Steved1998
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I should count my own blessings, I guess... I've seen YBR live.
Me too. Such a beautiful song, unappreciated by most of the stadium
1000MIKES - U2man on air
I should count my own blessings, I guess... I've seen YBR live.
Yup, I was like the only one standing around in the Red Zone freaking out because of YBR at Gillette (COME ON PEOPLE! SAVE THOSE TICKETS FOR THE REAL FANS!!).
Yup, I was like the only one standing around in the Red Zone freaking out because of YBR at Gillette (COME ON PEOPLE! SAVE THOSE TICKETS FOR THE REAL FANS!!).
Heh, where were all you naysayers when I was trying to convince people 3-4 weeks ago that we weren't getting a new album this year?
November 2013. Maybe March 2014, but I don't seem them making the mistake of pushing it into the next year and missing the holiday sales again.
It's really a good time to be a fan.
Umm, compared to when? The 80's, when you only had to wait a couple years between albums?
Or the 90's, when you also had new music every two years, and the band was using technology in a way that no musical artist had done before (or since), most notably on two mind-blowing tours?
I guess it's good to be a fan now compared to 2001-2004 or even post-2004 when we were wondering if they were ever going get their brains and balls back.
I only meant that it's a good time to be a fan FOR ME. Although I do my fair share of bitching about U2, sometimes I do look on the bright side. I got to see them last year, AND I get to see them again this year. Like somebody else said, anything U2 does from this point on is just gravy. Wether or not U2 releases an album in 2010 doesn't take away from the fact that we already have 12 great albums, countess great b-sides/unreleased songs, countless live DVD's to disect, many informative books to read about the band. Now with youtube we can watch videos we've never seen before, like Rattle & Hum outtakes, great bootlegs of old concerts, and within a few days we can watch an entire concert after it happens.
We could be Led Zeppelin fans and be disecting things that happened 40 years ago, with nothing new to talk about. We're all pretty lucky to be U2 fans. Some people are Nickelback fans... think about that!
So I just took the plunge and e-mailed Boston DJ Carter Alan.
I don't agree with this Stones-bashing. Their sets are not complete hit parades. On their most recent tour, they did Sway, She's So Cold, Little T and A, She Was Hot, All Down The Line etc In fact they may well offer as much variety as U2 over a tour. Moreover, I think A Bigger Bang was a very good album, probably better than HTDAAB.
-$$$$. Stones prices are out of control. $250 is quite a bit for U2 but seeing the Stones for $30, $50, even less than $100 is next to impossible.
-Back in the early 80's & before Stones had 5 guys on stage and horn players (2) come out when needed. They would add piano/keyboard arrangements to some songs or the songs that required them. Starting with with the Steel Wheels tour (guys were in their 40's) they had 5 guys, horn players, keyboard player (every song), 3 backup singers, and other people. There would be nearly 10 people or more on stage singing "Jumping Jack Flash"??? Can you imagine if U2 did something like this???
The Stones comparison are weak at best. U2 play more new songs on a regular basis, and they (and the audience) still care about the new stuff.
it's a very common theme here on interference... people don't want to admit the truth because the fans do not want to admit that u2 is an aging rock dinosaur... and more importantlty, they don't want to admit that there is absolutely 100% nothing wrong with that.
for example...
stones prices aren't that off from U2's... i paid 100 bucks to sit side stage at bigger bang at giants stadium. you'd pay the same for u2.
the difference is the floor seats... where the front sections on the floor went for $450 a pop. this of course is a greedy, money grab by the stones.
where as the reason why u2 got rid of seats on the floor is to fit more people on the floor... and the reason for 360 was to be able to sell an entire stadium's worth of seats, opening up an additional 10,000 or so seats.
this, of course, has nothing to do with money and it's just u2 being nice 'cause they love their fans so much.
right...
ya think so, huh?
see that's a wacky myth that's thrown out there... yes, die hard fans care about the new songs. the majority of the venue doesn't, and often bails for the bathroom during new songs... which is why u2 are smart and load the top of the set with new songs. nobody's bailing on the first 5-6 songs.
if you're gonna tell me that there wasn't a mass bathroom break during unknown caller, then i don't know what shows you were at.
me? i pee durring war horses, because i've seen them a million times and would rather see the new material. but the majority of the crowd are not die hards like us... they want to see the hits and don't give a crap about the new songs.
^^^
Stones Pricing for Bigger Bang
$350
$175
$100
$50
Pricing for 360
$250
$95
$55
$30
That's a pretty significant difference. Especially when buying in pairs.
Finally, until U2 does something like this I would put them ahead of the Stones in terms of new music being relevant:
Rolling Stones helps Days of Our Lives celebrate 40 years | More entertainment news | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle
so on Wednesday, do you think we should start a Setlist Party for the secret concert that probably won't happen?
Is that the concert where they wont play any new songs?
absolutely! they may not even show up for it!
Is that the concert where they wont play any new songs?
absolutely! they may not even show up for it!
so who/where is the poster that said they were able to confirm that U2 may be doing something on the 14th?
He/she had access to the station/buildings itinerary for the next few months, but no details.
i think it was nothing.
it was a u2start member who worked for a production company in Sweden. the post was up at u2start for about 4 days, and then it was taken down because the original poster got in trouble at work for posting details.
^^^
Stones Pricing for Bigger Bang
$350
$175
$100
$50
Pricing for 360
$250
$95
$55
$30
That's a pretty significant difference. Especially when buying in pairs.
Finally, until U2 does something like this I would put them ahead of the Stones in terms of new music being relevant:
Rolling Stones helps Days of Our Lives celebrate 40 years | More entertainment news | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle
So you call putting 3 relevant, commercially and critically successful albums out in the 2000s a "rock dinosaur?" What Stones albums are you comparing these to, and more importantly, are you joking? No, there is nothing wrong with an aging rock dinosaur, I love AC/DC for example. However, U2 may be aging, but they go out of their way in writing, promoting and playing new material to ensure that they are not a dinosaur act. The Stones, AC/DC, Aerosmith- none of them make too many bones about being dinosaur acts. U2 fears this.
Sitting stage side as in right down beside the stage? For U2, that would be GA and run around $55, not $100. You buy from a scalper? The Stones, both on the highest end tickets and on the overall average, beat the hell out of U2 in ticket prices.
360 is only the 3rd tour that they have ditched the seats and had the GA at the lowest or close to the lowest tier of ticket prices. You do realize this, right? This started on Elevation, it was not some greedy, sell more seats for the dinosaur 360 invention! U2 really broke even with this pricing system when compared with another on Elevation and Vertigo. All it did was shift the burden around a little. Seats in the lodge of the arena for another act may be $65, but U2 charged around $95 on Vertigo and were very open about the reason why: they wanted the "best spots in the house," closest to the stage and the band, to be occupied by real fans and not just fat cats who are there to say they were there.
So of course, U2 still makes the money, the distribution is just different. I am not trying to say "look at those wonderful, caring guys they just took a financial hit so their fans could pay less."
While it is true they did not take a financial hit, it is just as true that they made a conscious decision to try and make great, close to the action tickets available to fans. This was a risk as no other acts I am aware of do this with their pricing. The Stones certainly do not.
Of course, the 360 set up was done for money. I don't know anyone who thinks otherwise. You can sell more seats. They are still less than the Stones on average, and the front is a flat out bargain compared to the Stones.
I'll take the band who is still hungry and would rather have enthusiastic fans, undoubtedly many newer and younger like myself, down at the front than in the nosebleeds while the fat mid life crisis loser from the taxpayer owned bank yaps away on his cellphone at the stage front!
There is a whole lot of sense in what U2girl and others say. A whole lot of whacky in what you are saying! As has been said before, the casual fan hit parade now includes Beautiful Day, Elevation, Walk On, Stuck, City of Blinding Lights and Vertigo. They may not all be my favorites, but people know and love these songs. How many Stones songs from 2000-2009 are like this?
I would say the general public could easily name all of those songs and they are extremely well liked. Who the hell on the street could name a song from the Stones last album?
As for front loading the set with new songs, U2 has done that to some extent since JT and especially did it on Zoo TV and Popmart, which, surprise, surprise, were the other 2 stadium tours! I think for U2 it is always a matter of what works, or what they feel works whether you or I like it or not. By the end of the 2nd leg of 360, the NLOTH opening barrage had been broken up a bit.
People take bathroom breaks. Not me. Not my friends, not the people I go to shows with, but others do it of course. This happens at every concert everywhere. It will happen more so in a stadium. I have honestly never seen a sizable group of people noticeably timing their bathroom breaks to a song. That is just crazy. Maybe a few diehards don't want to hear Pride and know they have a few minutes until Streets and Ultraviolet, and will go to the bathroom then, but how the hell is a casual fan who is dying to hear Beautiful Day going to be sure that they wont start it as soon as they get in the bathroom line?
The reaction to the new songs was great at both Foxboro shows. Not as good as on the Vertigo tour, but people (generally speaking, there are exceptions like Electric co) react best to what they know. Could the average non blue crack fan who does not spend all of their time on U2 be expected to even know anything more than Boots and Magnificent from NLOTH? It has been almost ignored by the mainstream. Unknown Caller, I understand if the reaction was tepid in some places(wasn't in Boston), it is a bit strange and takes some getting used to. Most of the experiences I read about from other fans say that NLOTH, Magnificent, Breathe and Crazy remix all come off extremely well, regardless of the city.
Either way, the reaction matters not. It is U2 constantly working to make the best album they can every single time out, not resting on their past success and having the courage to play 6 or 7 songs from an album not as well known as others to an attendance record setting stadium that counts. Again, when is the last time the Stones cared about actually coming up with something new that they were enthusiastic about and wanted to promote on tour?
No way, no how are the Stones and U2 even comparable in this area. That is not my opinion or anyone else's, it is an undeniable fact!
I am sorry, but the only thing whacky is your post.