Crowdsourcing "Unlikely to Happen"

HughFreakingDillon

SPEEDY MCCREADY said:

Nobody needs to get upset
Nobody needs to take it as a personal insult
Nobody needs to bring up the bands personal lives

Its just a fact
Our boys don't play many shows in the states
And they haven't for almost 10 years

Personally I think they should go on a 100-150 show, 2 year, FULL BLOWN tour of the USA.
They should be able to handle this.
They are obviously well rested.

I didn't notice anyone getting upset.

correct, it is a fact. and it's probably only going to get less frequent! buckle up folks, we're in the home stretch!

joberschlake

HesCalledDyer said:

Pearl Jam is the only band that popped up 25 years ago that is still going today. I don't see why we can't be happy with what they give us, not judge them on what they may or not prefer regarding touring, and leave their personal lives completely out of it.

There are other bands from that era that still tour and do more shows.

HesCalledDyer

jennycoyle said:

mcgruff10 said:

HesCalledDyer said:

Pearl Jam is the only band that popped up 25 years ago that is still going today. I don't see why we can't be happy with what they give us, not judge them on what they may or not prefer regarding touring, and leave their personal lives completely out of it.

dave matthews? sound garden? phish?

Eh Metallica, Megadeth, Iron Maiden, the Offspring!

Don't think he really thought that post through haha

Ok, I forgot Dave Matthews. All the other bands mentioned popped up well before 25 years ago, and Soundgarden took a 12+ year hiatus. Regardless, that wasn't the point.

LeafsJaysCubsRaptorsFan

mcgruff10 said:

oftenreading said:

SPEEDY MCCREADY said:

mcgruff10 said:

dimitrispearljam said:

mcgruff10 said:

dimitrispearljam said:

pjhawks said:

MayDay10 said:

I think there has been a balance struck that has contributed to both the longevity of the band, and the output of each and every show. if they want/need time off I don't read it as them not loving music. Just recharging batteries. it has to be exhausting playing a leg of a tour at this age.

do people think that the 1996 version would have flown into nyc and played forest hills? Serious question I don't know.

agree. I think these shorter tours have been great for the level of energy, quality of the shows and Ed's voice. 2003 was great but no doubt when you go on a 70 date tour there is gonna be some duds in there just because you are tired or not feeling it. I'd rather have 10-15 kick ass shows every 12 months than 70 one year with duds thrown in then nothing for 3 or 4 years. right now I think it's a nice mix.

i agree100%..plus the quality of the shows now is unreal and 3 hours shows..
2003 was 2 hours show and they was 12 years younger..

it d be nice if they went from 10-15 shows a year to 30 to 40 spread out over two or three "tours". i'm not thinking the quality of the show would go down at all.

seems they have a way to control their energy by the way the choose touring ..dont forget,they write music,they play benefit sows,they doing side project,they play shows with other bands,they tour as welll as matt..so..seems they doing the right thing and are happy with it and they quality is in max level...travelng,changing countries and continents,preparing,and all that..is noit easy at all...

I am pretty sure they could keep their energy up playing thirty five shows a year or the equal of ten percent of the calendar year. They can rest the other 90% of the year.

Pretty sure The Who is playing more shows in the USA the last couple tours than Pearl Jam has played in the last 5-6 tours combined.

The guys in The Who apparently need the money. Not sure what they've done with the rest of it up to this point.

Who cares what they did with their money. The point is, they are playing a full tour!

And tickets are readily available on groupon plus they've postponed some shows already

mcgruff10

LeafsJaysCubsRaptorsFan said:

mcgruff10 said:

oftenreading said:

SPEEDY MCCREADY said:

mcgruff10 said:

dimitrispearljam said:

mcgruff10 said:

dimitrispearljam said:

pjhawks said:

MayDay10 said:

I think there has been a balance struck that has contributed to both the longevity of the band, and the output of each and every show. if they want/need time off I don't read it as them not loving music. Just recharging batteries. it has to be exhausting playing a leg of a tour at this age.

do people think that the 1996 version would have flown into nyc and played forest hills? Serious question I don't know.

agree. I think these shorter tours have been great for the level of energy, quality of the shows and Ed's voice. 2003 was great but no doubt when you go on a 70 date tour there is gonna be some duds in there just because you are tired or not feeling it. I'd rather have 10-15 kick ass shows every 12 months than 70 one year with duds thrown in then nothing for 3 or 4 years. right now I think it's a nice mix.

i agree100%..plus the quality of the shows now is unreal and 3 hours shows..
2003 was 2 hours show and they was 12 years younger..

it d be nice if they went from 10-15 shows a year to 30 to 40 spread out over two or three "tours". i'm not thinking the quality of the show would go down at all.

seems they have a way to control their energy by the way the choose touring ..dont forget,they write music,they play benefit sows,they doing side project,they play shows with other bands,they tour as welll as matt..so..seems they doing the right thing and are happy with it and they quality is in max level...travelng,changing countries and continents,preparing,and all that..is noit easy at all...

I am pretty sure they could keep their energy up playing thirty five shows a year or the equal of ten percent of the calendar year. They can rest the other 90% of the year.

Pretty sure The Who is playing more shows in the USA the last couple tours than Pearl Jam has played in the last 5-6 tours combined.

The guys in The Who apparently need the money. Not sure what they've done with the rest of it up to this point.

Who cares what they did with their money. The point is, they are playing a full tour!

And tickets are readily available on groupon plus they've postponed some shows already

Last time I checked pj usually has tickets readily available for most of their shows. Groupon is something they haven't done. And again who cares if tickets are available, they are touring!

deadendp

hedonist said:

Here we are now - entertain us!

Maybe they live a charmed life but they've paid their dues. I don't know what their daily lives consist of - does anyone here?

My guess is that, as Dimitris said above, they have other things going on. They have paid their dues and do tour, but not exhaustively so. Many of them have kids and I suspect that they don't want to be just road dads.

bootlegger10

They can do what they want but don't forget that they got paid a ton of money by a lot of us. They don't owe us a tour but they also don't tour for free when they do it. We all have paid $35 for a $5 shirt at a show.

Force Of Nature

I'm pretty happy with the way things are now. A few years ago I don't think they toured the UK for about 5-6 years (binaural - avocado tours). In the years after that I think they played 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014.

Of course I cant say all countries have been that lucky but in my mind, that's a pretty good return

HughFreakingDillon

bootlegger10 said:

They can do what they want but don't forget that they got paid a ton of money by a lot of us. They don't owe us a tour but they also don't tour for free when they do it. We all have paid $35 for a $5 shirt at a show.

I have zero idea how the amount they charge for shirts has anything to do with the frequency in which they should tour. I wish they woukd charge more to reduce the flippability of them. Then maybe i could score one!

mcgruff10

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

They can do what they want but don't forget that they got paid a ton of money by a lot of us. They don't owe us a tour but they also don't tour for free when they do it. We all have paid $35 for a $5 shirt at a show.

I have zero idea how the amount they charge for shirts has anything to do with the frequency in which they should tour. I wish they woukd charge more to reduce the flippability of them. Then maybe i could score one!

I loathe the guy in front of me at the last St. Louis show who bought the last ten show specific shirts. What an ass.

bootlegger10

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

They can do what they want but don't forget that they got paid a ton of money by a lot of us. They don't owe us a tour but they also don't tour for free when they do it. We all have paid $35 for a $5 shirt at a show.

I have zero idea how the amount they charge for shirts has anything to do with the frequency in which they should tour. I wish they woukd charge more to reduce the flippability of them. Then maybe i could score one!

It is for the people that say they don't owe us anything or they have already done so much for us. Like we haven't paid for every bit of what they have "given us". That's all I'm saying.

HughFreakingDillon

bootlegger10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

They can do what they want but don't forget that they got paid a ton of money by a lot of us. They don't owe us a tour but they also don't tour for free when they do it. We all have paid $35 for a $5 shirt at a show.

I have zero idea how the amount they charge for shirts has anything to do with the frequency in which they should tour. I wish they woukd charge more to reduce the flippability of them. Then maybe i could score one!

It is for the people that say they don't owe us anything or they have already done so much for us. Like we haven't paid for every bit of what they have "given us". That's all I'm saying.

When people refer to what the band has given them, they aren't talking about shirts or cd's. They are talking about how their music has touched their soul, how their songs have lifted them in tough times, for many people, even having it go as deep as saving their lives.

You cant buy that.

MayDay10

Agreed.


Also this thread breaks the record for the longest crowd sourcing thread!

badbrains

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

They can do what they want but don't forget that they got paid a ton of money by a lot of us. They don't owe us a tour but they also don't tour for free when they do it. We all have paid $35 for a $5 shirt at a show.

I have zero idea how the amount they charge for shirts has anything to do with the frequency in which they should tour. I wish they woukd charge more to reduce the flippability of them. Then maybe i could score one!

It is for the people that say they don't owe us anything or they have already done so much for us. Like we haven't paid for every bit of what they have "given us". That's all I'm saying.

When people refer to what the band has given them, they aren't talking about shirts or cd's. They are talking about how their music has touched their soul, how their songs have lifted them in tough times, for many people, even having it go as deep as saving their lives.

You cant buy that.

"Can't buy what I want because it's free"

jerparker20

MayDay10 said:

Agreed.


Also this thread breaks the record for the longest crowd sourcing thread!

Hooray!!!

bootlegger10

IBTL