U2.com's latest subscription "gift"

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Ah - I think that comment clarified in my head what I find to be different between earlier U2 songs and the SOE tracks. Bad, One, WOWY, Streets, and many others have backing tracks that are important to the live experience, but Edge still has an important part. The thing I'm less excited about with those two SOE tracks in particular is that Edge could fall off the stage without derailing the song. That ought not to be.

So you're right, backing tracks playing as strong a role as they did in 2018 isn't what's new. What's new is Edge not having meaningful to contribute.
Yeaaaa but I think that's more of a song problem than a backing track problem.

There's also a Bono guitar problem, specific to Lights of Home. To play the non strings version would really require a second guitar to do it right. With that still not an option, they took the easy way out.
 
I'd say the worst offender for backing tracks live is Invisible... the kick drum, keyboard bass, guitar solo, xylophone, maybe even those 4-note riffs at the intro and after the first chorus....
 
He played the solo for the first 10-20 or so shows with the chords over playback, and then swapped so he played the chords and the solo was playback.
 
I'd say the worst offender for backing tracks live is Invisible... the kick drum, keyboard bass, guitar solo, xylophone, maybe even those 4-note riffs at the intro and after the first chorus....
He's not playing the guitar solo live?? What else would he be doing instead?
He's playing chords. You'll see in the Paris concert they've edited the solo out and there's Edge lazily playing the rhythm chords
He played the solo for the first 10-20 or so shows with the chords over playback, and then swapped so he played the chords and the solo was playback.
The xylophone, etc. doesn't bother me - that's pretty par for the course for them. They don't whip an organ out before streets (although Amp's been known to amirite???).

The guitar part is a little lazy - but I again think it has more to do with Bono's inability to play than anything else. For as much as we mock him for his pre bike injury guitar playing, he was at least capable of strumming the chords to certain songs so that Edge could focus on the heavy lifting.
 
That's...unfortunate.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but I'm glad I skipped the last tour. You can close your eyes and ignore some of the little issues, but when compiled all together it just makes the whole thing less appealing.

And I don't think this is a hole the band will be able to dig themselves out of, no pun intended. Hell, even on the last album, where Bono wasn't able to play guitar, instead of Edge laying down more tracks, they bring in all these randoms to play additional guitar. Why?
 
That's...unfortunate.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but I'm glad I skipped the last tour. You can close your eyes and ignore some of the little issues, but when compiled all together it just makes the whole thing less appealing.

Well, invisible wasn't played on the last tour. This was i/e, which admittedly actually was the same tour, but technically not? I dunno.

And I don't think this is a hole the band will be able to dig themselves out of, no pun intended. Hell, even on the last album, where Bono wasn't able to play guitar, instead of Edge laying down more tracks, they bring in all these randoms to play additional guitar. Why?

Maybe they should bring in a mole to produce the next album or somethin'
 
Here’s my question... would anybody object to U2 having a 5th member onstage? I know they have Terry playing keyboards. But what about another guy actively playing rhythm guitar, some additional keyboards and some backing vocals. I would welcome it. I think a song like ABOY, for example, really sounds weak when Edge stops playing the riff or chords to play the lead fills instead. There are several other instances where a rhythm guitarist would beef up the sound.

And the backing vocals thing too. When you have a song like “Beautiful Day”, with an obvious sea of backing vocals, it’s obvious that it’s not just Edges voice doing all that. I think it’d be more believable if anything to have another backup singer. Larry sometimes rises to the occasion, sometimes not... seems to be no rhyme or reason to how they utilize his singing.
 
Here’s my question... would anybody object to U2 having a 5th member onstage? I know they have Terry playing keyboards. But what about another guy actively playing rhythm guitar, some additional keyboards and some backing vocals. I would welcome it. I think a song like ABOY, for example, really sounds weak when Edge stops playing the riff or chords to play the lead fills instead. There are several other instances where a rhythm guitarist would beef up the sound.

And the backing vocals thing too. When you have a song like “Beautiful Day”, with an obvious sea of backing vocals, it’s obvious that it’s not just Edges voice doing all that. I think it’d be more believable if anything to have another backup singer. Larry sometimes rises to the occasion, sometimes not... seems to be no rhyme or reason to how they utilize his singing.



Biffy Clyro does this. They officially have 3 members but have a touring rhythm guitar player that hangs out to the side of the drummer. And it’s not weird. The guy is a pretty big legend to Biffy Clyro fans.
 
the same guy has played keyboards on every rolling stones tour and album since the mid 80s and still isn't officially part of the band. there's tons of precedents for that kind of thing. U2 isn't required to start presenting themselves as a 5-piece if they have someone at the back near larry playing rhythm guitar to make the music sound better.

i would much rather have the guy that plays keyboards and any rhythm guitarists or backup singers on stage where i can actually see and enjoy them doing their thing, rather than be shuffled under the stage and the main band pretending like they don't exist, or not having them at all and leaving holes in their songs like the_acrobat mentioned with ABOY.
 
you would prefer that they quit playing altogether and retire, than have the guy that's already playing keys underneath the stage just be playing next to larry in the back instead, really?
 
Has Terry given many interviews over the years? I've always wondered if he has stage fright or doesn't like the distractions of the stage productions or something, as opposed to being banished to the underworld.

Either way, I'd be interested to see what U2 sounds like with a utility musician or two on stage.
 
you would prefer that they quit playing altogether and retire, than have the guy that's already playing keys underneath the stage just be playing next to larry in the back instead, really?

Yes. But I'm saying this in 2019. I may have felt differently 10 years ago. I don't want to see them getting more and more frail and looking even more foolish as they try to appear young/hip/relevant etc. I'd rather they quit while they're ahead slightly behind.

People like us who are big fans are aware there's some slight of hand going on to create the illusion of magic. But once the general public starts seeing that kind of on-stage support, they're going to look like one of those bands: the dinosaur acts who are too old to do it all themselves.

But I seem to be fighting a losing war when it comes to this evaluation of their legacy and reputation, as so many here think it's perfectly fine that they did a Joshua Tree tour...and another one 2 years later.
 
but they already literally are too old to do it all themselves.

i don't get the notion that acknowledging the reality of their age and current situation would somehow be so detrimental to the band's legacy and reputation that it's better that they would quit making music and touring altogether before letting the guy who already plays their keyboards get some applause from the crowd once in a while.
 
Yes. But I'm saying this in 2019. I may have felt differently 10 years ago. I don't want to see them getting more and more frail and looking even more foolish as they try to appear young/hip/relevant etc. I'd rather they quit while they're ahead slightly behind.

People like us who are big fans are aware there's some slight of hand going on to create the illusion of magic. But once the general public starts seeing that kind of on-stage support, they're going to look like one of those bands: the dinosaur acts who are too old to do it all themselves.

But I seem to be fighting a losing war when it comes to this evaluation of their legacy and reputation, as so many here think it's perfectly fine that they did a Joshua Tree tour...and another one 2 years later.

I also don't agree with them doing the JT 2017 or 2019 tours. It just feels wrong to me... a blatant cash grab. They didn't even seem like they were truly sold on the idea themselves when I was watching the 2 shows I saw in 2017. Don't get me wrong, I was happy that U2 actually came to some cities closer to me than Chicago (I saw Cleveland and Indy). I was happy to be able to see them perform songs 5-11. But I would've preferred not to do an all out nostalgia act tour. BUT... they filled stadiums, and made a lot more money than they would have with another new album tour, so what do I know? I enjoy the 2015 and 2018 tours much more, just because it was them pursuing their continuing creative vision, rather than just playing a nostalgia show.

As far as this 5th member business. I'm not talking a guy who would be up towards the front of the stage, in the band photos, etc. This guy would have a station back by Larry, where he would play guitar, and have a keyboard and a microphone set up. He would blend into the background, and not be as brightly lit as the others. He may not even be featured on every song, just as needed. I really feel like U2 should've had this for years. Pretty much every other band I like has implemented somebody like this, and nobody thinks any less of them for it.

Take Kings of Leon, for example. 4 Followills... 3 brothers, and a cousin. KOL will ALWAYS be those 4 guys. But they have a full time keyboard player onstage, as well as an auxiliary guy who plays guitar, keyboards, percussion, backing vocals, etc. These 2 extra guys stay to the back of the stage, and while they aren't invisible, the emphasis is mostly put on the 4 main members. I see nothing wrong with this. Muse has an extra keyboard player that stays towards the back of the stage. Coldplay do not have this... but then again, Chris Martin is an effective rhythm guitar player, and he can play the piano. If Bono could play effective rhythm guitar and some keyboards, then it'd be different.

I personally would just prefer to see an actual human being playing some of these parts for U2, rather than a bunch of pre-recorded samples.
 
They didn't even seem like they were truly sold on the idea themselves when I was watching the 2 shows I saw in 2017.

Was there something in particular you observed, or just a vibe you picked up on during the shows?
 
Was there something in particular you observed, or just a vibe you picked up on during the shows?



Just a vibe, really. They really seemed to go through the motions and be bored. It was a very scripted show, with the same banter between songs. They only seems truly happy to be there during the encore, when they were playing BD, Elevation and Vertigo.
 
Let's play a game. Describe something about the spontaneity of a U2 tour. Annnnd go.

JT30!

It was a very scripted show, with the same banter between songs.

e/I

It was a very scripted show, with the same banter between songs.

i/e

It was a very scripted show, with the same banter between songs.

360

It was a very scripted show, with the same banter between songs.

Vertigo

It was a very scripted show, with the same banter between songs.

Elevation

It was a very scripted show, with the same banter between songs.

PopMart

It was a very scripted show, with the same banter between songs.

ZooTV

It was a very scripted show, with the same banter between songs.
 
The biggest distinction for me is that this is a band that usually plays 7-8 songs from whatever new album they’re touring, and are for the most part able to convey the excitement of sharing these songs in the live setting for the first time.

On JT, you’re only talking about 4-5 songs that most people in the audience haven’t had the chance to see live. While they definitely seemed stoked to play Exit, for example, I don’t know if this was the case for the others.

Also, the band tends to get better over the course of a tour, was it the same in the case of JT? Sure doesn’t sound like it to me.
 
My son got a hold of my phone and posted a bunch of emojis here... edited
 
Last edited:
Kunstmuseum

It was a 100% real show, with setlist partiers losing their shit between songs
 
The biggest distinction for me is that this is a band that usually plays 7-8 songs from whatever new album they’re touring, and are for the most part able to convey the excitement of sharing these songs in the live setting for the first time.

Seeing them go from JT 2017 to playing 7-9 SOE songs a night was a sort of restoration of faith that they weren't going full nostalgia act. I even got worried after 360, but they've given a lot of love to the new material on I+e and e+I, which is great.
 
Kunstmuseum

It was a 100% real show, with setlist partiers losing their shit between songs

There should be a sticky of the Knustmuseum setlist somewhere around here. I admit, I kinda fell for it for a minute! The world premiere of the song "No Line on the Horizon". The live debut of "Flower Child"... it was quite a time to be alive!!
 
Back
Top Bottom