How much is too much for a concert? (Is U2 worth it?)

[danny316]

After finally starting to get to some shows again, I'm now sizing up whether or not to go see U2 next week. The CHEAP seats at a U2 show still cost more than $60 a pop, which seems ridiculously high for just one band (and a lackluster current album and lousy opening act don't help any).

Thinking about how expensive some of these big acts get in comparison to how cheap some of the best shows are ($12 got me to a Derek Webb show last week, $10 to a WPA concert the week before that), I'm starting to think it's just not worth it for the big stadium acts.

So - is U2 worth it? Is it just too much money and hassle to deal with "classic rock" arena acts?

[spacebrat311]

Isn't Muse opening? I'd pay that for them, probably not so much for U2. I might have payed that in the late 1980s though.

[ajyouthguy]

we're going to see U2 in 2 weeks...i would have paid a LOT more than i did for them, but they are the one exception for me in that regard, the only band i'd massively overpay to see because i haven't seen them yet.  the tickets we got, though, were $30 ones, which is far less than i would have been willing to pay.

[murlough23]

I'd say they're worth it if you're into what they're doing now. Don't expect the setlist to hit all of your classic favorites; do expect at least one surprise song choice from the olden days. (Those who saw the band on SNL this weekend know what I mean.) I like pretty much their entire discography (the few weaker entries are likely to be ignored), so for a first timer, I'm sure I'll have a blast. I think it's worth the high asking price to at least see them once. I probably wouldn't go see them every tour.

All of that said, Bono's live performances have begun to sound weaker and wackier as the years have gone by.

So Muse is their opening band? Is that true for the entire North American tour?

EDIT: A few "lucky" folks on the West Coast, us included, get the Black Eyed Peas as an opener instead. I'd rather have Muse, and I don't even like Muse.

[danny316]

I'd say they're worth it if you're into what they're doing now.

I wouldn't say that I'm into it. NLOTH hasn't even found it's way into my CD collection yet - a few songs were decent enough, but between the songs I actually hated and the ones that bored me, I was pretty well convinced from the release blitz that this was some of their worst material in a while (although I suppose ATYCLB wasn't that long ago in U2 terms...)

Don't expect the setlist to hit all of your classic favorites;

Of course - they've actually NEVER played some of my classic favorites. It's a major strike against them that crud like "Moment of Surrender" can be a setlist staple while they won't even bother attempting "Acrobat" live.

do expect at least one surprise song choice from the olden days. (Those who saw the band on SNL this weekend know what I mean.)

Surprising, but not too exciting. Of all the classics to revive and update a little - "Ultraviolet"? Really? Is there anyone that considers that the great underrated U2 classic they should play more live?

I like pretty much their entire discography (the few weaker entries are likely to be ignored), so for a first timer, I'm sure I'll have a blast. I think it's worth the high asking price to at least see them once. I probably wouldn't go see them every tour.

http://u2tours.com/ is a great resource for seeing what they're playing on any given tour. Some interesting songs from the back of the discography have popped up ("Stay" and "Electrical Storm" stand out), but it looks like they're playing ~10 megahits each night and delivering plenty of filler (how did The Unforgettable Fire get to be so well-represented at shows in 2009?). I'm starting to wonder if a per-song concert rating system similar to your current Epinions system would help evaluate shows like this.

All of that said, Bono's live performances have begun to sound weaker and wackier as the years have gone by.

I generally agree, but how did he pull off Miss Sarajevo repeatedly on the Vertigo tour?

At least we have DVD's of the '90's tours to remind us of when Bono would try to hit all the notes...

So Muse is their opening band? Is that true for the entire North American tour?

EDIT: A few "lucky" folks on the West Coast, us included, get the Black Eyed Peas as an opener instead. I'd rather have Muse, and I don't even like Muse.

BEP is better than Muse in my book, but neither is really what I'd expect in a U2 opener. I don't recall the previous album's tours having such lousy openers...

[murlough23]

I wouldn't say that I'm into it. NLOTH hasn't even found it's way into my CD collection yet - a few songs were decent enough, but between the songs I actually hated and the ones that bored me, I was pretty well convinced from the release blitz that this was some of their worst material in a while

I like more than I don't like about it. If you differ on this point, you should probably stay home.

Of course - they've actually NEVER played some of my classic favorites. It's a major strike against them that crud like "Moment of Surrender" can be a setlist staple while they won't even bother attempting "Acrobat" live.

Once I got over the fact that Bono kills the intimacy by singing the verses too loud, I found that I really liked MOS.

Now, MOS with odd name-dropping rap verses drowning out Edge's solo, that's a tough sell.

Surprising, but not too exciting. Of all the classics to revive and update a little - "Ultraviolet"? Really? Is there anyone that considers that the great underrated U2 classic they should play more live?

Yeah, that baffled me to. It is the one and only track on Achtung Baby that I'm lukewarm about.

http://u2tours.com/ is a great resource for seeing what they're playing on any given tour. Some interesting songs from the back of the discography have popped up ("Stay" and "Electrical Storm" stand out), but it looks like they're playing ~10 megahits each night and delivering plenty of filler (how did The Unforgettable Fire get to be so well-represented at shows in 2009?).

I like TUF and consider it a bit underrated, but then, it is represented on the band's Best of the 80's disc. Nice to know that's in the setlist. I don't want to know too much else about the setlist - part of the fun of concerts is having that be a surprise. (This is why I'm skipping Switchfoot this year. I'm sure I'll probably enjoy Hello Hurricane. I'm also sure I don't want to hear anybody's entire album IN ORDER at a concert.)

I'm starting to wonder if a per-song concert rating system similar to your current Epinions system would help evaluate shows like this.

Interesting idea. I'd try it if I still did concert reviews, but then, the price of a concert can vary wildly, so I'd say the number of songs played might be more important than the song selection. It's hard to quantify, though.

I generally agree, but how did he pull off Miss Sarajevo repeatedly on the Vertigo tour?

If his crappier vocals are not a result of ailing vocal chords, it's an artistic choice, and a bad one at that. Either way, Bono makes me wince on several occasions these days.

BEP is better than Muse in my book, but neither is really what I'd expect in a U2 opener. I don't recall the previous album's tours having such lousy openers...

I just can't figure out in what universe BEP and U2 belong together. I really don't like this practice of throwing random hip-hop acts onto rock tours, even when the hip-hop acts are good. Muse makes sense because they are an acclaimed Britrock act that is apparently going places in several countries other than the US; nice of U2 to give 'em a bit more exposure here. Even though Muse isn't really my thing, I could probably warm up to them enough to enjoy them as an opener.

[danny316]

(This is why I'm skipping Switchfoot this year. I'm sure I'll probably enjoy Hello Hurricane. I'm also sure I don't want to hear anybody's entire album IN ORDER at a concert.)

I didn't know they were doing that. I've fallen out of the SF loop since moving to an area they don't really tour in (not their fault, we have no appropriate venues for a band at their level of popularity).

FWIW, Derek Webb did the whole Stockholm Syndrome album in order last week and it went just fine. He stops in the middle for an all-request acoustic set, and his amusing between song stories brought more than enough surprise to the night. The shock of just how some of the songs are really assembled also helped to keep things plenty surprising even though we did know the material (of course, he had to apologize to the people who didn't...)

[murlough23]

Dude, I can't even fathom how Stockholm Syndrome would work live. Must have been fascinating. Unless he just strummed chords or something.

[Ian]

Only band I'd pay over $50 to see is Radiohead, and that's just because I haven't seen them yet and they're my favorite band.

[bloop]

I'd pay $50 to see Radiohead again, but I want to see Bob Dylan or a Flaming Lips show, since I haven't been to any of theirs.

[Josh]

I paid close to $150 for my ticket to the Vertigo tour, and it was some of the best money I ever spent-- perhaps the best rock concert (as opposed to intimate club shows) I've been too. (David Byrne might be a close second.)

[Aaron]

Danny, you think Black Eyed Peas are better than Muse?  Have you heard BEP lately?  Utter garbage.  If not for Will.I.Am, that group is 3 mediocre hacks.  Ever since Fergie joined the group, they have gone downhill from a talent standpoint.  BEP opening for U2 makes as much sense as if KJ-52 opened up for Demon Hunter.  To each their own with their opinions, but I just can't understand why you think BEP > Muse.

[Ian]

Yeah... why anyone would rather see BEP over Muse is beyond me.  Even if you don't like Muse that much, no one can really deny that they put on one of the best shows in the industry right now.

[spacebrat311]

Now I'm all considering going just for Muse.

OH WAIT my area gets BEP.

I have Stockholm Syndrome stuck in my head now.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4033433299575277265#

[Ian]

I have Stockholm Syndrome stuck in my head now.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4033433299575277265#

Now would you rather see that... or this bullshit.

[bethany]

I wouldn't pay $60 to see U2, especially not for the crappy seats. Then again, I've seen them once before and I was extremely close to the stage, so I don't really feel the need to ever see them in concert again. I doubt I'd pay over $40 or so for anyone except maybe Radiohead, and that probably only to see them once.

[murlough23]

Yeah, my usual rule with the big-name bands that cost a lot of money to see is that I should see them once before I die, and then only if they're known for putting on an excellent live show. For me the money is a secondary concern (I'm not made of money or anything, but I can spring for an expensive concert now and then without breaking the bank) - the primary concern is the amount of hassle it will take to work out the logistics, drive to the concert, park, fight the crowds, etc. This U2 thing is looking like it'll become an all-day event, as early as we're being advised to show up to avoid parking hassles and waiting in long lines, etc. So there's a high likelihood that even if it's the best concert ever, I might not see them again for a while.

I love Dave Matthews Band, and before U2, spending $50 on one of their concerts was the most I'd ever spent on a single ticket. They were worth it (despite having to put up with Macy Gray and Widespread Panic and thousands of weed-smoking hippies), but I don't feel the need to see them again, even as much as I love their new album.

[spacebrat311]

This topic has thrown me into a huge Muse kick in a way topics about Muse couldn't for some reason.

[murlough23]

This topic has thrown me into a huge Muse kick in a way topics about Muse couldn't for some reason.

It's actually made me slightly curious, despite my unpleasant past experience. I could be opening to listening to the Resistance at this point. (I listened to the tracks that were Pubbed, and I wasn't blown away, but they were somewhat interesting.)

NP: "Runaway", Yeah Yeah Yeahs

[bethany]

When I saw U2, Kanye West was opening.

[spacebrat311]

When I saw U2, Kanye West was opening.

I'm excited for you, and I'mma let you finish...

[murlough23]

When I saw U2, Kanye West was opening.

What did they call that, the Obnoxious Blowhard Tour?

(Sorry, Bono. You know I still love you, man.)

[bloop]

I'm just amazed Kanye is willing to open for anyone.

[murlough23]

I just got this funny image of Kanye interrupting Bono while plugging the ONE campaign.

"But UNICEF started the greatest charity of all time! OF ALL TIME!"

[danny316]

Danny, you think Black Eyed Peas are better than Muse?  Have you heard BEP lately?  Utter garbage.  If not for Will.I.Am, that group is 3 mediocre hacks.  Ever since Fergie joined the group, they have gone downhill from a talent standpoint.  BEP opening for U2 makes as much sense as if KJ-52 opened up for Demon Hunter.  To each their own with their opinions, but I just can't understand why you think BEP > Muse.

I can't say I make a habit of following groups that I don't particularly care for. Of what I've heard from each group, I like more BEP songs. I also dislike more BEP songs than Muse songs, but part of that is caused by Muse's material that I've heard sounding so samey that I never bothered to tell any of their songs apart. I never liked Fergie either, but at least I can point to some of the BEP stuff from before 2004 and say it wasn't bad. I'm yet to hear anything interesting from Muse.

If the whole group here is saying they've grown that much, I guess I should give them another shot. It has been a few years since I first heard them and thought that they sounded like a blander version of latter-day Plus One, and it is completely plausible that Muse could be worth taking seriously now. So far, though, I'm not getting it.

[murlough23]

I sort of liked latter-day Plus One. 

[danny316]

I paid close to $150 for my ticket to the Vertigo tour, and it was some of the best money I ever spent-- perhaps the best rock concert (as opposed to intimate club shows) I've been too. (David Byrne might be a close second.)

What sort of seats did $150 get you? I seem to recall you being able to see the band without the aid of a jumbotron.

From what I've seen of both tours so far, Vertigo was by far the better tour. It helps that they had a better album of source material to work with, though, and that crazy nostalgic streak for stuff from Boy didn't hurt either. Fans even convinced Bono to peform "The First Time" for the first time! Now if only "30 years!" meant as much to them as "25 years!" did...

[spacebrat311]

Blander version of latter-day Plus One? What band were you listening to?

By most accounts though, their first three albums were their heyday.

[murlough23]

Blander version of latter-day Plus One? What band were you listening to?

You'll have to excuse Danny. His negative hyperbole is as off the charts as Ian's and Josh's positive hyperbole.

[Ian]

latter day plus one, why you little >:O

[Aaron]

bland? I didn't know we were talking about Jennifer Knapp...   FIGHT THREAD! haha



but honestly, at least Muse plays their own instruments.  Plus One had half the Newsboys playing on their Exodus album (explains the blandness)

[murlough23]

Wow. Some people just have no souls.

[Aaron]

 

[danny316]

Blander version of latter-day Plus One? What band were you listening to?

By most accounts though, their first three albums were their heyday.

...then maybe I should just sit them out. Checking Wikipedia now, it looks like the first three albums were the ones I've probably heard part of.

Plus One wasn't that bad near the end of their careers. I don't actually own Exodus, but I wouldn't mock anyone for having it either. The first time I heard Muse, I was pretty sure I was hearing a disappointing new Plus One single, but a lyrics search revealed who the song was really by.

You'll have to excuse Danny. His negative hyperbole is as off the charts as Ian's and Josh's positive hyperbole.

Negative hyperbole? It's not like anyone around here has heard what I think of Hillary Duff. I'd consider "lousy" to be a pretty tame term for dismissing a band as not worth my time, particularly considering how many people are always saying everything "sucks".

Then again, I guess you have heard me go off on Third Day... but generally, unless someone is truly, extraordinarily terrible like Duff or Third Day, I'm not likely to complain too much. Life's too short to pick on people for liking mediocre music - to the extent that I follow this online, it's to decide what I should try out because I might like it (liking stuff that I don't might undercut your authority as someone I'd look to for tips, but it's not that much of a strike either).

[murlough23]

Plus One wasn't that bad near the end of their careers. I don't actually own Exodus, but I wouldn't mock anyone for having it either.

Same here. Though I would expect to be mocked for having it. But I don't have it.

Negative hyperbole? It's not like anyone around here has heard what I think of Hillary Duff. I'd consider "lousy" to be a pretty tame term for dismissing a band as not worth my time, particularly considering how many people are always saying everything "sucks".

I thought the invocation of Plus One was the hyperbole. Now I realize you thought they were middling, so never mind. It's not as harsh of a statement as I thought it was. Though it's still pretty funny. (Now if you'd said early Plus One...)

Then again, I guess you have heard me go off on Third Day...

Go back in time to about 2001 at the latest, and that statement might have pissed me off. These days, I marginally enjoy a few songs, but I'm mostly in agreement with you that they're pretty bland.

NP: "In My Arms", Plumb

[spacebrat311]

Thinking about it some more, I can see how "Poor Man" kind of sounds like watered-down Muse if you were to turn the volume and intricacy down by about half.

in my head at the moment ( and a good measure of whether or not you could like the band, even if the shooting of the concert is absolutely horrendous): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttsByQWvIEw&feature=related

[murlough23]

Thinking about it some more, I can see how "Poor Man" kind of sounds like watered-down Muse if you were to turn the volume and intricacy down by about half.

"Poor Man" is my favorite song of theirs, so if Muse does that, but better, then sign me up.

[Ian]

"Poor Man" is my favorite song of theirs, so if Muse does that, but better, then sign me up.

Muse shits all over "Poor Man" on a regular basis.  They don't even sound that similar to begin with though.

[murlough23]

Muse shits all over "Poor Man" on a regular basis.

That explains the smell.

[danny316]

Sticking with the tangent, I actually picked up Absolution a few months back because someone was giving it away. There was actually one song on there I liked at first listen! More than I expected. I may give them more of a shot after all, although the theatrical histrionics and generic early 00's sounds still bug me like nobody's business.