For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
keithglimmer
To be fair to Simmons he said they WOULD be like little girls if they dressed up in that silly costume he wears.
Quote
bitusa2012Quote
keithglimmer
To be fair to Simmons he said they WOULD be like little girls if they dressed up in that silly costume he wears.
Ah yes, but why spoil a good thread title with a bit of accuracy?
Quote
OpenG
Gene had problems with Ace - here Ace doing a great cover of 2000 Man
KISS: 2000 Man (NYC ~ Aug 9, 1995
[www.youtube.com]
Quote
More Hot Rocks
Simmons is just frustrated over the sexual battery charges...
[www.iheartradio.ca]
And he settles
[www.spin.com]
Quote
Jah Paul
Misleading thread title...and he was talking about the weight of his outfits.
Quote
More Hot Rocks
Simmons is just frustrated over the sexual battery charges...
[www.iheartradio.ca]
And he settles
[www.spin.com]
Quote
buttons67
i think bono always sees the stones as a competition, and maybe thats why the stones have continued for as long, but based on stats u2 will always prevail because they overlap by about 16 years, thats 16 years u2 can play more stadiums, charge higher prices due to inflation and get more hits on social media, spotify,downloads etc which counts as a unit of sales.
so it will always appear that u2 have done more, done it bigger, made more etc and people will think they are the better band.
what u2 have skillfully done too is their historical setlist. over 900 songs played live, but over 400 are just snippets. even tells you on u2,s official site, individual concerts, or individual songs and whats been snippeted, it actually uses the word snippeted, and they have done it a lot. if u2 only set out to beat the stones regarding stats it wont work, u2 lost their soul in the joshua tree concert gigs, completely missing out so many songs that made them the band they were, and inserting 7 joshua tree songs and 4 snippeted songs to total 20. snippeted songs lasts for seconds, and the first 4 albums were only represented by 5 songs during the joshua tree concerts in 1987. i saw them in glasgow then, felt the setlist was all wrong and quickly got out of u2 as quickly as i got into the stones. thier total repertoire of songs played live by snippeting half the total lost them my respect.
to me the stones will always be better,and i feel bono cant handle that. i love u2 early days, they left behind everything that was good about them too quickly. theres just no competition.
Quote
keithglimmerQuote
More Hot Rocks
Simmons is just frustrated over the sexual battery charges...
[www.iheartradio.ca]
And he settles
[www.spin.com]
And gets sued again
[pitchfork.com]
Quote
buttons67
i think bono always sees the stones as a competition, and maybe thats why the stones have continued for as long, but based on stats u2 will always prevail because they overlap by about 16 years, thats 16 years u2 can play more stadiums, charge higher prices due to inflation and get more hits on social media, spotify,downloads etc which counts as a unit of sales.
so it will always appear that u2 have done more, done it bigger, made more etc and people will think they are the better band.
what u2 have skillfully done too is their historical setlist. over 900 songs played live, but over 400 are just snippets. even tells you on u2,s official site, individual concerts, or individual songs and whats been snippeted, it actually uses the word snippeted, and they have done it a lot. if u2 only set out to beat the stones regarding stats it wont work, u2 lost their soul in the joshua tree concert gigs, completely missing out so many songs that made them the band they were, and inserting 7 joshua tree songs and 4 snippeted songs to total 20. snippeted songs lasts for seconds, and the first 4 albums were only represented by 5 songs during the joshua tree concerts in 1987. i saw them in glasgow then, felt the setlist was all wrong and quickly got out of u2 as quickly as i got into the stones. thier total repertoire of songs played live by snippeting half the total lost them my respect.
to me the stones will always be better,and i feel bono cant handle that. i love u2 early days, they left behind everything that was good about them too quickly. theres just no competition.
Quote
buttons67
i think bono always sees the stones as a competition, and maybe thats why the stones have continued for as long, but based on stats u2 will always prevail because they overlap by about 16 years, thats 16 years u2 can play more stadiums, charge higher prices due to inflation and get more hits on social media, spotify,downloads etc which counts as a unit of sales.
This.Quote
georgie48Quote
buttons67
i think bono always sees the stones as a competition, and maybe thats why the stones have continued for as long, but based on stats u2 will always prevail because they overlap by about 16 years, thats 16 years u2 can play more stadiums, charge higher prices due to inflation and get more hits on social media, spotify,downloads etc which counts as a unit of sales.
I remember this was said about Michael Jackson too. But ..... he didn't prevail.
It's just silly to make these comparisons. The Stones are the Stones: unique ... and they are the teachers, and U2 is U2: unique ... and they are the students. This will never change as long as the sun keeps shining and the human race prevails
Quote
buttons67
i think bono always sees the stones as a competition, and maybe thats why the stones have continued for as long, but based on stats u2 will always prevail because they overlap by about 16 years, thats 16 years u2 can play more stadiums, charge higher prices due to inflation and get more hits on social media, spotify,downloads etc which counts as a unit of sales.
so it will always appear that u2 have done more, done it bigger, made more etc and people will think they are the better band.
what u2 have skillfully done too is their historical setlist. over 900 songs played live, but over 400 are just snippets. even tells you on u2,s official site, individual concerts, or individual songs and whats been snippeted, it actually uses the word snippeted, and they have done it a lot. if u2 only set out to beat the stones regarding stats it wont work, u2 lost their soul in the joshua tree concert gigs, completely missing out so many songs that made them the band they were, and inserting 7 joshua tree songs and 4 snippeted songs to total 20. snippeted songs lasts for seconds, and the first 4 albums were only represented by 5 songs during the joshua tree concerts in 1987. i saw them in glasgow then, felt the setlist was all wrong and quickly got out of u2 as quickly as i got into the stones. thier total repertoire of songs played live by snippeting half the total lost them my respect.
to me the stones will always be better,and i feel bono cant handle that. i love u2 early days, they left behind everything that was good about them too quickly. theres just no competition.
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
buttons67
i think bono always sees the stones as a competition, and maybe thats why the stones have continued for as long, but based on stats u2 will always prevail because they overlap by about 16 years, thats 16 years u2 can play more stadiums, charge higher prices due to inflation and get more hits on social media, spotify,downloads etc which counts as a unit of sales.
so it will always appear that u2 have done more, done it bigger, made more etc and people will think they are the better band.
what u2 have skillfully done too is their historical setlist. over 900 songs played live, but over 400 are just snippets. even tells you on u2,s official site, individual concerts, or individual songs and whats been snippeted, it actually uses the word snippeted, and they have done it a lot. if u2 only set out to beat the stones regarding stats it wont work, u2 lost their soul in the joshua tree concert gigs, completely missing out so many songs that made them the band they were, and inserting 7 joshua tree songs and 4 snippeted songs to total 20. snippeted songs lasts for seconds, and the first 4 albums were only represented by 5 songs during the joshua tree concerts in 1987. i saw them in glasgow then, felt the setlist was all wrong and quickly got out of u2 as quickly as i got into the stones. thier total repertoire of songs played live by snippeting half the total lost them my respect.
to me the stones will always be better,and i feel bono cant handle that. i love u2 early days, they left behind everything that was good about them too quickly. theres just no competition.
U2 have never claimed to be bigger than the Stones. What U2 did was DESTROY the Stones' biggest tour record ever with one tour, financially by show 74 and attendance wise by show 76 or something like that. That just shows that demand to see U2 was greater than it was for the Stones at that time and that U2 were smart about handling it.
That's just fact. That doesn't make them "better", just that they did something bigger sooner once and it was a huge accomplishment. Your opinion of U2 has zero relevance with that. Your opinion that Bono "can't handle that" about what all you jibber on about is absurd. It's not competition. The venues are happy to have them whenever they come around, just like any good/great attendance demanding band/act.
It's not 1965. Some people grow up about music, others stay stuck in some teenage wasteland. Enjoy it.
Quote
GasLightStreet
U2 have never claimed to be bigger than the Stones...
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
buttons67
i think bono always sees the stones as a competition, and maybe thats why the stones have continued for as long, but based on stats u2 will always prevail because they overlap by about 16 years, thats 16 years u2 can play more stadiums, charge higher prices due to inflation and get more hits on social media, spotify,downloads etc which counts as a unit of sales.
so it will always appear that u2 have done more, done it bigger, made more etc and people will think they are the better band.
what u2 have skillfully done too is their historical setlist. over 900 songs played live, but over 400 are just snippets. even tells you on u2,s official site, individual concerts, or individual songs and whats been snippeted, it actually uses the word snippeted, and they have done it a lot. if u2 only set out to beat the stones regarding stats it wont work, u2 lost their soul in the joshua tree concert gigs, completely missing out so many songs that made them the band they were, and inserting 7 joshua tree songs and 4 snippeted songs to total 20. snippeted songs lasts for seconds, and the first 4 albums were only represented by 5 songs during the joshua tree concerts in 1987. i saw them in glasgow then, felt the setlist was all wrong and quickly got out of u2 as quickly as i got into the stones. thier total repertoire of songs played live by snippeting half the total lost them my respect.
to me the stones will always be better,and i feel bono cant handle that. i love u2 early days, they left behind everything that was good about them too quickly. theres just no competition.
U2 have never claimed to be bigger than the Stones. What U2 did was DESTROY the Stones' biggest tour record ever with one tour, financially by show 74 and attendance wise by show 76 or something like that. That just shows that demand to see U2 was greater than it was for the Stones at that time and that U2 were smart about handling it.
That's just fact. That doesn't make them "better", just that they did something bigger sooner once and it was a huge accomplishment. Your opinion of U2 has zero relevance with that. Your opinion that Bono "can't handle that" about what all you jibber on about is absurd. It's not competition. The venues are happy to have them whenever they come around, just like any good/great attendance demanding band/act.
It's not 1965. Some people grow up about music, others stay stuck in some teenage wasteland. Enjoy it.