who's better live....U2 or Pearl Jam??
- Thread starter earthshell
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
techfire
Acrobat
Early Pearl Jam was much better (Even Flow video), the intensity was insane at the shows, U2 was good back in the day as well but PJ would leave me exhausted with bloody knees. I would give the nod to U2 today, they have something special about them, where as PJ is kinda going through the motions, although the PJ fan club is 110% much better than U2's. I got 2nd row center via Ten Club for $15 a year.
Shade
Acrobat
The best band currently banding isn't U2 or Pearl Jam: it's Wilco. If you've seen them live, you already know. If you haven't, a live DVD and album are coming out very soon. You should also check out I AM TRYING TO BREAK YOUR HEART, a documentary about the troubled birth of their album Yankee Hotel Foxtrot. I cannot recommend Wilco enough.
Last edited:
techfire said:
i'm trying to figure out how comming up with a completely unique set list for every single show is going through the motions, as opposed to having the same set list and just changing a song or two?
vivaSA
War Child
I think both bands are great.
girlcalledparty
The Fly
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2005
- Messages
- 55
Let's just put it this way. I'm going to see PJ on Monday and all I can think about is how every part of me is aching for October 16, the date of my next U2 show.
However, I am looking forward to Monday too, I haven't seen PJ in probably 7-8 years. Anyone know what time they're typically taking the stage on this tour?
However, I am looking forward to Monday too, I haven't seen PJ in probably 7-8 years. Anyone know what time they're typically taking the stage on this tour?
techfire
Acrobat
Headache in a Suitcase said:
True, PJ plays a different set each show, but they change only a few songs here and there as well, they play Alive, Daughter, Even Flow, Black and so on at most shows. But now they pretty much stand there and play the songs, not much energy or passion as they once had back in the day. Dude I'm a huge PJ fan, I flew to Seattle from L.A. just to see a non-tour show a few years back, but U2 shows some emotion during the performance, where as Eddie is starting to forget some lyrics to the songs, probably because of the various set lists.
jphelmet
Refugee
Shade said:
I love Wilco and will see them for the 6th time in the last year in two weeks, BUT they are still not U2. There setlists are great, the musicianship is incredible, and they have a great sense of humor. There is still not the grandness and emotional impact of a U2 show. I would rate them behind U2, but above Pearl Jam. Very different feel, but I will take watching Nels Cline play live over Mike McCready anyday.
Mrs. Vedder
Refugee
What do you have against my hubby? 
I like I when better when he grunts 
Uh.. What Pearl Jam Shows did you go to? No Passion? Um.. yeah... okaaaaaaaaay!! You must have been at a Cold Play concert.. um but that's another story!
I don't care what you U2 Freaks say...I F*uckin' LOVE PEARL JAM!!! way more than U2 so there!!
hehehe
Last edited:
Mrs. Vedder
Refugee
Funny, I have U2 GA tickets for both Oakland shows in November and GA tickets for Portland Oregon in Dec, YET, I would rather have a Pearl Jam album or US tour.. ok, I'm also SERIOUSLY considering seeing Pearl Jam in Mexico instead of U2 in Portland!
:realizes, that this is a U2 board... leaves quitely:
Hallucination
Refugee
I've seen both bands and it isn't even close. Pearl Jam are awsome but they are not even close to U2's level.
EPandAmerica
New Yorker
I just saw on Yahoo news that Eddie got on stage with the Stones for Wild Horses. Will some of you tech savy peeps post a ysi of that here. 
I
that song and want to hear Eddie singing it.
I
that song and want to hear Eddie singing it.As it's been said before, they're two totally different shows, with very different styles of music, I find it hard to compare. As for the setlist angle, I dig that PJ vary it up so much, but we live in age with the internet that we can spoil up coming shows by looking at setlists, it's not just u2 that have repeative setlists, a lot of bands do.
If you go back 15 years you wouldn't have a clue what was coming next on a setlist as you couldn't log on and check it out. Still, u2 could do with changing things up a bit. Maybe the next big thing u2 could do to throw us a curve ball is a totally stripped back show, no fancy lighting, no fancy stage, just the band playing with basic lighting and an alternative set list and cheaper ticket prices down to less production!
I kinda dig the theatrics that u2 bring in with their shows, as very few bands do it on the scale u2 do, but it'd be cool if u2 did a little off the cuff club tour or something, play just for the fan club members and give them an alternative setlist with die hard fan favourites instead of the greatest hits.
If you go back 15 years you wouldn't have a clue what was coming next on a setlist as you couldn't log on and check it out. Still, u2 could do with changing things up a bit. Maybe the next big thing u2 could do to throw us a curve ball is a totally stripped back show, no fancy lighting, no fancy stage, just the band playing with basic lighting and an alternative set list and cheaper ticket prices down to less production!
I kinda dig the theatrics that u2 bring in with their shows, as very few bands do it on the scale u2 do, but it'd be cool if u2 did a little off the cuff club tour or something, play just for the fan club members and give them an alternative setlist with die hard fan favourites instead of the greatest hits.
techfire said:
this is simply untrue.
the setlists for pearl jam's last three dates (not counting the short set in pittsburgh opening for the rolling stones) included 83 total songs, 63 of them were played only once, 13 of them were played twice, and only 7 songs... Betterman, Alive, Even Flow, Go, Elderly Woman, Cordory, Animal... were played all three shows
that does not included snippets of songs such as WMA, Bad, etc. etc.
these are all the songs that were played over those three shows...
in comparison, u2's last three shows included a total of 68 songs played, 28 of them were unique, 21 were played twice, 19 were played all three shows.
again, snippets not included.
these are all the songs u2 played on their last three shows...
as you can see, pearl jam's list is much bigger... and they don't have song titles that are a dozen words long...
u2 played 28 unique songs over three shows... pearl jam played 28 songs in ONE show.
don't get me wrong... if i had to see one and only one act, it's u2, based only on the fact that they are by far my favorite band. pearl jam is #2 on the list.
but we must give pearl jam their due.
Last edited:
techfire
Acrobat
Headache in a Suitcase said:
Wow, hey guy, you got me. That's some deep research, who can argue?
techfire
Acrobat
Mrs. Vedder said:
Uh.. What Pearl Jam Shows did you go to? No Passion? Um.. yeah... okaaaaaaaaay!! You must have been at a Cold Play concert.. um but that's another story!
I F*uckin' LOVE PEARL JAM!!! way more than U2 so there!!
.
Great, you got my vote for being the #1 Pearl Jam fan in a U2 web site, good job (-)(-)
Last edited:
angelordevil
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Headache in a Suitcase said:
Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town
That's a very rare exception.I agree with everything you say...PJ are due their due, especially live. It would be intriguing, however, to see them build a theme into a tour, ala U2, don't you think? I think Ed has the ability to carry it off, in terms of role-playing, in a similar fashion to Bono.
That's my only grievance with PJ: the fact that their stage show doesn't evolve. I love the imagery of a U2 show, and I'm in love with technology, as I think Bono and the boys are.
When I see Eddie hauling his mic cord around the stage, I realize that PJ are light years away from that kind of production...but that's ok. I get my contrast with other bands, bands like U2.
it's a choice thing really... which is why i go back to my original post...
if you're going to see one show and one show only, go see u2.
but for die hard fans who are going to multiple shows? pearl jam is more satisfying due to their ever chaning set lists.
this comming from someone who from november 22, 2004 to november 22, 2005 will have seen u2 11, maybe 12 times... go figure
and elderly woman behind the counter in a small town is listed simply as "elderly woman..." in that post
if you're going to see one show and one show only, go see u2.
but for die hard fans who are going to multiple shows? pearl jam is more satisfying due to their ever chaning set lists.
this comming from someone who from november 22, 2004 to november 22, 2005 will have seen u2 11, maybe 12 times... go figure
and elderly woman behind the counter in a small town is listed simply as "elderly woman..." in that post
Last edited:
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
Actually 40, he'll be 41 in December.timothius said:
Anyway, as many have mentioned its kind of an apples and oranges situation, but at least you have juicy tasty apples and sweet seedless oranges to choose from.
I've seen U2 18 times (with 19 and 20 next week and 21 and 22 in Dec), and I've seen Pearl Jam 14 times.
So I can make a reasonable comparison.
U2 shows are more visual, Pearl Jam's focus is strictly on music.
Both bands play with passion and energy, on their best nights you'll leave thinking you may have just seen the greatest concert ever. (I've had that sense with both bands more than once)
As for the set list issue, Pearl Jam wins that, hands down. While U2 will throw nuggets in the setlist in cities like Boston, Chicago, NYC, Dublin and a few others, there main setlist is more stastic than Pearl Jam's, its been that way since ZooTV and the evolution of the stage show/lighting tying into the concert and setlist. Pearl Jam plays a wider range of songs on anaverag night, also usually a longer set. In 2003, i witnessed them attempt to play their entire touring catalog (for that tour) during a 3 night stand in Boston, about 105 songs. It culminated with a nearly 4 hour performance on the 3rd night (1 hour acoustic "pre-show" before Sleater Kinney followed by a 2hr, 45 minute main show, breaking Tweeter Center curfew by 1/2 an hour, culminating with the only repeat of the 3 nights, an impromptu Yellow Ledbetter cause the crowd wouldn't stop roaring).
For me they rank 1 and 1A, which is "better"? Depends on what you expect from a rock concert, but both are amongst the best touring currently and will stand up in history as 2 of the better live rock bands ever.
what he said
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
Well it conversely rewards fans who've stayed loyal to the band for 14 or 15 years. And it gives younger fans the opprtunity to get good, probably not great, seats without fighting during Ticketmaster on sales and hoping to get anything before the show sells out.anitram said:
And if she's never been on the floor, I doubt she's been in the club as long as 7 years, while that kind of seniority won't get her right down front, it would get her decent seats, and in some cities with less fan club members attending (that means not NYC, Seattle, Boston or Philly) she would have very good seats.
The fan club has deposited me in the 2nd row 3 times and the 5th row on another occasion.
U2 could have avoided a lot of issues by following the same model with its old Propaganda database this year, though certainly the fan base is larger, they could have kept some longtime loyal fans a lot happier and closer to the action than the mess the 1st leg presales resulted in. Kudos to them for attempting to rectify it on leg 3, but still some longtime fans were left feeling slighted.
u2's problem was they didn't want the same 25 people in the front row every single show. that's where the lottery came in, which isn't good, either.
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
The GA system allows for that, whereas if they had seats on the floor and fanclub members were limited in how may shows they could buy tickets for on a tour, the good seats would be filled with different faces each night, all of whom would be die hard U2 fan club members. But the current staging is built for GA, making it possible for someone to always get a great spot if they put forth the time and effort, the lottery prevents these people from always entering the ellipse, but they can obtain great rail spots at the very least night in and night out.
Its not gonna ever be a system that'll satisfy everyone.
Its not gonna ever be a system that'll satisfy everyone.
Headache in a Suitcase said:
and frankly, the lottery system doesnt prevent much of that either
i have to agree with the previous posters. U2 puts on shows more for the casual fans. Pearl Jams puts on shows more for the hardcore fans.
Mrs. Vedder
Refugee
techfire said:
Thanks.
And you get my vote for ... nevermind.You know I've read all of these posts. And I wasn't in the mood to sit here and argue with things some people have said. Instead I chose to show my love for PJ in a sarcastic way. Eh.
I mean really it's a matter of CHOICE. No matter who or what a band does to hardcore U2 fans, no band will be better than U2; same with PJ fans no band will be better than PJ. Unless you are one of those fans who does not preffer one band over the other.
I mean who is to say that because PJ has a diverse setlist each night and the fact that they PLAY MORE SONGS than U2.. that "Quality is better than Quantity" as some U2 fans put it? BTW- I if you have not been at a PJ concert in years... ED doesn't not just stand up there and sing nor do they just "Modified" the setlist and inlclude the fans fav like "ALIVE" "BETTERMAN" et.,
in every setlist! Come on! I saw this band 7 times straight last tour, 2 times in a row for Bridge School Benefit and recently in Canada.. it's always different, hell sometimes you wouldn't get any of the fans "sing-a-longs" like ALIVE or DAUGHTER! Anyway, where was I?... I can go on and on on about OPINIONS by U2/PJ fans, blah blah. But I won't accomplish anything because really you can't change people's minds about thier favorite band!!! At the end of the day is whatever band makes YOU HAPPY! U2 makes me happy and so does PJ.. one more than the other but..
Last edited:
Matthew_Page2000
War Child
Headache in a Suitcase said:
If you'd seen early Pearl Jam you wouldn't have to ask that question. I've seen PJ live about 13 times. That's more than I've seen U2. It's more than I've seen any band. They really do mix it up in a remarkable way but they've lost that indescribable...something that makes transcendant rock and roll.
I can mark the spot where they lost it too. I saw them in Augusta, Maine for the No Code tour. The band raged. Dennis Rodman rushed the stage and carried Ed Ved around on his shoulders. The frat boys punched their fists in the air. But I felt nothing. I've seen PJ several times since then on each of their tours. It's just never been the same. Sure they mix up the set list. Sure Mike solos his ass off. But a varied set list and guitar solos are not the reason I go to a rock show. Is that all you guys want? Really? I want the magic. I want the feeling I get during the intro to Streets. And PJ hasn't generated that kind of magic in years.
As for the deluded PJ fans who think the reason they're not selling a lot of albums is because "they don't feel like it." Well, you're nuts. The songs just aren't that memorable anymore.
It's not easy selling a lot of albums consistently over a decade and a half. Even bands who work hard at it like U2 screw it up from time to time. You can't really believe that the songs on Riot Act or Binaural are great. Can you?
Matthew_Page2000
War Child
Headache in a Suitcase said:
Yeah, no one mixes it up like PJ. It's just too bad that the only songs worth repeating every night all come from their first three albums. It's been a long time since I bought Vitalogy the day it was released.
Mrs. Vedder
Refugee
Matthew_Page2000 said:
Again, everything you said is based on OPINION! YOUR OPINION. This is what get's me about these PJ VS U2 threads... some of you talk like it's FACT. As a matter of fact I do believe that a lot of songs on Binaural and especially on RIOT ACT are great. That's like me asking you DO YOU ACTUALLY THINK HTDMAAB is a "ok" ALBUM?
No. I go for the whole experience. I go for the special feeling I get at PJ concerts; a feeling that indescribable but it's amazing! The varied setlist and guitar solos are just an added bonus for me. It's fine that you don't feel the "magic" anymore with Pearl Jam. or thta Pearl Jam hasn't generated that magic in years FOR YOU. That's exactly how I feel with U2. I like them still, I go to their concerts and listen to their music but they lost me somewhere. They just do not have that magic FOR ME anymore.Where you find "magic" in U2 I find a "show" not a concert. But that's how I feel. But again, it's a matter of opinion. We can sit here and argue all day but it will not change how I feel about Pearl Jam or how you feel about U2. Unless we start talking about FACTS. Like Yes, U2 has sold more albums that Pearl Jam... et et et, everything else of "PJ has no more magic" or "U2's does shows now..." are just biased opinions!!
I hate it when these two bands get compared!
Last edited:
Russty Cat
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Matthew_Page2000 said:
I'm a huge fan of both bands and agree that its really apples to oranges.
But I just had to speak up on the songs on Riot Act and Binaural...I know this is my opinion, but I love both albums! How can you not love Thumbing my way or You are?! I have seen PJ live many times and I will many more. I don't think they are old and not memorable. But no worries if you do, that just means better tickets for the rest of us at the shows.
Also when it comes to passion in the shows, I guess you had to be there at The Gorge last month to see Ed coming running out and jumping during Given To Fly or Mike doing windmills while running on the stage. There is nothing like them totally going off! And they definetly haven't lost the passion.
angelordevil
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Russty Cat said:
I'm a huge fan of both bands and agree that its really apples to oranges.
But I just had to speak up on the songs on Riot Act and Binaural...I know this is my opinion, but I love both albums! How can you not love Thumbing my way or You are?! I have seen PJ live many times and I will many more. I don't think they are old and not memorable. But no worries if you do, that just means better tickets for the rest of us at the shows.
Also when it comes to passion in the shows, I guess you had to be there at The Gorge last month to see Ed coming running out and jumping during Given To Fly or Mike doing windmills while running on the stage. There is nothing like them totally going off! And they definetly haven't lost the passion.
I love the last few albums. Of course, all of this discussion is opinion based...isn't that why we're here? Personally, I think Ten was over-produced, and overplayed, which means for the casual fan, PJ gets stuck in a flannel time warp.
