snooky

http://www.ttsdotcom.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31001

snooky

http://www.ttsdotcom.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31001

john

Heh - I find it funny to read all those posts. I would actually post a
reply there, if I didn't have to register to do so.

Anyway, I was at the ACC show on Monday (the one the guy's referring
to), and I thought it was a great show. Of course, I arrived fashionably
late so as to miss almost all of the opening band. I did catch the last
song they did, which only made me more happy that I came late, because
they were pretty bad.

As for the complaints about the setlist, I have trouble understanding
why people only want to hear the classics - guess what? The songs DON'T
CHANGE. The version of 2 Minutes to Midnight they're playing on this
tour is exactly the same one they played 22 years ago. Not to mention
the fact that there are already many live versions officially released
of that and probably every other classic, in both video and audio
format. Why would you pay $80 to see something only once, when you could
just pay $25 and own it on dvd and watch it as many times as you want?
Looking at it that way, does it not make sense that people should want
to see them play stuff that they can't see elsewhere?

And also, people who were complaining about the setlist after the
concert really have no excuse. This was not the first show on the tour,
therefore everybody at the show should have known the setlist before
they even went. If they knew they were going to be that bored by it,
they could have chosen not to go. I was on the floor pretty close to the
front (a little towards Dave's side of the stage), and the people around
me didn't seem that bored.

john

Heh - I find it funny to read all those posts. I would actually post a
reply there, if I didn't have to register to do so.

Anyway, I was at the ACC show on Monday (the one the guy's referring
to), and I thought it was a great show. Of course, I arrived fashionably
late so as to miss almost all of the opening band. I did catch the last
song they did, which only made me more happy that I came late, because
they were pretty bad.

As for the complaints about the setlist, I have trouble understanding
why people only want to hear the classics - guess what? The songs DON'T
CHANGE. The version of 2 Minutes to Midnight they're playing on this
tour is exactly the same one they played 22 years ago. Not to mention
the fact that there are already many live versions officially released
of that and probably every other classic, in both video and audio
format. Why would you pay $80 to see something only once, when you could
just pay $25 and own it on dvd and watch it as many times as you want?
Looking at it that way, does it not make sense that people should want
to see them play stuff that they can't see elsewhere?

And also, people who were complaining about the setlist after the
concert really have no excuse. This was not the first show on the tour,
therefore everybody at the show should have known the setlist before
they even went. If they knew they were going to be that bored by it,
they could have chosen not to go. I was on the floor pretty close to the
front (a little towards Dave's side of the stage), and the people around
me didn't seem that bored.

snooky

Nah that's crap dude, its only like the second week of the
tour, people would have bought their tickets a month ago.

snooky

Nah that's crap dude, its only like the second week of the
tour, people would have bought their tickets a month ago.

vittorix

you were lucky. "A bullet for Valentine" are no good


I can assure you that Chicago loved yesterday's concert, people all the time
standing and jumping, head-banging, clapping and raising hands

--
ciao
Vittorix

vittorix

you were lucky. "A bullet for Valentine" are no good


I can assure you that Chicago loved yesterday's concert, people all the time
standing and jumping, head-banging, clapping and raising hands

--
ciao
Vittorix

frank the poet

På Thu, 19 Oct 2006 03:54:21 +0200, skrev John <jrtwynam@rogers.com>:


That\s what I\ve been saying. They never change the songs anyway, so why
do people want to hear the same songs over and over again? I mean, if they
made a blues version of "2 minutes...", so ok, but they don`t. They don`t
change ANYTHING, except they got 3 guitars now compared to the 80`s...

frank the poet

På Thu, 19 Oct 2006 03:54:21 +0200, skrev John <jrtwynam@rogers.com>:


That\s what I\ve been saying. They never change the songs anyway, so why
do people want to hear the same songs over and over again? I mean, if they
made a blues version of "2 minutes...", so ok, but they don`t. They don`t
change ANYTHING, except they got 3 guitars now compared to the 80`s...