Two vs three

by **Don** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:10 am

Do you prefer two band packages (Yes/ Styx, Def Leppard /Heart) or three band packages (Journey/Foreigner/NR, Motley Crue/Poison/New York Dolls)?
Would you rather have two bands with longer sets or have an extra band tacked on for variety since you're paying a boatload of money for tickets anyway?

by **Archetype** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:11 am

Two bands. Journey headlines, and a special guest with a 50 minute set is how it should be.

by **S2M** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:14 am

Depends on if the bands are ones I haven't seen before. I love seeing RUSH alone. But I did see Candlebox open for them on '94s Counterparts tour. And it was ok.

I saw House of Lords with Bang Tango a couple of winters ago....never saw either so it was cool. With Journey? Now that they have Arnel? I'd rather have 3 bands.... :lol:

by **SF-Dano** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:15 am

In general two bands please. But if it is an all day festival (I know not may of those anymore), I say the more the merrier.

by **Jana** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 5:32 am

Two bands, usually, not three, just because I would prefer a two-hour set always for the headliner. I'm sick of Journey dong 1 1/2 hour gigs at a lot of their shows. You can't dig deep enough, because they have to cover their hits and get in some new songs. Two hours gives you enough time to throw some treats to the longtime fans and play enough of your newer songs from the more recent albums.

by **Ehwmatt** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 5:56 am

Either a headliner for 3 to 3.5 hours or two bands I really like with 90 minutes each. I'm not a fan of the typical set lengths you get with 3+ bands. 45-50 minutes is not enough for any band I think is worth its salt to see live.

by **kgdjpubs** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 6:09 am

Jana wrote:Two bands, usually, not three, just because I would prefer a two-hour set always for the headliner. I'm sick of Journey dong 1 1/2 hour gigs at a lot of their shows. You can't dig deep enough, because they have to cover their hits and get in some new songs. Two hours gives you enough time to throw some treats to the longtime fans and play enough of your newer songs from the more recent albums.

bingo. I get disappointed when you see a headlining band and they don't play 2hrs. Very, very rarely will I go to see a show for the supporting act--it's just not worth the ticket price for a 40-minute set.

by **Melissa** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 6:16 am

I prefer 2 because they usually have some other little unknown "opener" of some sort anyhow even with just 2, so then there's still 3 sets, lol, but at least the 2 known bands' sets are longer than with 3 knowns listed. Less breaks and it's more enjoyable that way IMO.

by **Journey/Survivor** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:26 am

Usually, I prefer only two bands, with them getting longer stage time.

But in this case, Journey, Foreigner and Night Ranger are all on my top 5 favorite bands list. So, it's pretty cool to get to see them together.

by **JRNYMAN** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:07 am

Definitely prefer two over three. If the headliner is the reason you went to the concert, a single opening act would translate to more time on stage by the headliner.

by **S2M** » Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:13 am

JRNYMAN wrote:Definitely prefer two over three. If the headliner is the reason you went to the concert, a single opening act would translate to more time on stage by the headliner.

I tend to agree ONLY if the headlining band has new material out, or a new member you haven't seen. If this is just the same group touring year after year with no new anything - grab a 3rd band.....I don't know how some fans can support the same tired nostalgia acts(Styx, REO...etc) that just tour the D12 year after year after year....I just can't.

MR

Two vs three

Two vs three

Who is online