Acrobat Live

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

NamelessStreets

The Fly
Joined
Nov 1, 2004
Messages
141
Location
Barnsley, England
This will probably get moved but sod it.
One song I have never heard live is Acrobat. Ive heard how amazing it is but I have never had it. Its not even on the complete U2! Crime!

Is anyone hear kind enough to send me a decent sounding copy???? Pretty Please!
 
yep! ACROBAT definitely one of U2s best 3 songs (others THE FLY, UTEOTW)..its a shame that mr. boner wont do this killer song.
there was a link to an ACROBAT online petition in the interference forum, but i cannot find the link again.
ACROBAT has one of the best guitar solos ever, what a song and what wonderful lyrics
:rockon: :rockon: :rockon: :bow:
 
NamelessStreets said:
This will probably get moved but sod it.
One song I have never heard live is Acrobat. Ive heard how amazing it is but I have never had it. Its not even on the complete U2! Crime!

The reason why you have never heard it played live before is because it was never played live. The only place Acrobat has ever been heard "live" was during the Hershey Stadium rehearsals. I don't have the files on me...

But yeah, Acrobat was never officially played at a concert.
 
And the worst part is, the Acrobat heard rehearsed at Hershey was only an acoustic version! :mad:
 
NamelessStreets said:
Oh right. For some reason I thought the played it a few times on the Zoo tour????

Nope. :(

They were rehearsing it to precede Zoo Station, but never played it. It didn't even make the public rehearsal on 7 August 1992 - the recording we have is from someone outside the venue during the private rehearsal on 6 August 1992.

The rarely played AB song on ZooTV was So Cruel.
 
They don't because they CAN'T reproduce it live in a form they'd be proud of. In 2001, they told a girl who requested it for her bday that they'd have to 'medidate in a tree for a month' to be able to play it live. They are not going to play it live, ever, so might as well stop asking and making petitions.:sigh:
 
Last edited:
RocknRollKitty said:
They don't because they CAN'T reproduce it live in a form they'd be proud of. In 2001, they told a girl who requested it for her bday that they'd have to 'medidate in a tree for a month' to be able to play it live. They are not going to play it live, ever, so might as well stop asking and making petitions.:sigh:

I call bullshit on the band's excuse. They wrote the song, it's obviously not too technically complex for the band. The only reason I can see that Acrobat never got played was that U2 was too determined on an Acrobat ---> Zoo Station transition like Hershey; and they didn't want to have Zoo Station be anything but the concert opener.

From a practical standpoint, they've likely never even played Acrobat since Zoo TV so a pick-up-and-play request like Out of Control or Angel of Harlem is out of the question.
 
mobvok said:


I call bullshit on the band's excuse. They wrote the song, it's obviously not too technically complex for the band. The only reason I can see that Acrobat never got played was that U2 was too determined on an Acrobat ---> Zoo Station transition like Hershey; and they didn't want to have Zoo Station be anything but the concert opener.

Ever consider that Bono's voice can't hit the notes the way he'd want it to sound, and he doesn't want to 'dumb it down' by lowering the octave? I think it's the same reason he doesn't do RHMT live either. Also, there are many things you can do musically in a studio that come off sounding fake and canned in concert when you have to use recordings to make up the things the band members can't play live. I admire them for not putting out a halfassed, shitty, toned down version just to say they played it live. Acrobat is a great song and it deserves better than that.

From a practical standpoint, they've likely never even played Acrobat since Zoo TV so a pick-up-and-play request like Out of Control or Angel of Harlem is out of the question.

Those are not 'pick up and play' requests. They did those on the last tour. U2 only do songs they practice. While they are great and creative, they are not natural born musicians with a gift for that sort of thing, we can't really expect it.
 
RocknRollKitty said:


Ever consider that Bono's voice can't hit the notes the way he'd want it to sound, and he doesn't want to 'dumb it down' by lowering the octave? I think it's the same reason he doesn't do RHMT live either. Also, there are many things you can do musically in a studio that come off sounding fake and canned in concert when you have to use recordings to make up the things the band members can't play live. I admire them for not putting out a halfassed, shitty, toned down version just to say they played it live. Acrobat is a great song and it deserves better than that.



No, I didn't consider Bono's voice being an issue, because there's nothing in Acrobat that's exceptional. There's a few random held notes but you could easily remove them for zero total effect on the song. You can't say that about Pride's "In the NAME of love" or RHMT's...chorus, or Lemon's....entire vocal track. A comparison of Acrobat to RHMT is just silly.

Second, you seem to think that any possible live version of Acrobat will suck enormously and that's why they've never played it. It sounds great from Hershey (albeit with crappy sound quality). If they have a great version of a song but they never play it live, I can only assume there's some other factor beyond the quality of the live experience keeping it- hence my Zoo Station speculation.


Those are not 'pick up and play' requests. They did those on the last tour. U2 only do songs they practice. While they are great and creative, they are not natural born musicians with a gift for that sort of thing, we can't really expect it.

...Right, that's exactly what I meant. If I asked U2 right now if they could play Acrobat, could they do it? No, not without some rehearsal time. But if I asked U2 right now if they could play Angel of Harlem, could they do it? Very likely.
 
The only problem I could potentially see with Acrobat live is the intro. But they could change that if they really wanted to. The actual song itself is NOT difficult to reproduce live. If U2 cover bands can do it successfully, then the real thing should be able to as well. :|

There simply has to be another reason as to why they don't play it. I don't think it has anything to do with the difficulty of reproducing the sound of the song. They wouldn't even have to lower it down half a semitone or even an entire semitone - the album version is well within Bono's register.
 
RocknRollKitty said:
They don't because they CAN'T reproduce it live in a form they'd be proud of.

They could quite easily. Multiple people have just told you that. Unfortunately, I know you won't believe them.

In 2001, they told a girl who requested it for her bday that they'd have to 'medidate in a tree for a month' to be able to play it live. They are not going to play it live, ever, so might as well stop asking and making petitions.:sigh:

That excuse sounds a whole lot like something humorous the band would say so that they're polite, rather than a rude-sounding "no, we don't want to play it".

And who says they will never play it live? Really, how do you know? Before this tour, I would've said they'll never bring back An Cat Dubh and Bono will never sing the Miss Sarajevo opera live, but look what has happened.

If Bono can sing Miss Sarajevo's operatic vocals, U2 could quite easily bring out Acrobat if they liked.
 
How can people think the Acrobat vocals are out of Bono's range anymore?! That's just silly.

I think they'd just like to leave the track as it is in case they can't pull it off live in quite the same way, but even that is unbelievable. Wasn't the studio one done completely live with like no overdubs or anything? Surely it's possible to recreate live on stage! :sad:
 
gareth brown said:
How can people think the Acrobat vocals are out of Bono's range anymore?! That's just silly.

I think they'd just like to leave the track as it is in case they can't pull it off live in quite the same way, but even that is unbelievable. Wasn't the studio one done completely live with like no overdubs or anything? Surely it's possible to recreate live on stage! :sad:

Exactly. They've pulled off songs like Lemon and Mofo live. Acrobat should be a breeze.
 
unfortunately mr. boner is the man on the brake pedal. he is a politician now. they actually cannot play heavier songs. shame!
 
jacobus said:
unfortunately mr. boner is the man on the brake pedal. he is a politician now. they actually cannot play heavier songs. shame!
Ur.... :eyebrow:
 
jacobus said:
unfortunately mr. boner is the man on the brake pedal. he is a politician now. they actually cannot play heavier songs. shame!

um?

k.

ANYWAY, there's no real reason U2 couldn't do Acrobat given some rehearsal time. Yeah, it's a complex song, but they WROTE it, and it's not incredibly hard to sing or anything. I'm sure U2 could pull out an acoustic version with a couple days rehearsal time! (it would take Bono lots of practice to remember the lyrics though :wink: ).

As Axver pointed it, we've seen lots of things this tour we never thought we'd see - The First Time? The Wanderer? Miss Sarajevo, with Bono doing opera? Hell, even Fast Cars? Not to mention bringing back songs like An Cat Dubh/Into the Heart, The Electric Co., Gloria, 40, Who's Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses, Zoo Station... now, I sincerely doubt U2 would pull out Acrobat of all things this tour (though if they did I'd buy myself a ticket to a 4th leg show, or kill myself trying! :p ), but next tour, who knows? U2 may surprise us.

I'm wondering, does U2 realize just how much everyone wants to hear the song? I mean, so apparently some fan requested it, but do they know that it's probably the #1 song the diehards want to hear? I sure as hell would love for them to play Acrobat, that song is my soul. And it's one of the best things they've ever done. However the band doesn't talk about it much... I wonder if maybe they just don't like it much? That'd be a shame, but it'd also be a reason why they haven't played it.
 
I can understand 100% why it is not played live. It's a personal song. It's a song that Bono definatly put alot of feeling in to and thats hard to share. They have done that with songs like Mofo I guess but its still hard and I think perfectly understandable. Besides I doubt it holds much weight in representing feelings anymore.

Besides I dont think it would be the easiest translation in to a live setting. Maybe, maybe not.

I sort of like how its not played. At least for me it adds another dimension of meaning to it I guess. I like how it is sort of hidden and personal.
 
If Bono can reach the 'wide awake's on Bad, he sure as hell can fucking reach the high notes on Acrobat!!! Maybe they just don't think they could ever improve on the album version.
 
I wouldn't know about how difficult "Acrobat" is to perform live, as I am not a musician, but I did find this quote:

"We've been trying to work out how to get all the Achtung Baby sounds live. Basically we can do it if Edge plays something different with every one of his appendages."
Bono pushes Edge to the limit, January 1992.

Is it the guitar holding them back? The soundcheck was acoustic after all...

I think Edge should put all of his appendages to work on this.
 
mobvok said:


The only reason I can see that Acrobat never got played was that U2 was too determined on an Acrobat ---> Zoo Station transition like Hershey; and they didn't want to have Zoo Station be anything but the concert opener.

That's what I think as well,

I understand why they only wanted to open with zoo station, though I love the acrobat into zoo station segue - it sounds brilliant.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom