Metal bands of that time just went quietly away with the popularity of their type of music. So that being said, I am actually very impressed at the numbers that were quoted above. (sales, etc..) That being said..AC/DC has their fans(alot of them apparently) U2 has been conscience of trying to stay cool. They have made an effort to reach out to the impressional Rock fans at ages 14-19. Ac/DC havent. They are more than content with the 35 and above fans that have been with them forever.

I looked this up on Wikipedia, so if its wrong dont blame the messanger....
The longest break they have taken between albums has been 8 years between 2000 and 2008. Christ, it took our boys 5 years to come up with NLOTH. And in my opinion this isnt a strong record. But u2 are monsters of the tour. They will sell out 90% of their tours no matter how good the album is that they are touring for. I think the answer to the origional quetion is simple. It cost money to tour. The more elaborate your tour is, the more money you have to make up before profits. u2 arent paying for this stage design. We are. Which is fine. A u2 concert is more of a specticle than a Rock show. Wish is cool to an extent. In my opinion this album is not good enough for the tour to rely on the new music alone. All of us U2 fans dig this kind of stuff and the band and their managemnt know it.

Anyway, I cant believe how much just rambled. Below are albums and years that they were relaeased. AC/DC has actually been busier in the studio. Sometimes I wish U2 took the same path....OK bash me here......

High Voltage (Australia) (1975)
T.N.T. (1975)
High Voltage (international) (1976)
Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap (1976)
Let There Be Rock (1977)
Powerage (1978)
Highway to Hell (1979)
Back in Black (1980)
For Those About to Rock (We Salute You) (1981)
Flick of the Switch (1983)
Fly on the Wall (1985)
Who Made Who (1986)
Blow Up Your Video (1988)
The Razors Edge (1990)
Ballbreaker (1995)
Stiff Upper Lip (2000)
Black Ice (2008)

Boy (1980)
October (1981)
War (1983)
Under A Blood Red Sky (1983)
The Unforgettable Fire (1984)
Wide Awake In America (1985)
The Joshua Tree (1987)
Rattle and Hum (1988)
Achtung Baby (1991)
Zooropa (1993)
Pop (1997)
All That You Can't Leave Behind (2000)
How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb (2004)
No Line on the Horizon (2009)
 
BVS said:
It's pretty easy when you use the same three chords and write the same song over and over and over...
Click to expand...

Wasn't 'three chords and the truth' U2's mantra for quite some time?? :lol:
 
i think ac/dc has its place in rock and roll, and they have been putting out the same thing for thirty plus years.so what! people like it,i'm not a big fan of ac/dc but i have way more of my guitar students wanting to learn "back in black" than "i will follow".
but they've around alot longer,and are like comfort food to alot of people.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
U2 Show Logistics Question/Theories
Replies
7
Views
741
lazarus
lazarus
prbiker15
U2:UV Boxscore Discussion
Replies
20
Views
1K
DeVaul
DeVaul
Scorpionac
Songs that would fit better on SOI vs. SOE?
Replies
1
Views
409
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
  • Sticky
U2 in Vegas - Tips for booking hotels, flights and other Vegasy type things.
20 21 22
Replies
642
Views
33K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
U2: Virtual Road to launch on YouTube Wednesday
6 7 8
Replies
222
Views
16K
ascender_RS
ascender_RS

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom