It's time for the next U2 setlist evolution.

[Axver]

If you watch U2's setlists over time, you can see a pattern of evolution relating to acoustic sets and encores and the like. The following is a brief run-down:

Boy to Under Australian Skies (1980-1984)

- Main set
- Encore
- Possible further encore/s

These setlists gradually grew in length, with the band often coming out for spontaneous encores due to audience enthusiasm.

The Unforgettable Fire and The Joshua Tree Tours (1984-1987)

- Main set
- Encore

These setlists were pretty similar in basic format to 1980-1984, but without the spontaneous encore. For this period and Lovetown, the main set was usually closed with Bad/October/New Year's Day/Pride.

Lovetown Tour (1989 to early 1990)

- Main set
- U2 + BB King set
- Encore

Very occasionally, the show would close without an encore after the BB King set.

ZooTV Tour (1992-1993)
- Main set
- B-stage set
- Continuation of main set
- Encore

Popmart Tour (1997-1998)
- Main set
- B-stage set
- Continuation of main set
- Encore #1
- Encore #2

Elevation Tour (2001)
- Main set
- B-stage/acoustic set
- Continuation of main set
- Encore #1
- Encore #2

The encores were not strict, with the band often staying on stage and continuing straight into One, the song that marked the start of encore #2.

Note that in the eighties, the general pattern was a main set followed by a single encore, and then the pattern in the nineties and on Elevation was a main set with a b-stage/acoustic set about two-thirds of the way through, followed by one or two encores.

I think it's about time U2 did something new with their sets. The mid-main set trek to the b-stage/tip of the heart/whatever to play a couple of numbers is starting to get a little old. The setlist should evolve. But how?

Agree/disagree?

 

[lazarus]

No acoustic set. Axe it. They started the trend, but it is SO overdone now. They need to stop playing to the damn geriatrics in the audience. The electric instruments are on wireless anyway, right? Can't they play ANYTHING on the b-stage?

And if they're gonna do something acoustic, how about something that we wouldn't expect? It's kind of lame to do basic songs that don't sound too different. If I hear a stripped down version of Angel of Harlem again I'm going to throw up. When was the last time it was even played electric? Staring at the Sun--NO. Stay--electric only. Desire--NO.

This is the scary thing though--what U2 hasn't done yet, and this is pretty common now--is a MEDLEY. Yeah, I said it. The thought of it horrifies me, but they have A LOT of material. Even Prince, who I think is one of the best live performers ever, has been doing medleys for a while.

I don't want it to happen, but as John Lennon said, you say you want a revolution, well, you know...

that's what you might get.


laz

 

[Axver]

Oh no, not medleys! We did sort of have that with Hawkmoon 269 --> Desire --> Running To Stand Still at one (German?) Elevation show, and it wasn't bad, but ... I hate to think how much people will complain if they do a medley. "They didn't sing this verse!" "They didn't play that solo!" "I wanted to hear the whole song!"

I want the acoustic set to go - and you're right, why the hell can't they play some electric songs at the tip of the stage? The first Popmart encore was on the acoustic set's b-stage, was fully electric, and worked fine. Whatever the case, they need to stop disrupting the flow with the acoustic set. It WORKED on ZooTV, but on Elevation, I felt they were going along quite nicely in their sets until this sudden thought of "shit, better get to the acoustic stuff now" dragged the set down in the middle of the show.

 

[Aardvark747]

But what would happen to Stay if they dropped the acoustic all together Axver?

 

[Axver]

But what would happen to Stay if they dropped the acoustic all together Axver?

Zooropa would no longer be represented. Though I think the acoustic Stay is a piss-poor representation anyway.

 

[gabriele1971]

I agree; as I already wrote on a thread ages ago, these are some options they could choose for the b-stage set:
1) early days set (11 o'clock, control, celebration...)
2) piano set (october, running, original...)
3) b-side set (spanish eyes, slow dancing, love comes tumbling...)
4) covers set (helter, watchtower, help...)
5) ambient set (promenade, velvet dress, mothers...)
6) passengers/million dollar set (never let me go, your blue room, falling at your feet...)
7) edge set (seconds, numb, stand by me...)
8) single album set (3-4 songs off a single album in a row, i.e. homecoming-unfire-wire or zooropa-babyface-dirty day or...)
never gonna happen, anyway.
and don't piss on medleys!!!!! for example: rain-found-exodus-rain from Sweden '87 was awesome. and all the tags put to bad and one are gorgeous too...have you heard bad-who's gonna ride from elevation 3RD leg? or bad-when i look (KC 2001)? great stuff.

 

[Aardvark747]

Perhaps Stateless could make an appearence or 2?

 

[pepokiss]

and don't piss on medleys!!!!! for example: rain-found-exodus-rain from Sweden '87 was awesome. and all the tags put to bad and one are gorgeous too...have you heard bad-who's gonna ride from elevation 3RD leg? or bad-when i look (KC 2001)? great stuff.

but those aren't medleys...

Rain wopuld go on, then start I Still, then a snippet of Exodus, then Rain

And WGRYWH is a snippet to Bad, and so WILATW


a medley is like 3 or 4 songs played with their own chords and melody, not tagging in to the one before or after... Mettallica does some sweet medleys ... Hit the lights, Four Horsemen, Whiplash


ANGEL OF HARLEM / WHEN LOVE COMES TO TOWN or ANGEL OF HARLEM / DANCING QUEEN... from ZOO TV, those are medleys (quite strange, yet medleys)

 

[BWU2Buffs]

I agree; elevation 3RD leg? or bad-when i look (KC 2001)? great stuff.

Medley or not, Bad-When I Look @ KC was the best single moment for me of 3 Elevation shows - unexpected and awesome.

I agree that the 'acoustic set' is overdone, replacing it with something unique or different would be hard at this point. Plus, I've always thought of it as a way for the band to take a break and catch their breath so to speak. If keeping it means more songs, I'm all for it. (Or maybe they just need to get in better shape)

Regardless of the technical musical term, I enjoy it when they play snippets of a few songs and then roll into full versions of other songs and visa versa. Done right, they are effective and fun -- I would not mind seeing more of this during this tour -- I'll take the trade off of partial versions versus not hearing a song at all anytime.

I like the piano set idea as well -- can't say which songs would work, but it sounds interesting.

Alas, I'm all over the board -- just get me in the building, and turn it up.

 

[Shawn Bonneau]

I think U2 should start a show by doing a five song acoustic set.

SMB

 

[TheRat]

I still think a jam session would rule, and a Medley is the next best thing to that.

 

[RA-D]

I love the acoustic sets, they're so touching that I can't believe so many people dislike them. Personally, I think the acoustic versions of Stay, Staring At The Sun and Desire are absolutley superb, bringing a whole new element to these songs. The best thing about U2's concerts, compared to some other bands, is the way that each song is tailored for each tour and changed around to able to be played acoustically. Even Sunday Bloody Sunday, about which I was initially highly sceptical, was stunningly good live.

Plus, if Larry does need a break then its a great excuse for him to get one (and if that means an extra 4 songs of the main set, then I'm game).

 

[TheRat]

They started the trend

Wrong. Zeppelin was playing Acoustic sets in the middle of their main sets over 30 years ago.

I love hearing acoustic songs live. Good to break up the mood and get more intimate with the crowd. I don't see why you'd ever want to axe it.

 

[lazarus]

It's not a trend if no other bands are doing it. Zeppelin may have been the first rock band to play a mid-show acoustic set, but U2 were the first to do it in the early 90's, which is when the TREND actually started.


laz

 

[broken toy]

U2 didn't start the trend. It's been a performance "trick" for decades, for a variety of musical styles. Zeppelin is just one good example.

Not that there's anything WRONG with that. The thing is, it is a GREAT way to alter the pace of the show, and give more tension-release opportunities.

The bottom line is, a balls-to-the-wall, all-rockers show would not be as good without the tension-building of more quiet and somber material interspersed. Plus there's the age factor. U2 couldn't just go all-out for two-plus hours.

They could go the two-set route, a standard ploy for bar-bands, and used throughout the Grateful Dead's long career (and since used by many "jam bands"). That allows you to have multiple "openers" and "closers" each night, while giving the band a break. However, it's tough to do when you have an opening act, because of union rules around show-end times.

Since U2 has announced opening bands already, I'm sure this format won't be used.

Maybe they'll opt for a mid-show barbershop quartet set.