Dear PJ, don´t be lazy in Europe

dimitrispearljam

so,if eddie start talking to amsterdam about bikes like 1 hour and 10 minutes and and the show goes 4 hours,is all ok then?

pdalowsky

this thread must have been a joke, he just missed the little winky man

CharlieP

mrk2 wrote:

CharlieP wrote:

I´ve never understood why longer is neccesarily better.

I´d much rather have a tight 28 song set than a sloppy 36 set, draining the audience completely as well.

Saw Springsteen last year.
And although he was good he just went on for too long. 3 hours +
You barely couldn´t stand afterwards and had no energy for the final 40 mins (or so) of the show.
Just my 2 cents

3 hours only, that is a short Bruce show. I once stood for over six hours, including 40 minute preset and 4 hours 6 min show

Oh yeah I actually heard about that show in Finland! It was in the papers here in Denmark Legendary

jumbojet

Dear PJ, please play short sets in Europe. Just cannot have any spare time for sightseeing and shopping, because of those sets.

Pegasus

Pingfah wrote:

25 - 30 songs per show is still way more than most bands would play, I think deeming that "lazy" is exceptionally unfair.

though most bands don't charge what they do (sorry still sore about the UK ticket prices).

2 hours set in Europe (PJ I mean) is what we get.. since most places are very strict on curfew, generally 11pm (lots of venues are in the city centre and by-laws enforce it, and the ones outside centre people need to be able to catch public transport back, cars are less prevalent here), and since they don't start until 9 (assuming they're on time!), then they give themselves no leeway for longer sets.

as for 'An evening with PJ', there's been shows billed like that before and it made no difference in the running time (sometimes didn't even mean no opening band).

I'm not complaining, I've resigned myself to it, but that's certainly true.
that said, in 2012 the shows might not have been particularly long but they kicked ass

shep

Suziemay wrote:

shep wrote:

Suziemay wrote:

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm dead serious about insert my hometown here being the center of the universe.

:roll:

funny... i know plenty of people in my hometown that would say the same thing... that doesn't make it true...

You're no fun.

Sorry, I was at work when I replied...

Rarely am I any fun at work

I live in pretty much the only city in the world that doesn't consider itself the center of the universe.... Houston. Pretty hard to have compassion for the rest of you

Eraserhead

The Leeds show is listed as "An Evening With Pearl Jam" on the venue's website.

dimitrispearljam

Eraserhead wrote:

The Leeds show is listed as "An Evening With Pearl Jam" on the venue's website.

:P

pdalowsky

Eraserhead wrote:

The Leeds show is listed as "An Evening With Pearl Jam" on the venue's website.

that sounds just great,

Suziemay

pdalowsky wrote:

Eraserhead wrote:

The Leeds show is listed as "An Evening With Pearl Jam" on the venue's website.

that sounds just great,

I soooooo wanna go to Leeds :( :(

mr.mac

The OP did at least say thank you. :roll:

Holy Hell...

PJ_Soul

CharlieP wrote:

I´ve never understood why longer is neccesarily better.

I´d much rather have a tight 28 song set than a sloppy 36 set, draining the audience completely as well.

Saw Springsteen last year.
And although he was good he just went on for too long. 3 hours +
You barely couldn´t stand afterwards and had no energy for the final 40 mins (or so) of the show.
Just my 2 cents

I just saw a 36 song PJ show it was awesome. I wanted more, and the crowd was completely into it right to the end. :P

PJ_Soul

pdalowsky wrote:

Eraserhead wrote:

The Leeds show is listed as "An Evening With Pearl Jam" on the venue's website.

that sounds just great,

Having no opener is WAY better for people in GA.

PJ_Soul

Pegasus wrote:

Pingfah wrote:

25 - 30 songs per show is still way more than most bands would play, I think deeming that "lazy" is exceptionally unfair.

though most bands don't charge what they do (sorry still sore about the UK ticket prices).

2 hours set in Europe (PJ I mean) is what we get.. since most places are very strict on curfew, generally 11pm (lots of venues are in the city centre and by-laws enforce it, and the ones outside centre people need to be able to catch public transport back, cars are less prevalent here), and since they don't start until 9 (assuming they're on time!), then they give themselves no leeway for longer sets.

as for 'An evening with PJ', there's been shows billed like that before and it made no difference in the running time (sometimes didn't even mean no opening band).

I'm not complaining, I've resigned myself to it, but that's certainly true.
that said, in 2012 the shows might not have been particularly long but they kicked ass

I've paid just as much, and in some cases more, for most of the big bands I have seen this year, and all of their shows were way shorter than any PJ show. So I'm going to say that your statement is not accurate (although I am talking North American, not Europe... so maybe it's accurate in Europe, I don't know - not sure why all those bands would be charging LESS in Europe than in North America though).

KateA

CharlieP wrote:

mrk2 wrote:

CharlieP wrote:

I´ve never understood why longer is neccesarily better.

I´d much rather have a tight 28 song set than a sloppy 36 set, draining the audience completely as well.

Saw Springsteen last year.
And although he was good he just went on for too long. 3 hours +
You barely couldn´t stand afterwards and had no energy for the final 40 mins (or so) of the show.
Just my 2 cents

3 hours only, that is a short Bruce show. I once stood for over six hours, including 40 minute preset and 4 hours 6 min show

Oh yeah I actually heard about that show in Finland! It was in the papers here in Denmark Legendary

Ok, so maybe we should all sign up to the gym now. Still few months to train for the 3+ hours jumping around

KateA

Eraserhead wrote:

The Leeds show is listed as "An Evening With Pearl Jam" on the venue's website.

And they are 100% soundproof - no curfew.....lalala

dankind

Suziemay wrote:

Everyone knows NYC is the center of the universe

High Fidelity 2000

Metro McD wrote:

US 2013: 32 - 37 Songs per Show
EU 2012: 25 - 30 Songs per Show
????????

Would you please give us for the same Ticket Prices the same duration in Europe?
Thank you!

Yeah but this is really the FIRST time they've played sets with a constant 30+ song/3 hour or so length, for the whole tour. This is the first year that's happened. You can't compare it to the past. Just hope they do it for the future.

jumbojet

CharlieP wrote:

I´ve never understood why longer is neccesarily better.

I´d much rather have a tight 28 song set than a sloppy 36 set, draining the audience completely as well.

Saw Springsteen last year.
And although he was good he just went on for too long. 3 hours +
You barely couldn´t stand afterwards and had no energy for the final 40 mins (or so) of the show.
Just my 2 cents

Yeah, you always have to keep them wanting more. :twisted:

High Fidelity 2000

jumbojet wrote:

CharlieP wrote:

I´ve never understood why longer is neccesarily better.

I´d much rather have a tight 28 song set than a sloppy 36 set, draining the audience completely as well.

Saw Springsteen last year.
And although he was good he just went on for too long. 3 hours +
You barely couldn´t stand afterwards and had no energy for the final 40 mins (or so) of the show.
Just my 2 cents

Yeah, you always have to keep them wanting more. :twisted:

I think every band should play 3 hours or more. 36 song sets can still be tight. I doubt Springsteen puts on a sloppy show at this point in the game. Nothing wrong with draining the audience as much as the guys on stage. That means you got your money's worth. The only show that was truly exhausting was Wrigley and that's because of the 3 hour delay. And hell, I wasn't even one of those goofs that waited in line for hours for a poster in the heat during the day.

PJ_Soul

jumbojet wrote:

CharlieP wrote:

I´ve never understood why longer is neccesarily better.

I´d much rather have a tight 28 song set than a sloppy 36 set, draining the audience completely as well.

Saw Springsteen last year.
And although he was good he just went on for too long. 3 hours +
You barely couldn´t stand afterwards and had no energy for the final 40 mins (or so) of the show.
Just my 2 cents

Yeah, you always have to keep them wanting more. :twisted:

At the Vancouver show Eddie said something like, "i know they say you should always leave them wanting more... but fuck that shit!!!" And they continued to play another song, and everyone was very happy.

Feiraco

I

think what's really horseshit was them only playing 12 song sets in 92. Lazy fucks.

LOL!

Metro McD

THANK YOU PEARL JAM!!!!

boyo79

I think it is safe to say the band haven't been 'lazy' with the sets so far on this tour....

jumbojet

boyo79 said:

I think it is safe to say the band haven't been 'lazy' with the sets so far on this tour....

Yeah, there are even complaints about some shows that the band has played too long.:)

josevolution

At least the OP is not asking for hi's name to be added to the list #:-S

mcgruff10

God they ve been so damn lazy in Europe. These set lists are terrible. Time to refund some money to the ticket holders.

deadendp

GP179117 said:

Dear PJ, Fuck Europe. Play North America more.

Absolutely! We won't complain about the number of songs. We're just happy to have you come and hang out for a few hours with us.

PJfanwillneverleave1

Metro McD said:

US 2013: 32 - 37 Songs per Show
EU 2012: 25 - 30 Songs per Show
????????

Would you please give us for the same Ticket Prices the same duration in Europe?
Thank you!

Where they have more,...
Still they take more

evenflow82

One three hour version of RVM.