Post Show Banter >>>>

Yada wrote:
lol@lumineers

The Lumineers: More boring than rousing

http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/music/the-lumineers-more-boring-than-rousing/2013/01/31/e8dbdf9e-6b95-11e2-ada0-5ca5fa7ebe79_story.html

"We lust after bands playing old-timey instruments the same way we lust after vintage clothing, craft beer and exposed-filament light bulbs."

i resent having craft beer associated in any way with that band.

sweetcell wrote:

Yada wrote:
lol@lumineers

The Lumineers: More boring than rousing

http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/music/the-lumineers-more-boring-than-rousing/2013/01/31/e8dbdf9e-6b95-11e2-ada0-5ca5fa7ebe79_story.html

"We lust after bands playing old-timey instruments the same way we lust after vintage clothing, craft beer and exposed-filament light bulbs."

i resent having craft beer associated in any way with that band.

You are lame.  And this is the post-show banter thread.  Pretty hard to have post show banter about a show you didn't even attend. 

atomicfront wrote:
You are lame.  And this is the post-show banter thread.  Pretty hard to have post show banter about a show you didn't even attend.  

aww, is lil' atomicfrontie mad because someone insulted his fav band in the whole wide world?  there there… <pats on head>  you just ignore those big mean ol' meanies…

(p.s. if relevance and knowledge were prerequisites for posting in a thread, your post count would be zero).

sweetcell wrote:

atomicfront wrote:
You are lame.&nbsp; And this is the post-show banter thread.&nbsp; Pretty hard to have post show banter about a show you didn&#039;t even attend.&nbsp;&nbsp;

aww, is lil&#039; atomicfrontie mad because someone insulted his fav band in the whole wide world?&nbsp; there there… &lt;pats on head&gt;&nbsp; you just ignore those big mean ol&#039; meanies…

(p.s. if relevance and knowledge were prerequisites for posting in a thread, your post count would be zero).

They aren't my favorite band. Not even in my top 50.  But the fact that you have a bunch of morons on this threads reviewing a show they didn't attend is beyond stupid.  Ok we know pitchfork didn't give them a good review so you don't like them.  But geez do you have to go on and on about it.  We get it.  You were never popular in your life so you take it out on things that are popular. 

atomicfront wrote:
But the fact that you have a bunch of morons on this threads reviewing a show they didn&#039;t attend is beyond stupid.&nbsp;

since reading comprehension isn't your forte, i'll give you some help: i didn't review the show.  i commented about the association made with craft beer.  t'was an on-topic jab.  you're welcome.

I heard a Lumineers song on the radio yesterday.. it was absolutely craptastic…. like bad Dave Matthews and Dave Matthews is pretty bad..

I dont think it was their "hit" as it didn't have a hey ho or what have you part… the lyrics were something like "I need you" or some crap like that…I put it out of mind

when they were done playing it the DJ did a plug for Merriwether show…probably  paid for by IMP.

holy fuck.. i just looked up on google and i guess that was their big hit… it didn't' go i need you i guess but i belong to you..


horrible.

Goddamnit is every thread an argument with Atomicfront now?

I usually ignore him.  I made the mistake of replying to him once.  Never again.

I've largely ignored him for the past few weeks..unfortunately him and ratbastard are killing this forum for me.

hutch wrote:
I&#039;ve largely ignored him for the past few weeks..unfortunately him and ratbastard are killing this forum for me.

I thought you were killing the forum.  As you don't see any bands who have been relevant in the past 25 years and your constant simplistic political views.  You and Ratbastard are quite similar politically.

Am I going to get slammed for bringing my five year old to a Cody Chesnutt show at the Hamilton on Valentine's Day on a school night? She ended up losing maybe 45 mins of sleep.

Cody was very good. Didn?t play any of the old stuff, which was fine because the only song I remember is the one the Roots reworked.. Changed the arrangements to much of the new stuff, which was cool. Though he didn?t have a horn section?.boo. Table service was terrible, food was good, not great. A pitcher of Heavy Seas Loose Cannon was $24, probably a lot cheaper than buying the equivalent of that amount at a 9:30 show. My wife enjoyed the show, my daughter tolerated it tolerated it (the pizza and cake helped), until she fell asleep at the table midway through Cody?s set. However, before falling asleep, she did write a Valentine?s poem (on her own, unprompted):

Choklit is brown
I (symbol for heart) u!
The more you eat
The more you poo

Since I'm the only person who participates in this thread, I'll bump it.

Saw Rancid last night, holy shit it was awesome. I admittedly haven't been to a punk rock show in at least 10 years, but they completely ripped.

I also haven't listened to a new album of theirs since probably 2000, but I liked most of the new (er) material.

The moshing was bonkers.

stones in phily was good… highlight for me was the rambler with mick taylor…real nice… also dead flowers..

almost surely going to pass on the dc show now…

i have to say i'm not sure if keith is even playing most of the time.. to me the whole show seems designed to cover up for the fact he is pretty much done…a lot of smiling on his part but the heavy lifting was done by ronnie….

hutch wrote:
stones in phily was good… highlight for me was the rambler with mick taylor…real nice… also dead flowers..

almost surely going to pass on the dc show now…

i have to say i&#039;m not sure if keith is even playing most of the time.. to me the whole show seems designed to cover up for the fact he is pretty much done…a lot of smiling on his part but the heavy lifting was done by ronnie….

I think he has been done for 30 years.  Anyway you paid for a Stones show but you are complaining about the cost of the Franz Ferdinand show? 

atomicfront wrote:

hutch wrote:
stones in phily was good… highlight for me was the rambler with mick taylor…real nice… also dead flowers..

almost surely going to pass on the dc show now…

i have to say i&#039;m not sure if keith is even playing most of the time.. to me the whole show seems designed to cover up for the fact he is pretty much done…a lot of smiling on his part but the heavy lifting was done by ronnie….

I think he has been done for 30 years.&nbsp; Anyway you paid for a Stones show but you are complaining about the cost of the Franz Ferdinand show?&nbsp;

stones shows cost the same in philly and dc …$85 all in.. pretty close to franz ferdinand's jacked up dc price.. not sure how much franz is when you factor fees.. could be close to $70

The venues the Stone are playing in are more intimate and better sound quality, so those things alone would justify the higher prices, right?

James wrote:
The venues the Stone are playing in are more intimate and better sound quality, so those things alone would justify the higher prices, right?

umm.. I know you didn't have a chance to go to college (I really do hope you are saving up for your kids seeing how they're not going the scholarship route… we're rooting for you guys to get a college educated person in the family) but its called supply and demand.. look it up sometime..

you see, if a lot of people want to see you they pay more money and the venues get bigger… now if you're gary louris, yeah, well you'll be at jammin' java next year

Sorry, would rather give my $25 to a locally owned club with talented performers than $85 to a venue with a corporate name hosting multi-millionaires. That leaves $60 for the college fund and good beer funds!

And my kid's white. Of course she's not going to get any scholarships.

hutch wrote:

James wrote:
The venues the Stone are playing in are more intimate and better sound quality, so those things alone would justify the higher prices, right?

umm.. I know you didn&#039;t have a chance to go to college (I really do hope you are saving up for your kids seeing how they&#039;re not going the scholarship route… we&#039;re rooting for you guys to get a college educated person in the family) but its called supply and demand.. look it up sometime..

you see, if a lot of people want to see you they pay more money and the venues get bigger… now if you&#039;re gary louris, yeah, well you&#039;ll be at jammin&#039; java next year

James wrote:
Sorry, would rather give my $25 to a locally owned club with talented performers than $85 to a venue with a corporate name hosting multi-millionaires. That leaves $60 for the college fund and good beer funds!

And my kid&#039;s white. Of course she&#039;s not going to get any scholarships.

hutch wrote:

James wrote:
The venues the Stone are playing in are more intimate and better sound quality, so those things alone would justify the higher prices, right?

umm.. I know you didn&#039;t have a chance to go to college (I really do hope you are saving up for your kids seeing how they&#039;re not going the scholarship route… we&#039;re rooting for you guys to get a college educated person in the family) but its called supply and demand.. look it up sometime..

you see, if a lot of people want to see you they pay more money and the venues get bigger… now if you&#039;re gary louris, yeah, well you&#039;ll be at jammin&#039; java next year

talented performers? most of the time they have hacks

i wish jammin java had great shows… i'm not too far… but they only have something decent every few months and on ocassion when they do they charge $45 (Dement)…wtf.