Jump to content

The reason they are playing all indoor venues...


Nate1647
 Share

Recommended Posts

You LA guys are lucky to have so many outdoor venues that are good for sound. SoCal is a cool place, but I'm never convincing my wife to move there, she's made that very clear to me. Retire one day in FL if I'm lucky. We have wind and rain in NY. Wind can be loud, and physically it actually blows the higher range sound waves and distorts the sound, for those not close. Rain blocks vision as well.

 

If this were the Jones Beach forum instead of TRF, there would be tons of posters shaming me as to how awesome the beach is for concerts ;) The view of the moon reflecting off the ocean from the upper deck during a show is quite unique, but who wants to sit way up there!

 

It's ironic CMS' article had MSG ranked high, which does have good acoustics, but Radio City Music Hall (music....) is supposed to be legendary for sound acoustics. It's actually that R30 light show, being center stage in the balcony fully immersed in the LVS lasers, was unreal. The only lights we saw were the lights Rush wanted us to see! Like hallucinating while straight...yeah right... Love reliving that...hehehe... ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good gawd, you fabulous Rush nerds. Indoor venues are NEVER better than outdoor venues! Acoustics ALWAYS are better outdoors, along with the added bonus of not having 20 thousand sweat-mucked morons' vast array of stenches rolling over you for 3 hours. I specifically am going outta my way to hit the Irvine show (an outdoor amp) instead of hitting the very last show on the tour at the Forum. As much as I love the Forum thanks to my intimate and long history with its ambiance, and as much as I'd like to hit the very last Rush date on what may be their last tour, I opted for the second to last date at Irvine BECAUSE it's outdoor instead of indoor.

 

Special effects are great and all, don't get me wrong. But gimme premium sound and fresh air every time over a sweaty stanky dungeon arena. :)

I agree...You may give up a couple light-show songs until it gets dark (although sunset light does have value)... but the out door sound, especially at Irvine Meadows is superior no doubt. I've got the best of both with Irvine and the Forum on my schedule.

Can you guys compare the Forum and Staples Center for us East coast peeps?

If u have been to both for concerts.

 

I have been to both for many shows.

 

It's probably best to compare the Forum in two modes...in its old capacity, and its newly furbished one.

 

Staples Center is your typical basketball arena. It's in the heart of downtown LA, and I've seen the Stones, Black Eyed Peas, Van Halen, and many others there over the years. As you'd expect with sports arenas, it's cozy, but the reverb echo is perpetually existent and noticeable unless you're up front at the speaker level.

 

In the old days before Staples opened, the Forum was the main indoor joint of all of Los Angeles and environs. Sometimes it'd get some competition musically from the LA Sports Arena, but most acts hit the Forum. It was and remains entrenched in Inglewood, one of the less gentrified and more urbanized districts in central LA. :) It too suffered from reverb echo and an atrocious mezzanine, lavatory, and concession setup. But it was the place to go for the hard rock. When Staples came in, acts started touring over there instead, 'cause it was nicer and newer. But since Madison Square Garden bought out and took over the Forum, spent six months refurbishing and improving acoustics and sound, it's returned to its former glory and then some. I hit the grand reopening of the Forum opening night with the Eagles last year, and the change was remarkable. Best indoor sound I've ever heard in a 20k arena setting, and I was in the upper bowl. The artists are paying attention, as everyone is now playing back at the Forum...Fleetwood Mac just finished 3 or 4 dates there, I saw Aerosmith and Slash last July, U2's got 5 or 6 dates there in June, and of course we all know Rush is finishing their tour there this year.

 

So yeah, if you're hitting SoCal for a show, and you have to hit an indoor arena in LA, you want to hit the Forum over all else. But if you have a choice, hit the outdoor Hollywood Bowl venue instead. :) I still maintain the best Rush show I've ever seen was the '07 Snakes and Arrows date at the Hollywood Bowl.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You LA guys are lucky to have so many outdoor venues that are good for sound.

 

Agreed. Someday I wanna make the trip to Red Rocks though. Best concert venue, indoor or outdoor, in the entire country by most accredited reports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good gawd, you fabulous Rush nerds. Indoor venues are NEVER better than outdoor venues! Acoustics ALWAYS are better outdoors, along with the added bonus of not having 20 thousand sweat-mucked morons' vast array of stenches rolling over you for 3 hours. I specifically am going outta my way to hit the Irvine show (an outdoor amp) instead of hitting the very last show on the tour at the Forum. As much as I love the Forum thanks to my intimate and long history with its ambiance, and as much as I'd like to hit the very last Rush date on what may be their last tour, I opted for the second to last date at Irvine BECAUSE it's outdoor instead of indoor.

 

Special effects are great and all, don't get me wrong. But gimme premium sound and fresh air every time over a sweaty stanky dungeon arena. :)

I agree...You may give up a couple light-show songs until it gets dark (although sunset light does have value)... but the out door sound, especially at Irvine Meadows is superior no doubt. I've got the best of both with Irvine and the Forum on my schedule.

Can you guys compare the Forum and Staples Center for us East coast peeps?

If u have been to both for concerts.

 

I have been to both for many shows.

 

It's probably best to compare the Forum in two modes...in its old capacity, and its newly furbished one.

 

Staples Center is your typical basketball arena. It's in the heart of downtown LA, and I've seen the Stones, Black Eyed Peas, Van Halen, and many others there over the years. As you'd expect with sports arenas, it's cozy, but the reverb echo is perpetually existent and noticeable unless you're up front at the speaker level.

 

In the old days before Staples opened, the Forum was the main indoor joint of all of Los Angeles and environs. Sometimes it'd get some competition musically from the LA Sports Arena, but most acts hit the Forum. It was and remains entrenched in Inglewood, one of the less gentrified and more urbanized districts in central LA. :) It too suffered from reverb echo and an atrocious mezzanine, lavatory, and concession setup. But it was the place to go for the hard rock. When Staples came in, acts started touring over there instead, 'cause it was nicer and newer. But since Madison Square Garden bought out and took over the Forum, spent six months refurbishing and improving acoustics and sound, it's returned to its former glory and then some. I hit the grand reopening of the Forum opening night with the Eagles last year, and the change was remarkable. Best indoor sound I've ever heard in a 20k arena setting, and I was in the upper bowl. The artists are paying attention, as everyone is now playing back at the Forum...Fleetwood Mac just finished 3 or 4 dates there, I saw Aerosmith and Slash last July, U2's got 5 or 6 dates there in June, and of course we all know Rush is finishing their tour there this year.

 

So yeah, if you're hitting SoCal for a show, and you have to hit an indoor arena in LA, you want to hit the Forum over all else. But if you have a choice, hit the outdoor Hollywood Bowl venue instead. :) I still maintain the best Rush show I've ever seen was the '07 Snakes and Arrows date at the Hollywood Bowl.

:goodone:

Before this tour began we the wife and I were researching Staples.

Main Reason I have a Gazillion Marriott points and I could stay at the one right next door for free.

It was an option, but decided on New Orleans.

2 Free Nights and 2 Days on Bourbon, sign me up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good gawd, you fabulous Rush nerds. Indoor venues are NEVER better than outdoor venues! Acoustics ALWAYS are better outdoors, along with the added bonus of not having 20 thousand sweat-mucked morons' vast array of stenches rolling over you for 3 hours. I specifically am going outta my way to hit the Irvine show (an outdoor amp) instead of hitting the very last show on the tour at the Forum. As much as I love the Forum thanks to my intimate and long history with its ambiance, and as much as I'd like to hit the very last Rush date on what may be their last tour, I opted for the second to last date at Irvine BECAUSE it's outdoor instead of indoor.

 

Special effects are great and all, don't get me wrong. But gimme premium sound and fresh air every time over a sweaty stanky dungeon arena. :)

I agree...You may give up a couple light-show songs until it gets dark (although sunset light does have value)... but the out door sound, especially at Irvine Meadows is superior no doubt. I've got the best of both with Irvine and the Forum on my schedule.

Can you guys compare the Forum and Staples Center for us East coast peeps?

If u have been to both for concerts.

 

I have been to both for many shows.

 

It's probably best to compare the Forum in two modes...in its old capacity, and its newly furbished one.

 

Staples Center is your typical basketball arena. It's in the heart of downtown LA, and I've seen the Stones, Black Eyed Peas, Van Halen, and many others there over the years. As you'd expect with sports arenas, it's cozy, but the reverb echo is perpetually existent and noticeable unless you're up front at the speaker level.

 

In the old days before Staples opened, the Forum was the main indoor joint of all of Los Angeles and environs. Sometimes it'd get some competition musically from the LA Sports Arena, but most acts hit the Forum. It was and remains entrenched in Inglewood, one of the less gentrified and more urbanized districts in central LA. :) It too suffered from reverb echo and an atrocious mezzanine, lavatory, and concession setup. But it was the place to go for the hard rock. When Staples came in, acts started touring over there instead, 'cause it was nicer and newer. But since Madison Square Garden bought out and took over the Forum, spent six months refurbishing and improving acoustics and sound, it's returned to its former glory and then some. I hit the grand reopening of the Forum opening night with the Eagles last year, and the change was remarkable. Best indoor sound I've ever heard in a 20k arena setting, and I was in the upper bowl. The artists are paying attention, as everyone is now playing back at the Forum...Fleetwood Mac just finished 3 or 4 dates there, I saw Aerosmith and Slash last July, U2's got 5 or 6 dates there in June, and of course we all know Rush is finishing their tour there this year.

 

So yeah, if you're hitting SoCal for a show, and you have to hit an indoor arena in LA, you want to hit the Forum over all else. But if you have a choice, hit the outdoor Hollywood Bowl venue instead. :) I still maintain the best Rush show I've ever seen was the '07 Snakes and Arrows date at the Hollywood Bowl.

:goodone:

Before this tour began we the wife and I were researching Staples.

Main Reason I have a Gazillion Marriott points and I could stay at the one right next door for free.

It was an option, but decided on New Orleans.

2 Free Nights and 2 Days on Bourbon, sign me up.

 

That Marriott next door is really nice.

 

You made the right choice in choosing New Orleans, I think. :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they play outdoors, the wind may blow the dry ice off the stage when they play the full version of Xanadu

 

 

And an eagle may poop open the amps during Fly By Night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they play outdoors, the wind may blow the dry ice off the stage when they play the full version of Xanadu

 

 

And an eagle may poop open the amps during Fly By Night.

 

How is pooping open done? :LOL:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they play outdoors, the wind may blow the dry ice off the stage when they play the full version of Xanadu

 

 

And an eagle may poop open the amps during Fly By Night.

 

How is pooping open done? :LOL:

 

With such force the amps are broken open by downward pressure.

 

 

 

Fly by night, away from here...

.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they play outdoors, the wind may blow the dry ice off the stage when they play the full version of Xanadu

 

 

And an eagle may poop open the amps during Fly By Night.

 

How is pooping open done? :LOL:

 

With such force the amps are broken open by downward pressure.

 

 

 

Fly by night, away from here...

.

 

:LOL: Sounds like crap.

Edited by EagleMoon
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Forum show will sound better I think. Irvine's a great place if you're in the orchestra or first 10 rows of the loge. The Forum can hold a larger stage. Irvine's is fixed.

 

Outdoor acoustics almost always avoid reverb and carry better sound than indoor arenas. The indoor echo, especially with louder bands, much like Rush, is always noticeable even with earplugs. That said, the Forum's new acoustics and sound are stellar indeed.

Edited by Van Squalen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe they are just old and Canadian and don't like the heat. Or maybe those venues were more accessible. Or maybe... wait. No. I just checked the SOCN board.... it's Obama's fault they are not playing many outdoor arenas... something about bogus claims of global warming.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am curious about the hypothesis that they make a greater profit by playing indoor hockey/basketball arenas as opposed to sheds. To me, this seems counterintuitive. An indoor venue would likely have more upscale club/lounge areas plus there must be a cost associated with climate control. Plus, indoor areans may involve more scheduling conflicts to work with given hockey/basketball playoffs in full swing or pending. I would think amphitheaters outside would be significantly cheaper to rent and put on a production than an indoor arena that houses a professional sports team. Can someone explain the conclusion that they make more money for indoor shows?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I am not buying the argument that the sheds are bigger so they would cost more. Most sheds hold 15-20k, with a large portion of that (10-15k) as lawn seats that are unprotected from the elements. Most hockey arenas have a capacity of 18-22k, so with the area behind the stage blocked off, it would be more like 14-15k available seats. Given that most shows do not sell out, it seems like the issue of spectator capacity is moot as attendance numbers would seem to be more or less commensurate at a shed or arena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I am not buying the argument that the sheds are bigger so they would cost more. Most sheds hold 15-20k, with a large portion of that (10-15k) as lawn seats that are unprotected from the elements. Most hockey arenas have a capacity of 18-22k, so with the area behind the stage blocked off, it would be more like 14-15k available seats. Given that most shows do not sell out, it seems like the issue of spectator capacity is moot as attendance numbers would seem to be more or less commensurate at a shed or arena

I am curious about the hypothesis that they make a greater profit by playing indoor hockey/basketball arenas as opposed to sheds. To me, this seems counterintuitive. An indoor venue would likely have more upscale club/lounge areas plus there must be a cost associated with climate control. Plus, indoor areans may involve more scheduling conflicts to work with given hockey/basketball playoffs in full swing or pending. I would think amphitheaters outside would be significantly cheaper to rent and put on a production than an indoor arena that houses a professional sports team. Can someone explain the conclusion that they make more money for indoor shows?

 

A friend is a facilities director for an arena here in Florida. He says they operate 365 days a year. The building has to be climate controlled to preserve the ice as well as to avoid mold, etc.. And they host more events than people would think, obviously a full hockey season, but also the circus for two months every year doing two shows a day, touring ice based shows also do weeks at a time and regional sporting events, motocross, wrestling, etc... He says the arena is in use more than 65% of the year. He also says costs are based on how many shows, projected sales, etc...

 

I can say that the 'sheds' in Tampa & West Palm both say they hold 20K but there is no way. I've never seen any artist offer more then 13K tickets and both are packed and traffic is a nightmare at that attendance. West Palm has a much larger lawn area and less seats than Tampa but it is still less than 25% of total capacity not over 50%.

 

Also, you have to consider that if an arena holds 22K for hockey yes you loose one end for a concert but you also gain several thousand seats on the floor. My friend says if they don't sell the seats behind the stage you loose approx. 15% and capacity is usually 18-20K depending on the size of the stage.

 

So with Tampa as an example you have the amphitheater with 13K tickets with 9K being seats at $85-$175 each and 4K being lawn at $35 each. And then you have the arena with say 18K tickets at $85-$350

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I am not buying the argument that the sheds are bigger so they would cost more. Most sheds hold 15-20k, with a large portion of that (10-15k) as lawn seats that are unprotected from the elements. Most hockey arenas have a capacity of 18-22k, so with the area behind the stage blocked off, it would be more like 14-15k available seats. Given that most shows do not sell out, it seems like the issue of spectator capacity is moot as attendance numbers would seem to be more or less commensurate at a shed or arena

I am curious about the hypothesis that they make a greater profit by playing indoor hockey/basketball arenas as opposed to sheds. To me, this seems counterintuitive. An indoor venue would likely have more upscale club/lounge areas plus there must be a cost associated with climate control. Plus, indoor areans may involve more scheduling conflicts to work with given hockey/basketball playoffs in full swing or pending. I would think amphitheaters outside would be significantly cheaper to rent and put on a production than an indoor arena that houses a professional sports team. Can someone explain the conclusion that they make more money for indoor shows?

 

A friend is a facilities director for an arena here in Florida. He says they operate 365 days a year. The building has to be climate controlled to preserve the ice as well as to avoid mold, etc.. And they host more events than people would think, obviously a full hockey season, but also the circus for two months every year doing two shows a day, touring ice based shows also do weeks at a time and regional sporting events, motocross, wrestling, etc... He says the arena is in use more than 65% of the year. He also says costs are based on how many shows, projected sales, etc...

 

I can say that the 'sheds' in Tampa & West Palm both say they hold 20K but there is no way. I've never seen any artist offer more then 13K tickets and both are packed and traffic is a nightmare at that attendance. West Palm has a much larger lawn area and less seats than Tampa but it is still less than 25% of total capacity not over 50%.

 

Also, you have to consider that if an arena holds 22K for hockey yes you loose one end for a concert but you also gain several thousand seats on the floor. My friend says if they don't sell the seats behind the stage you loose approx. 15% and capacity is usually 18-20K depending on the size of the stage.

 

So with Tampa as an example you have the amphitheater with 13K tickets with 9K being seats at $85-$175 each and 4K being lawn at $35 each. And then you have the arena with say 18K tickets at $85-$350

 

You raise some very valid issues that I had not considered regarding the different price tiers for an arena v a shed with a lawn and those vastly cheaper seats. I guess I was under the misconception (not sure where I came to the understanding) that bands get paid a set amount for doing a tour regardless of the number of tickets sold or the price of the tickets....something like "ok, 35 dates, you get X." Anything added on would be a percentage of merchandise sold and concessions at the venue...but if it as you say, I can indeed see how they would make more money in an arena.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting posts about the indoor FL venues, but I am sure Rush commands a solid advance fee.

 

I think it's been strongly hinted they are going all out with intense pyro and lasers this tour. Despite what our LA friends say about the awesome outdoor venues there (because LA weather is fairly stable most of the time). Otherwise, the outdoor venues do not have the same bang regarding the intense vivid colors and lasers that you get with an indoor show. There was Nothing like R30 at Radio City, I'll say it a zillion times, because it's fun.

 

 

 

.

Edited by Gabrielgil513
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, I'm all for the total visceral experience, but seriously, the sound trumps lasers and pyro every time. I'll take Rush onstage with no gimmicks in an outdoor venue any day over Rush indoors with the full visuals.

 

Indoor arena stank just...sucks. Smoky, sweaty, flat beer, body odors and general germ-ridden confined audience clusterfuckery....pass if possible.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, I'm all for the total visceral experience, but seriously, the sound trumps lasers and pyro every time. I'll take Rush onstage with no gimmicks in an outdoor venue any day over Rush indoors with the full visuals.

 

Indoor arena stank just...sucks. Smoky, sweaty, flat beer, body odors and general germ-ridden confined audience clusterfuckery....pass if possible.

 

When was the last time you were at a concert? :) I haven't noticed any of that in the last 20 years. Except for the cluster thing. The folding seats they put on the floor are pretty close together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VS I hear ya about indoor stank,that's the luck of venue IMHO. I have been at outdoor ones where the seating was so tight I'm surprised I was never served paternity papers and indoor ones with great floor seating.

 

To better describe what 1st row balcony at Radio City was like, since its a smaller venue, we were the equivalent of 25th row floor, but in the first balcony. We were completely submerged in the colorful light show most of the time, while fairly close to the stage and the lights, yet elevated.

 

I think they have one more big ten show run at radio city left in them, summer 2017. The press, the aura, the big city. No weather or other outdoor complications. Premium sound and visual venue. Rush and their families together in the city. Would be the ultimate. Hollywood Bowl would be great also. I'm getting a ticket, or 5. Then I woke up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bottom line on what venue artists play is all about the basic formula of capacity, availability, and last... choice.

 

Totally agree that the outdoor amphitheaters are acoustically superior.. and Rush cranks up the lazers -and pyros- after sundown anyway.

Edited by Fat Stick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...