Music lovers put off in these tight economic times by the exorbitant price of tickets for summer concerts by U2 and other big names can take solace in the fact that the headliners at Taste of Chicago are still priced right: They're still free.
The Mayor's Office of Special Events on Tuesday announced this year's roster of acts at the Petrillo Music Shell in Grant Park includes funk legends Charlie Wilson of the Gap Band and Cameo at 5:30 p.m. on June 26; rootsy rockers the Counting Crows at 5 p.m. on June 27; the Wallflowers and Chicago rockers Lovehammers at 5 p.m. on June 28, and Broadway in Chicago (with selections from "Mary Poppins," "Jersey Boys," "Young Frankenstein," "Spring Awakening" and "In the Heights") at 6 p.m. on June 29.
Also: alternative-pop band the Barenaked Ladies at 5:30 p.m. on June 30; R&B star Ne-Yo at 5:30 p.m. on July 1; Super Diamond and Afrodisiacs at 5:30 p.m. on July 2; blues great Buddy Guy at 3 p.m. on July 4 and kids' music artists Mitchell Musso and Jordan Pruitt at 2:30 p.m. on July 5.
As this blog reported earlier, this year, the smaller Taste stage also will be highlighting the rosters of several of Chicago's best independent labels, including Bloodshot Records on June 27, Earwig on June 30 and Thrill Jockey on July 2, while indie rocker Christian Kiefer and guests artists will be presenting "A Patriotic Salute to our 44 Presidents" on July 4, with songs for every U.S. president.
"...exorbitant price of tickets for summer concerts by U2..."
Since when is $32 to see the biggest band in the world exorbitant pricing? Yes, concert prices in general tend to be obscene (hello Rolling Stones a few years back), but don't lump U2 in that group. The majority of tickets offered for their show, including the best in the house (GA), are under $100. The majority ranged between $32 and $55. If you want to talk exorbitant, let's talk about how the ticketmaster fees I paid were more than 1/2 the face value of my $32 ticket. U2 should be applauded for recognizing the economic climate and making their shows affordable for all their fans, not just the fans with big checking accounts.
Wallflowers for free?
Has anyone paid to see them since 1998?
$32 U2 tickets? You better spend the money you saved on better seats on a nice pair of binoculars.
I just got U2 tickets for under $50 and consider that a very good deal to see the greatest band in the world. I've taken a pass of seeing many other groups that I would love to see in concert, because of ridiculously high ticket prices and they're nowhere near as big as U2. What do you expect them to do? Play Taste of Chicago for free?
1) U2 is most certainly not the best band in the world unless, of course, you are in your mid-thirties and are searching for youthful meaning in your life, or are quickly driving to the Sting ticket line in your overpriced car, striped shirt unbuttoned at the top with crested blazer.
2) I would have paid to see a couple of the other bands, but this would have only occurred in the early 90's, before these bands became miserably annoying.
3) I still can't get over how absurdly over-hyped U2 is. Seriously? A band has to have sold millions of records to people with bad taste in music for you to spend money to see them? I'm sorry.
Tom wrote:
U2 is most certainly not the best band in the world unless, of course, you are in your mid-thirties and are searching for youthful meaning in your life, or are quickly driving to the Sting ticket line in your overpriced car, striped shirt unbuttoned at the top with crested blazer.
Zing!
But seriously, I have to disagree with the notion that people who like U2 have "bad taste in music." Granted, their taste might not necessarily be all that adventurous, but there are far, far worse bands than even the present incarnation of BonoBot5000 & the Three McStooges. And I honestly very much like four of their records, from The Unforgettable Fire to Zooropa, and excepting the horrendous Rattle & Hum.
That being said, anybody calling U2 "the greatest band in the world" needs to have his/her head examined by Dr. House. Like I said, U2 is not a terrible band IMO, but the greatest? Really? I mean, I could think of about fifty better bands off the top of my head. Everybody's entitled to his/her opinion, but... yeesh. It's not quite as patently absurd as the oft-parried notion that the Doors were any semblance of a good band, but calling U2 "the greatest band in the world" has to be up there as one of those falsities told so much that average music fans just assume it to be true.
Ho boy... I'm gonna get reamed for this one...