U2 to headline Acoustic X-Mas

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
That song is like a fart.....



Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


That idiot drummer said that about the album. Foo Fighters have turned into the american Nickelback. Generic beer commercial / sporting event rock


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
After experiencing 360's fan-managed GA lines and their respective dictators, I am looking forward to seeing how that goes down with people who don't give two fucks about U2. It's going to be a sight.
 
I would pay money just to see the obsessive U2 freaks get beat up for pulling typical line shenanigans.

No one's getting beat up because the typical concert attendee for this sort of thing is 14-17. Here's what will happen. U2 people will camp out. Maybe they'll start a numbering system. The following day , starting around noon, everyone else will start showing up. They will be confused why there's so many people there already. They'll refuse to get a number but by then there will be a lot of people and the numbering people won't really care about giving them a number, either. The groups of people will likely stick to themselves, except for some U2 fans trying to talk the younger set into appreciating the band. The young people won't talk much to the U2 fans because they'll think it's weird there's so many older people there. Both sets will have a good time at the show.
 
I can't believe some of you have the chance to see U2 live and actually complain.

What if you had the chance to see members of U2 having sex with everyone in your family right in front of you? How about the band clubbing a bunch of baby seals...in person? Would you watch? Or pay to watch? No? Well now we're qualifying whether or not seeing the band live is an absolute must-see.

I love the band, but don't want to see them without the sonic landscapes they can build with full power. I don't want to see them play ATYCLB in full. And I don't want to see them unless they have cheap GA seats.

These are all legitimate reasons for being uninterested in what would not be a typical U2 show.
 
What if you had the chance to see members of U2 having sex with everyone in your family right in front of you? How about the band clubbing a bunch of baby seals...in person? Would you watch? Or pay to watch? No? Well now we're qualifying whether or not seeing the band live is an absolute must-see.

I love the band, but don't want to see them without the sonic landscapes they can build with full power. I don't want to see them play ATYCLB in full. And I don't want to see them unless they have cheap GA seats.

These are all legitimate reasons for being uninterested in what would not be a typical U2 show.

CaptainHyperbole.jpg
 
What if you had the chance to see members of U2 having sex with everyone in your family right in front of you? How about the band clubbing a bunch of baby seals...in person? Would you watch? Or pay to watch? No? Well now we're qualifying whether or not seeing the band live is an absolute must-see.

I love the band, but don't want to see them without the sonic landscapes they can build with full power. I don't want to see them play ATYCLB in full. And I don't want to see them unless they have cheap GA seats.

These are all legitimate reasons for being uninterested in what would not be a typical U2 show.

Everytime EBW is played acoustic, a baby seal dies.
 
What if you had the chance to see members of U2 having sex with everyone in your family right in front of you? How about the band clubbing a bunch of baby seals...in person? Would you watch? Or pay to watch? No? Well now we're qualifying whether or not seeing the band live is an absolute must-see.

I take it you're trying to be funny but this just strikes me as a bizarre reply.

I love the band, but don't want to see them without the sonic landscapes they can build with full power. I don't want to see them play ATYCLB in full. And I don't want to see them unless they have cheap GA seats.

These are all legitimate reasons for being uninterested in what would not be a typical U2 show.

Well, the thing is you see, to those of us who will likely never see them outside of a regular tour, and to someone who hasn't had the chance to see them indoors (save for travelling to another continent), your attitude just seems a bit spoiled.

I have nothing against anyone being disinterested, I just don't think you should complain. If you don't want to go, then don't.
 
No one's getting beat up because the typical concert attendee for this sort of thing is 14-17. .

14-17??
Even removing U2 from that lineup there is no way that its avaerage target audience is teenaged. Its targeting folks who were teenagers in 1994 not 2014.
 
14-17??
Even removing U2 from that lineup there is no way that its avaerage target audience is teenaged. Its targeting folks who were teenagers in 1994 not 2014.

for their parents? Someone needs chaperones.

Look, I've never been to KROQ's AAX. But I have access to knowing what demographics attend the shows up on by it's sister station in the Bay Area, and I've been told the demo is the same for L.A. I'm not making this up. They sell tix to attract teens. Many of those teens also want to be able to say they saw the "greats" like the Pumpkins.
 
I take it you're trying to be funny but this just strikes me as a bizarre reply.







Well, the thing is you see, to those of us who will likely never see them outside of a regular tour, and to someone who hasn't had the chance to see them indoors (save for travelling to another continent), your attitude just seems a bit spoiled.



I have nothing against anyone being disinterested, I just don't think you should complain. If you don't want to go, then don't.


Let's keep the discussion to ourselves on this discussion board, guys.
 
Well, the thing is you see, to those of us who will likely never see them outside of a regular tour, and to someone who hasn't had the chance to see them indoors (save for travelling to another continent), your attitude just seems a bit spoiled.

I have nothing against anyone being disinterested, I just don't think you should complain. If you don't want to go, then don't.

Uhh...

Let's keep the discussion to ourselves on this discussion board, guys.

Yeah. This is a forum. Where people discuss things. And make jokes. And complain. And celebrate. And post the last whatever they experienced with whichever one of their five senses.

You really should be used to all of that by now. People talk all the time about seeing 15 shows on a tour when most people here have trouble affording or finding a way to even see one. That sucks. That's also life.

Deal with it.

No one's getting beat up because the typical concert attendee for this sort of thing is 14-17.


(GAF feverishly searching Orbitz and Kayak for the cheapest flight to Los Angeles)
 
I know it's a forum and all, I'm just really envious of the people who can actually go.
And I don't consider myself sensitive, but using the image of the band having sex with my family was just a really, really strange way of making a point.
 
People talk all the time about seeing 15 shows on a tour when most people here have trouble affording or finding a way to even see one. That sucks. That's also life.

And I'm one of those people who is probably only get to see one show. Not sure this is the one I want it to be.


But, I'm still going to try for tickets on Friday (I accidentally said Thursday earlier. Hope no one randomly decided to trust me on that one).
 
I know it's a forum and all, I'm just really envious of the people who can actually go.

Are you envious because of the other bands + U2, or just U2? B

Because I don't get the mentality that IF U2 are playing then U2 MUST be seen. They don't tour that infrequently and this isn't even close to a full show. I love Bruce Springsteen, but I have next to no interest in seeing him when he's on his solo tours. Conditions are everything.
 
for their parents? Someone needs chaperones.

Look, I've never been to KROQ's AAX. But I have access to knowing what demographics attend the shows up on by it's sister station in the Bay Area, and I've been told the demo is the same for L.A. I'm not making this up. They sell tix to attract teens. Many of those teens also want to be able to say they saw the "greats" like the Pumpkins.

In general I don't doubt that, but the night 2 lineup is not going to appeal to teenagers for the most part. Night 1 moreso, Fall Out Boy being the main culprit probably, but the night 2 lineup is basically tailor made for the 25-45 demographic. In strictly general terms U2 doesn't appeal to today's teenager, Tears For Fears is unlikely to even be known by the average teenager today, The Pumpkins and Weezer similarly don't currently appeal to high school kids....I saw Weezer 2 weeks ago, the crowd was almost exclusively folks in their 30s and 40s.
 
Are you envious because of the other bands + U2, or just U2? B

Because I don't get the mentality that IF U2 are playing then U2 MUST be seen. They don't tour that infrequently and this isn't even close to a full show. I love Bruce Springsteen, but I have next to no interest in seeing him when he's on his solo tours. Conditions are everything.


I'm envious because it's U2. But I like a lot of the other acts, so it'd be a nice bonus.

Also, laz, going through the thread I don't see you complaining really, and I wasn't targeting anyone in particular. It's just that people living in LA will have plenty of chances to see U2 and shouldn't complain that they get another one in my opinion.
 
I know it's a forum and all, I'm just really envious of the people who can actually go.
And I don't consider myself sensitive, but using the image of the band having sex with my family was just a really, really strange way of making a point.

I bet Adam had a damn good time though.


People say you shouldn't mix sex and music, or sex and politics....

...I think that's kind of bullshit.


adam-clayton-1_1142224a_zpsa33d1faf.jpg
 
No one's getting beat up because the typical concert attendee for this sort of thing is 14-17.

You're assuming Vik won't be in attendance.

14-17??
Even removing U2 from that lineup there is no way that its avaerage target audience is teenaged. Its targeting folks who were teenagers in 1994 not 2014.

Most of the bands on the lineup have been together at least 14-17 years.
 
Last edited:
I take it you're trying to be funny but this just strikes me as a bizarre reply.



Well, the thing is you see, to those of us who will likely never see them outside of a regular tour, and to someone who hasn't had the chance to see them indoors (save for travelling to another continent), your attitude just seems a bit spoiled.

I have nothing against anyone being disinterested, I just don't think you should complain. If you don't want to go, then don't.

I think Lazarus makes a fair point. Similarly, I am torn between buying really expensive tickets for the KROQ show or holding off a couple of weeks until really expensive tickets are released for the U2 2015 tour.

I am sure there are a lot of U2 fans in California asking themselves, "Do I have the resources to buy $120 tickets twice, especially since there is a really good chance that U2 is only going to play the "promotional" hour-long acoustic set at the KROQ show?"
 
Back
Top Bottom