Clarification

after rereading my post (something i tend not to do even when writing a paper) and reading the comments field, i have to admit that it looks as if i am pissed off at nin, which i am not; that was a damn good show and well worth the money if you include queens of the stone age and death from above 1979. fifty five dollars for the set nin alone played was a bit excessive, but in combination with qotsa and death from above 1979, its well worth the money. i am lucky that i saw them while the openers were playing with them. it doesnt look like they are touring together however, because qotsa is playing at the house of blues in myrtle beach this wednesday night, meaning they are headlining and nin is probably somewhere else. i wonder how much tickets are elsewhere. i bet the tickets price will change based on who is playing with them. its a shitty thing, in my opinion, to charge people fiftyfive dollars for an hour and a half. i mean, i even disapprove of other bands doing that. u2 for example are charging between sixty five and a hundred and sixtyfive dollars a ticket at the same venue in a month. while yes, they have that much material, not all of it is good, and they probably will only play maybe two or two and a half hours, like when i saw them in 2000. its a shitty thing to do and i dislike it when bands think they can overprice their tickets cos they think theyre hotshit or something. its the same strategy, different medium, as what labels do to prices for cds. would anyone pay, say, 15$ for a cd that is maybe thirtyfive minutes long? keep in mind, an album, to be called an album rather than an ep, has to fufill two modern requirements: a) have over eight tracks and b) be longer than thirty minutes. i know i wouldnt; id help myself to their music via ben. its the same thing.
z out