fakfak

Because people want them and they have the money. As frustrating as it is, not everyone has a problem with ticket reselling. Many people actually see it as a "no fuss" way to buy a premium seat.

A lot of people have tried for years to fix these issues and the simple fact is, you can't. As long as there are people out there willing to pay huge money for tickets, someone's going to find a way to sell them and get the money. Personally, I don't find linking tickets to ID to be a good solution because it greatly limits what legitimate buyers can do with the tickets they paid for. (ie. difficult to buy them for someone else, difficult to transfer if you can't go.) It is what it is.

I don't see it that way. It's possible to be fine with how he looks on a day to day basis, and yet not feel it's "rock and roll" to be that way on stage. That's not anymore self conscious than wearing an ostentatious spangled shirt on stage that he wouldn't wear off of it.

That's more than I would expect. If he let it grow out, it would probably be about the same as what Will has. (though as a follicly challenged guy myself I have to say Will pulls of the balding look in about the best fashion possible. )

' To be fair, we don't know if he's truly self conscious or if he just doesn't see baldness as something that fits the vibe he wants to project as part of the band. FWIW virtually all the recent photos of him hatless (what few there are) are of him doing things outside the band.

By definition, it's official merch. That doesn't mean it wasn't misrepresented (intentionally or otherwise, though the fact that they're apparently giving out refunds tends to suggest it's the latter.) I would point out that the word "lithograph" is more broadly applied now than it has traditionally been in the past to include a variety of cheaper forms more properly classed as "prints" (posters). Be careful when you buy something like that, and not just from coldplay.com.

He looks a little worse for wear in a couple of those photos. Get some sleep Jonny...

His Ghost Stories kit looks quite different to me from the Yamaha absolutes he's always played, with different lug shapes on the toms and it's unique matte finish. I know he's added more electronic drums, but anyone know what his basic acoustic kit is now?

Largely, it's based on a band's past track record for how well they've drawn. Of course, there's a healthy dose of asking for the moon and seeing if you can get it thrown in as well.

Oh, they're a great live band for sure. (probably the best IMHO)

With Muse, I'm guessing the number has to do with the fact that they're not as popular in the rest of the world as they are in Europe. They can't demand huge guarantees across the board where there are still big regions of the world where they don't draw huge numbers. On their last North American tour, they were playing to half full arenas in many places.

Most of these bands typically make far more than this per show. These numbers represent their minimum guarantees which means promoters have to pay them at least that much to play a gig even if it doesn't draw well. Typically, they get a revenue split on anything drawn over the minimum, so it's not unreasonable for a popular band to be bringing in twice or more their minimum fee on a full show.

Agreed. I've seen more positive reviews of material from the new album than I've seen of Coldplay's work for a long time, certainly more positive of a reception than MX received. It's worth noting that the band that made ghost stories is not the band that made X & Y. They're older and seem to have a much better notion of what type of band they want to be, they're also far more secure in their financial position which tends in most artists to lessen the pressure to produce commercial popular work. I think they made exactly the kind of album they were looking to at this time, and if they decide to change things in the future, it won't be because of any negative reviews. (indeed the shift after X & Y probably had less to do with it's reception than with the fact that producing that album was an arduous process for the band)

Personally, I think the new material generally sounds significantly less produced than the previous 2 albums

The Rolling Stones have had numerous line up changes though. (though the most recent "new" member is Ron Wood and he's been in since the 70's.)

I would be surprised if they did continue without one member. Guy and Will would seem to be the "expendable" members at first glance, but they're very much integrated into the overall band structure. (much moreso than the rhythm section with most bands.) I just don't see them making a go of it without all members.

It just seems to me that the backline and stage placement they've been using so far this era seems set up to work in smaller spaces. I really think we'll see them in some smaller scale shows in the near future, at least in some places.

I don't see that at all. To me, the band was built far more around Chris in the earlier days when most of the songs were built almost exclusively around him on piano or acoustic guitar. To my ear (and eyes) it seems like the band's music has generally featured a more equal contribution from all 4 members as time has gone on. Sure he gets most of the media attention and stuff like that, but he's the front man, that's normal. The viability hierarchy for bands is usually topped by the lead vocalist, with the lead guitarist in 2nd place, and that's more or less the pattern with Coldplay. Chris has always done a ton of solo promo and appeared solo in their videos (Yellow, The Scientist, Strawberry Swing, PoC)

6.9 is actually fairly high by Pitchfork standards. :laugh3:

Unfortunately, if a tour is designed to play a certain type of venue, that often means that tour stops without an appropriately sized venue simply end up getting bypassed. This certainly has been the case with Coldplay tours in the past before they started playing stadiums on a widespread basis. Plenty of major "world tours" skip significant portions of the world. That said, I would not be at all surprised to see the band play some shows in theaters or other sub arena sized venues on whatever sort of tour they end up doing for this album.

A few songs undoubtedly will while the others will fade away, same as with all the other albums.

What you read as bashing, I read as them simply stating they don't really care for any other type of music. They do tend to be very critical of certain other artists, but it always seems to be more about how they operate than about the actual music.

I don't really get an elitist vibe from any of the guys in Arctic Monkeys, rather just the sense that they intend to keep plowing ahead with guitar music because that's what they like. That said, there's no way Arctic Monkeys is or will ever be as prominent a band as Coldplay is. They have a tiny fraction of the global footprint Coldplay does, especially outside the UK. The thing is Coldplay are now a band in their mid to late 30's, they're not young and hip and can never be again, they're pretty much firmly in the elder statesmen bracket by now.

Of course, I never meant to imply it was their fault. I'm just saying that in any discussion of how successful Ghost Stories is likely to be, the important thing is how previous releases have been trending, not why the trend is what it is. Coldplay have never released an album that can't reasonably be considered a commercial success.

Fair enough. The point is VLV was at least a bit polarizing with some people not being overly fond of it's baroque pop aestetic (I'm not one of them, I rather enjoy most of it.)