Bono contemplates 3 hour show based on fan voting

[Stories for Boys]

so did the stones... but it was just one song out of the setlist... put a list of options up on their webpage and had the fans pick the song before the show. i believe it was on the ... babylon tour

when rem did it, it was a good portion of the show...like, 6 or 7 songs. and it wasn't necessarily what got the most votes. you emailed and could write why you wanted to hear it, so sometimes they played songs because of the stories. they actually said "ok, this is for bob and jane" or whatever. good times, it was awesome...awesome tour, awesome setlists. but rem tend to vary more than u2 anyways.

 

[Carek1230]

Cool story

 

[doctorwho]

These bastards better be playing for at least 12 hours for the price they are charging for their tickets...

Better yet, they should play for a couple of days non-stop... no bathroom breaks allowed.

If you honestly feel that's true - that U2 should play for days for their $50 GA tickets - then God only knows what you expect the Stones to do (their GA's are $450 and require a $100 membership to their fan club).

That said, I do think U2 should mix things up a bit for this Third leg and so far they have. Including "Miss Sarajevo" - the Bono only version - is fantastic. Hopefully *I* get to hear his wonderful operatic voice at the concerts I see. And the inclusion of a rarity like "Fast Cars" is outstanding. That and "Love & Peace" are the most forward-thinking songs U2 have released recently and I love 'em! To showcase these songs in concert bodes well for the future.

 

[lazarus]

U2 won't play a 3 hour show probably for the same reason they don't want their albums going over 50 minutes anymore. As Bono said, "Too much of a good thing..." The U2 fanatics would have them play until sunrise, but the AVERAGE concertgoer just can't listen to that much music. The people that tend to go see The Boss in concert know they're in for a long haul, and are just as much troopers as the guy they're going to see (blue collar work ethic and all that).

Don't count on it.

 

[U2mixer]

We have to remember that most fans would still vote for I Still Haven't Found, Pride, Beautiful Day etc... because that's what they want to hear - so the setlist would be very much the same.

It doesn't matter what fans on this forum would vote for because, even though there's a great fan base here, it still is only a small minority compared to the worldwide fan base.

Also, U2 would still have a massive say in what should be played because there are songs that they can't play, won't play and songs that they are too embarrassed to play.

I think we would end up with a 3 hour (more like 2 hour) greatest hits show which would be great, but not interesting - if you know what I mean.

 

[cypress]

I could see U2 doing one show entirely based on what songs U2 fans voted them to play. I think they would consider it just because they're into innovation and they love their fans.

Problems with that kind of setup would be logistical (which date or possibly adding a special date) and also the effort needed to rehearse songs they maybe haven't done in a while for just one show.

Just think of the possibilities though.. all of the top of the line U2 songs and a bunch of the lesser known songs us hard-cores love. Heck, it might be the only way to get "Acrobat" on a setlist.

Regardless, I'd love to see it happen just to see how the vote would end up - there's a possibility for 10 songs from AB alone on a setlist like that. My dream scenario would be for it to be televised live, commercial-free and in HD (yup, I know, never gonna happen).