Worst single show on the 2005 tour???????

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
bad? really? would you call it a 'bad night'?
maybe not as uplifting as other ones or maybe one show could lack the kind of energy of other ones......but seing a bad U2 show? mmmm dont think so, sorry:sexywink:
 
Mr. BAW said:
I didn't go to Hartford but I heard from a friend who did, he also saw two LA shows, that it wasn't so hot...that B's voice was very raspy following the Boston gigs...:shrug: anyone else on Hartford???

i went to 24 shows incl . hartford and hartford was a good show.
 
<<never a bad U2 show>>

I've seen them about 16 times, but my first ever show was Popmart Vancouver, which I walked out during the encore. I've know of 4 other friends, all in seperate sections of the stadium, doing exactly the same thing before the concert was over.

<<Setlists>>

I only ask for consistency between published band comments and what they do. I think some fans were annoyed that they failed to perform several rehearsed(leg 1 played) songs during their 3 night Dublin run - surely their only Irish gigs would be more receptive than other cities.

u2fp
 
U2FanPeter said:
I've seen them about 16 times, but my first ever show was Popmart Vancouver, which I walked out during the encore. I've know of 4 other friends, all in seperate sections of the stadium, doing exactly the same thing before the concert was over.

What was wrong with the Vancouver Popmart show?
 
U2FanPeter said:
What's remarkable is that Bono kept his voice at a very high consistency for close to the full length of every show on the tour.

Save for ZOOTV, is that a first for the group inthe past 20 years?

u2fp

Bono's voice was shot towards the end of the Zoomerang tour. Listening to Bono's voice on Streets and Pride from the Sydney video makes me cringe.
 
-Bad sound
-The mono sound(some nights it was stereo) from the "giant pumpkin" is the worst possible setup for this particular venue
-20,000 empty seats, they sold 400% more tickets the last tour at the same venue
-the gig after the Mexico video shoot
tickets were $10 outfront before the opening act hit the stage
-pissing rain outside
-Bono was in a bad mood 2 weeks after Hutchence
-Bono asked the promoter for 1 throat doctor - 1 ear doctor - 1 voice doctor at 2 am the day of the show with the possibility of cancelling the whole show
-Bono spent 4-5 days drinking tequila after the mexico show(documented)
-Bono shaved his head
-Dead crowd
-Bono called the city "a rainy little town"
-mountains of bad press the 9 months leading up to the show.

7 years later and no Vancouver promoter has booked a full sized rock concert in that venue.

u2fp
 
Last edited:
Of the fourteen I saw, the worst shows were May 21 at MSG (bad band performance and horrible crowd) and May 14 in Philly (first of my 14 show run).
 
MTEdge said:
Of the fourteen I saw, the worst shows were May 21 at MSG (bad band performance and horrible crowd) and May 14 in Philly (first of my 14 show run).

I was at the May 21st show too, and I agree with your assessment of the crowd. Something just wasn't right...people around me were rude and seemed to be into their own little dramas instead of the show (like the obnoxious couple behind me that was talking very loudly about their date during the first encore). I thought the band was fine, though.
 
Bobo U2 said:
The last 2 shows in Nov. at MSG.
The 1st show was way too loud....
And the second show with the Patti Smith crap at the end.

2 out of 16......not bad

I thought 11/21 was absolute perfection...everything was on that night, best show of the tour I thought. Second night didn't beat it but it was far from the worst show of the tour as well. I thought NJ 5/17 was completely lacking energy although I already know other people see that one differently too. :)
 
"Bono called the city "a rainy little town"

i think this is for you the main reason to call it a 'bad show' and fuck off during the encore.....
the other things you've mentioned, dont really make it for a bad show; a lot of this always happen, before and during shows, the thing is people don't always notice it

Tell me Bono forgot a lot of words, tell me the sound collapsed, tell me the band was out of tune, tell me a lot of the audience left during the encore.......did it happen?

No it didn't

-Bad press is not a reason to point out it was a bad show
-Bono calling the city 'rainy little town' is not also
-tickets were $10 outfront before the opening act hit the stage also not
-Bono asked the promoter for 1 throat doctor - 1 ear doctor - 1 voice doctor at 2 am the day of the show with the possibility of cancelling the whole show....
-pissing rain outside... ?

the truth is all of this pissed you off. But to call it a bad U2 show, i dont think theres enough objetive reasons
They are not:wink:
 
I'd say out of the 5 shows I went to, 5/24 in Boston was the most lacklustre. It certainly wasn't bad, but it wasn't WOW or anything. It was still special because it was my first full-fledged U2 show (after Brooklyn) and I went with a friend from high school that I hadn't seen in 3+ years who was a massive fan (also going to her first show). We were in the very last row of the arena, straight back, and while it wasn't terrible to see the show from that perspective, it certainly didn't compare to seeing my last show from GA.

Also, I wasn't thrilled with the setlist. They had recently dropped New Year's Day (and not replaced it with anything) and being the first show in a city, I was expceting ACD/ITH, but we got The Ocean...and only The Ocean. No Gloria, no Bad. Blech.

And to whoever it was that said both of the November MSG shows were bad, I thought 11/21 was pretty great. Granted I had an amazing GA spot, but Instant Karma felt spontaneous (sure they ended up playing it several more times over the following weeks, but it felt special in the moment, and that's really what counts, I'd say). Even though I wasn't there, I would agree that 11/22 sounded pretty lame. The ending w/ IK sounded like a bit of a mess, and dropping 2 songs from the night before w/o replacement songs seems pretty shoddy.
 
The crowd sucked for 12/09/97, and I gave a slew of reasons why the crowd could be put off.

Go find the tape of the show, I think there is also a videotape.

I've never seen the show in anybody's top 10.

BTW, hasn't Bono performed great shows where he has forgotten the words?

u2fp
 
Well I won't comment on shows I didn't see, but of the ones I did, I'd say Toronto 2 was the worst. It was really short, they took out multiple songs from night 1 and added nothing back and it seemed like they were in a hurry to get off the stage. It wasn't a terrible show, it was just not really inspired at all.
 
Out of the 9 shows I saw, Anaheim1 was the "worst".

3/26, 3/28, 4/1, 4/14, 4/15, 11/1, 11/2, 11/5, 11/19.
 
it's all relative... this question is damn near impossible to answer because everyone's experiences are different.

someone mentioned that they thought 5/14 philadelphia was one of the worst because of the crowd... well i was at that show, my first show of the tour, had an amazing GA spot right on the rail outside the ellipse and thought it was amazing.

same with 11/21 MSG, which someone else mentioned... i was in the ellipse and had an amazing time.

now 10/11 MSG i had nosebleed seats, the only time i actually sat in the nosebleeders for the entire tour, and the people in my section were rather lame, not really standing too often, only into the mega hits, talking durring some of the slower songs, etc etc. now while the show it's self was good, it's my least favorite of all the ones i saw because of where i was sitting. but i'm sure that someone who was inside the ellipse had an amazing time.

:shrug: it's amazing how getting stuck in a bad section can change someone's view of a show. when it's a quiet, lame-o section, you tend to pick up on little errors that the band makes, tend to think that the band was "lacking energy"... when you're in a spot that's going off and you're jumping all around like a mad man, the band sounds ilke they're having the greatest show they've ever done.
 
^Agreed.

I was at the Anaheim show, three people back from the elipse, and thought it was incredible. Coming out with LAPOE gave a real hook to the show -- you didn't know what was going to come next! And the fact that it was still early -- I think the boys were trying to make sure they all played "40" in the right key -- gave the show a real edge. Bono's voice rocked the rafters.
 
Nube Gris said:
they never have a 'bad night'........whats your f..problem?

Did you fail to read 'BTW, all "they never have a bad night" posts are not welcome in this thread' in the original post? :eyebrow:
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
it's all relative... this question is damn near impossible to answer because everyone's experiences are different.

someone mentioned that they thought 5/14 philadelphia was one of the worst because of the crowd... well i was at that show, my first show of the tour, had an amazing GA spot right on the rail outside the ellipse and thought it was amazing.

same with 11/21 MSG, which someone else mentioned... i was in the ellipse and had an amazing time.

now 10/11 MSG i had nosebleed seats, the only time i actually sat in the nosebleeders for the entire tour, and the people in my section were rather lame, not really standing too often, only into the mega hits, talking durring some of the slower songs, etc etc. now while the show it's self was good, it's my least favorite of all the ones i saw because of where i was sitting. but i'm sure that someone who was inside the ellipse had an amazing time.

:shrug: it's amazing how getting stuck in a bad section can change someone's view of a show. when it's a quiet, lame-o section, you tend to pick up on little errors that the band makes, tend to think that the band was "lacking energy"... when you're in a spot that's going off and you're jumping all around like a mad man, the band sounds ilke they're having the greatest show they've ever done.

I agree to a certain extent. However, there are a few shows where there seems to several people indicating the same thing. IE 5-7-05 Chicago, I know alot of people that thought it was not anywhere near U2's best. Some on this thread have expressed the same. Also, the band themselves indicated they were not on top of their game that night. So I think there is something to that one. Like I said, I dont think it was an awful show, just subpar by U2's normal standards.
 
Chicago 5/7was my first U2 show, so it will always be special for me, i realize it wasn't their best show, but it was the first night they showed the Zoo Jackpot on the screen, and the whole encore was fantastic.

Bad that night was one of the best versions of I've ever heard. Vertigo sounded horrible that night, but that was probly the worst thing you can say about the show. Bono's voice wasn't any worse than the other Chicago shows that I also saw.
 
learn2kneel said:
Bad that night was one of the best versions of I've ever heard. Vertigo sounded horrible that night, but that was probly the worst thing you can say about the show. Bono's voice wasn't any worse than the other Chicago shows that I also saw.


Agreed.

I didn't attend any of the Chicago shows myself, but I did see them all on bootleg videos, and based on that alone, U2 wasn't any worse on 5/7 than any other date I have seen live or on video.

I think two things helped create the impression that 5/7 was U2's 'worst show":

1. Bono rapped the words to "Vertigo"

Vertigo is a straight forward rock song that is hard to improve upon or change around, much like "I Will Follow". Bono took a chance on it and tried a kind of rap version which made him sound out of breath. Because it was at the beginning of the show, I think this might have caused people to think that there is something wrong with him, or that he is sick, when he clearly was in fine form the rest of the show.

2. Bad reviews in the Chicago papers

Regardless of what everyone claims, people are very influenced by the media. I wonder if a lot of fans who saw the unjustifiably negative reviews the next day took them to heart.

Most versions of "Streets" are epic, but the 5/7 version is particularly spectacular, as is the finale with "Bad". I might be completely wrong about this, but 5/7 didn't look or sound like such a terrible show, at least on video.
 
4U2Play said:



Agreed.

I didn't attend any of the Chicago shows myself, but I did see them all on bootleg videos, and based on that alone, U2 wasn't any worse on 5/7 than any other date I have seen live or on video.

I think two things helped create the impression that 5/7 was U2's 'worst show":

1. Bono rapped the words to "Vertigo"

Vertigo is a straight forward rock song that is hard to improve upon or change around, much like "I Will Follow". Bono took a chance on it and tried a kind of rap version which made him sound out of breath. Because it was at the beginning of the show, I think this might have caused people to think that there is something wrong with him, or that he is sick, when he clearly was in fine form the rest of the show.

2. Bad reviews in the Chicago papers

Regardless of what everyone claims, people are very influenced by the media. I wonder if a lot of fans who saw the unjustifiably negative reviews the next day took them to heart.

Most versions of "Streets" are epic, but the 5/7 version is particularly spectacular, as is the finale with "Bad". I might be completely wrong about this, but 5/7 didn't look or sound like such a terrible show, at least on video.

As someone that was actually there, I disagree. I think you left off the most important part out of your argument. Bono himself, said they were off that night. I know how I felt coming out of that show. I have seen U2 over 30 times throughout the years, I know one of their weaker performances when I see it. Sorry you disagree, but basing it on an aud. shot bootleg video is no indicator at all IMO. :shrug:
 
What I'd like to ask is: How were the 5/9-10 DVD nights compared to the other shows you've been to?

....and am I right that the 5/12 show was way more on fire than the others in Chicago?
 
Blue Room said:
Sorry you disagree, but basing it on an aud. shot bootleg video is no indicator at all IMO. :shrug:


Terribly sorry that you disagree, but I would argue that basing one's opinion of a show on an audience shot bootleg video is just as valid an indicator as basing any other opinions of past rock concerts solely on a film recording of the event. One might even say that watching the show second-hand on video allows for more objectivity when grading a band's performance, not less.

Jimi at Monterey, The Who at Woodstock, Sex Pistols at Winterland, U2 at Live Aid.... most rock fans generally now agree that these were all great performances, even though 99% of them only saw the performances on TV. Saying to these people that because they weren't actually in the audience at these particular shows renders their opinions moot seems a bit tough.

Furthermore, I also believe that bootleg videos give a far better overall sense of a concert than some highly edited hatchet-job like the Hamlisch stuff they've been subjecting us to lately. The official Chicago DVD is nearly unwatchable, I'll take U2rulesmyworld's boots anyday.

Bono's comment that 'they were off that night' was only in response to the unfair review in one of the Chicago papers the next day... he was probably trying to be humble about it, imagine that. If he would have said, "What are you talking about, I thought we were pretty good", you can see how that would have gone over.

Based on the 7 Vertigo shows I attended this year, I would say that the Oakland 1 show was "the worst", but only because they played nearly the exact same setlist as Vegas 2, which I had just seen three days prior, but did not include Mary J. Blige or Brandon Flowers again.

On the contrary, everyone else around me inside the Ellipse at Oakland 1 thought the show rocked. They're probably right.
 
Last edited:
4U2Play said:



On the contrary, everyone else around me inside the Ellipse at Oakland 1 thought the show rocked. They're probably right.

I'm in the minority, but I thought Oakland 1 was better than Oakland 2, mainly because of the rockin' setlist. Crowd was a lot better at Oakland 2 though.
 
4U2Play said:



Terribly sorry that you disagree, but I would argue that basing one's opinion of a show on an audience shot bootleg video is just as valid an indicator as basing any other opinions of past rock concerts solely on a film recording of the event. One might even say that watching the show second-hand on video allows for more objectivity when grading a band's performance, not less.

Jimi at Monterey, The Who at Woodstock, Sex Pistols at Winterland, U2 at Live Aid.... most rock fans generally now agree that these were all great performances, even though 99% of them only saw the performances on TV. Saying to these people that because they weren't actually in the audience at these particular shows renders their opinions moot seems a bit tough.

Furthermore, I also believe that bootleg videos give a far better overall sense of a concert than some highly edited hatchet-job like the Hamlisch stuff they've been subjecting us to lately. The official Chicago DVD is nearly unwatchable, I'll take U2rulesmyworld's boots anyday.

Bono's comment that 'they were off that night' was only in response to the unfair review in one of the Chicago papers the next day... he was probably trying to be humble about it, imagine that. If he would have said, "What are you talking about, I thought we were pretty good", you can see how that would have gone over.

Based on the 7 Vertigo shows I attended this year, I would say that the Oakland 1 show was "the worst", but only because they played nearly the exact same setlist as Vegas 2, which I had just seen three days prior, but did not include Mary J. Blige or Brandon Flowers again.

On the contrary, everyone else around me inside the Ellipse at Oakland 1 thought the show rocked. They're probably right.

the majority of the videos that i've seen have been just as poorly filmed as hamish's was poorly edited... i don't know how many times i've seen the camera focused in on the friggin edge as bono's running around the ellipse... or videos that have a close up shot of one of the band members right at the money shot of the flood lights going on durring streets, and never panning out to get the entire crowd.

so these videos are not exactly done by spielberg and/or scorsese here...

also, videos do not give the viewer the feel of the arena... the first MSG show in may was not their best of their many nyc shows... but you could feel the energy and excitement in the air leading up to the band hitting the stage. you cannot get that from a video.

and those legendary performances that you mentioned... yea, they're held in high regard but only because they were taped... for all we know each one of those acts may have had an even better show a week earlier that wasn't taped, but unless you were there, you'd never have known.
 
Back
Top Bottom