• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

When you think that next bass is "too expensive"...

#141
Michedelic said:
All I know is, I paid $435 for two tickets for this, an old fart nostalgia experience of a different kind…
View attachment 5063767
Last year's line-up was much better, but this will still do. Granted, I was ready when the tix went online pre-sale, but this is still a great per-unit cost breakdown, if you will, even with the bands I don't care about. Plus, I might discover something I like among the newer, bottom of the bill outfits, you never know.
Click to expand...

Always love Gang of 4. Saw them steal the show from The Buzzcocks at Geary Temple in SF in the late 70's. Great show (that surely didn't cost much).
 
  • Like
Reactions: GregC and kreider204
#144
Dynacord said:
Yes, sadly well aware. Current guy really fits though - as does Sara Lee on bass even though she wasn't in the first version. Drummer Hugo is a friend (though I didn't know him way back then).
Click to expand...
I met him briefly back when he was doing A&R for Quincy Jones' label; some friends of mine from my midwest hometown had gotten signed, and they came out to LA to gig and do some business. I was guiding them around, then we met up with him at a sushi place. The juxtaposition of all of this was surreal. Nice bloke, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dynacord
#145
Michedelic said:
What anyone paid for a ticket 50 years ago is irrelevant. Even if you adjust for inflation, consider this…production costs have grown exponentially over the decades. PA systems have become enormous, plus expanded lighting, effects, giant video, bigger crews, communication systems for that crew, then there are roadies/crew just for the acts themselves, with expertise concerning tech that didn't exist 25 years ago, all of which gets written into the ticket price.

The days of reasonably big bands that show up with just a 25 ft box truck containing all their gear(with three or four guys to handle it)and performing by just standing there (maybe hopping around a little)are pretty much over. People expect spectacle, and a flawless 'just like the record' experience. That's why so many you see on stage now aren't really playing. Then there are the pop acts with dancers/backup vocalists.

Add to that the operational and legal costs for the venues. The tragedy of The Who concert in Cincinnati,'79, changed everything. The Great White pyro disaster, even though in a small club, added to that further. Insurance premiums, tour underwriting, an increasingly heavy upgrade in security after 9/11(and in spite of that, the EODM incident occured, although in Paris)…all those sorts of things have become a significant portion of the ticket price, in spite of corporate sponsorship buy-ins. It ain't a groovy time at the Fillmore anymore.
Click to expand...

Yes true, but none of that has to do with ticketmaster/live nation exponentially jacking up the base price of a ticket, using a variety of dubious means, simply because they can.
 
#146
Neil Folkard said:
Yes true, but none of that has to do with ticketmaster/live nation exponentially jacking up the base price of a ticket, using a variety of dubious means, simply because they can.
Click to expand...
Even before this current rampant plague of resale outfits like StubHub, who must be in cahoots with TM, and essentially hold tickets for ransom, and before online sales and distrubution became the norm, ticket prices had inflated exponentially, from typically $3-$4 back in the 'good old days' to $30 and $40, and beyond. That ran hand in hand with the production explosion. As time went on, yes, the ticket companies exploited the situation, and figured that if the public would put up with the price hikes so far, they'd keep edging them up. It's only now that everything is at absurd levels that everyone is aghast, but it's been a long, slow process, with all this legal scalping having been in the shadows for a while.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GregC, Passinwind, Neil Folkard and 2 others
#153
Michedelic said:
What anyone paid for a ticket 50 years ago is irrelevant. Even if you adjust for inflation, consider this…production costs have grown exponentially over the decades. PA systems have become enormous, plus expanded lighting, effects, giant video, bigger crews, communication systems for that crew, then there are roadies/crew just for the acts themselves, with expertise concerning tech that didn't exist 25 years ago, all of which gets written into the ticket price.

The days of reasonably big bands that show up with just a 25 ft box truck containing all their gear(with three or four guys to handle it)and performing by just standing there (maybe hopping around a little)are pretty much over. People expect spectacle, and a flawless 'just like the record' experience. That's why so many you see on stage now aren't really playing. Then there are the pop acts with dancers/backup vocalists.

Add to that the operational and legal costs for the venues. The tragedy of The Who concert in Cincinnati,'79, changed everything. The Great White pyro disaster, even though in a small club, added to that further. Insurance premiums, tour underwriting, an increasingly heavy upgrade in security after 9/11(and in spite of that, the EODM incident occured, although in Paris)…all those sorts of things have become a significant portion of the ticket price, in spite of corporate sponsorship buy-ins. It ain't a groovy time at the Fillmore anymore.
Click to expand...

Right. This thread has basically turned into a contest to see who paid the least to see a popular act a million years ago. Completely irrelevant.

Yes, there are still decent shows you can see for lesser prices in smaller venues, but if you want to see a big act that's in demand in a large venue, you probably won't do it for under $200.
 
#155
Dance wit yo' date to Spyro Gyra for bargain prices:

unnamed.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rabidhamster
#159
TrevorG said:
Fair point. I was considering paying £500 for an upcoming Sting concert and decided it would be easier and cheaper to become the world's best bass player and get him to hire me. Turns out that's quite tricky too.
Click to expand...

Just remembered saying this! Well, just to shut me up Lytham festival rang my work and offered seats in the VVIP section, to all us actors, for all the gigs INCLUDING STING!!!! I'm actually going!!!! Can't believe my luck but am going to practice extra hard just in case….
 
  • Like
Reactions: Passinwind and Dynacord
#160
Rabidhamster said:
Next time you think that bass you want is "too expensive", just put it in perspective. 1 (one) standing room-only orchestra pit ticket to Pearl Jam is $2800.00 before tax, fees and parking. Hope you didn't have a date!
Click to expand...
Meh... the last time I remember "Babs" Streisand performing in Vegas? The "standing room" way up in the cobwebs near the roof - behind a support post - started at around $5,000. I never could figure out which was more ridiculous - the price for just being there - or that people were willing to pay it...:rollno:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rabidhamster

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back