Album 13: Arguing/Punning/Meme-ing/Discussion thread

[trevgreg]

In my humble opinion, the NLOTH songs didn't get the live treatment they should have had because some of them worked really well. Boots, love it or hate it, was one of them, also NLOTH, which was dropped to early, and Breathe, yes, Breathe, even though I know many people didn't like it as an opener, I still think it worked quite well. I'm not so sure about the Crazy remix and don't think it will ever be played again. Magnificent was fine, too, I remember the audience being very much into it, it's such a great song, but Bono was struggling a bit with the vocals on that one. Unknown Caller, on the other hand, was awkward with all the karaoke style sing along, I liked it on the album but it didn't do very much for me live. In retrospect I'd say, NLOTH live was a mixed bag. U2 should have tried all of the songs at some point, hell, even SUC should have been played, it screamed for a live rendition.

I think they played just about all the songs off the album that they could have played at a show. The Crazy Tonight remix alone saved the song from being a snoozer live, imo. But there's not many cases where I can see the other four coming across that well in a live setting. Someone once suggested Fez-Being Born being used as an opener, and I see a bit of merit to that argument (a bit, haha). Other than that, I do think the ones that got played came off okay. You can make arguments about a handful of people ignoring them at a show, but that's the same case for every band out there. It happens.

 

[schnumi]

NLOTH2 with the lyrics from the real single would have been a killer.

It had a great rythem and pace really really good.

Sent from my HTC One using U2 Interference mobile app

 

[ClaytonsKitten]

The band should make MOS the new One from here on out. One needs a break bad from their live set. The band seems really proud of MOS and I can see them still playing it.

No, Walk On needs the set break. One could be used as more of a lifter than a downer, if they changed it's placement from the end/early encore position that it seems stuck in.

And while we're at it, I had better not see hide nor hair of Suck In A Moment.

 

[Registered Dude]

all this NLOTH live stuff reminds me of my own opinion on the matter...

...but I'll spare you.


I'd bet the band are very aware of how well the last record's songs translated live (for better or for worse), and I'd bet that that knowledge influenced the kinds of songs they've written for the record this time around.

I'm predicting a record that translates live, easily and naturally

 

[Nick66]

The band should make MOS the new One from here on out. One needs a break bad from their live set. The band seems really proud of MOS and I can see them still playing it.

This is actually a pretty good idea.

I'd love MOS to return, along with NLOTH (the original version, which is one of their best rockers of any era). The problem with MOS is I just can't see where they fit that into the set list. Ending on it seemed like the best place, but otherwise, as much as I love the song, I can see where it would be a bit of a show stopper.

Still, putting it in the One slot could be the best option...perhaps by shortening it to 4:30 or so. Sacrilege for those of us that adore the song, I know, but it might make sense for them.

 

[Nick66]

No, Walk On needs the set break.

And while we're at it, I had better not see hide nor hair of Suck In A Moment.

Bono would be ashamed of you.

 

[chork]

"One" is but one in an ever-lengthening list of songs that need to be put to rest live.

 

[powerhour24]

What current era of dominance would that be? They haven't been the leading distributor of mobile devices fora few years now.

Sent from my android cause iphones are for old people

Profit, market cap, cash reserves, music sales, and yes they sell the best selling tablet brand and to this day the best selling single smartphone model every year.

In the US their plurality of mobile os usage is growing. Their os usage share has shrunk elsewhere but their sales have grown every year, the market itself has expanded vastly in that time.

As with computers in the past 20 years they don't need a majority to be more profitable than everyone else. Other than a portion of Samsung sales almost all smartphone sales are very low margin. Google hopes to make money off Android through its web services but a large portion of handsets sold in the developing world don't utilize them or can't run them anyway (though Kitkat has improved its performance on low end hardware).

They are the most valuable company in the world, they have something like $125b in cash on hand.


My point was they haven't had a Super Bowl ad since they've exploded in consumer electronics because they spend more conservatively on ads than their competitors because they still own the mindshare.

 

[Nick66]

I have mixed feelings on deleting songs like "One" from the set list.

A lot of people here, I think, who go to multiple shows on every tour, can tend to get into a bubble on stuff like this. For the majority of people at any given U2 concert, it will be the only show they attend that tour. And for a good number them, it will be their first U2 concert ever. So I can see U2 not wanting to disappoint people who pay very good money and expect to hear songs like One and WOWY. A LOT of people, especially casual fans and first time goers, would leave the stadium or arena very let down if they didn't hear one but instead got, I don't know, LWTSH. (The same argument can be made to a lesser extent on mixing up the set list night to night).

Having said that, I thought the performances of several of the warhorses on the last tour, and in particular One, sounded just like U2 going through the motions, and if you can't play a song like One and mean it, it's maybe better to just not play it at all. But that's speaking as someone who knows all those songs really well, has seen them played live, and doesn't necessarily need to hear them played again (especially badly). Most casual fans probably wouldn't even notice.

So, yeah, I'm on the fence on that one.

 

[powerhour24]

1st single off nloth should of been nloth. Great song with a very different edgey sound.

2nd single magnificent. If the first single was a different sound this release would make people believe the good old u2 is still there.

3rd single breathe.mainy because its a cracking tune

This is what I've thought all along. NLOTH is the title track, it would have been built in marketing for the album as the lead single, Magnificent is the U2 anthem of that album with an infectious riff, and Breathe could have been a cool summer single. It's all for not in an era where the only "rock" music on the top 40 at the time was Coldplay and One Republic.

I admire the idea of MOS as lead single but it would have been butchered in a radio edit & probably would have fizzled just as fast as Boots, as a later single it could have been cool & wouldn't have had the pressure on it a lead begets.

 

[Sanchez]

https://twitter.com/U2comZooMods/status/425651080228122624

‏@U2comZooMods
Good morning everyone! Make sure that passport is valid, you have enough time to renew

 

[Nick66]

https://twitter.com/U2comZooMods/status/425651080228122624

‏@U2comZooMods
Good morning everyone! Make sure that passport is valid, you have enough time to renew

What is that even supposed to mean?

 

[PhilsFan]

I have mixed feelings on deleting songs like "One" from the set list.

A lot of people here, I think, who go to multiple shows on every tour, can tend to get into a bubble on stuff like this. For the majority of people at any given U2 concert, it will be the only show they attend that tour. And for a good number them, it will be their first U2 concert ever. So I can see U2 not wanting to disappoint people who pay very good money and expect to hear songs like One and WOWY. A LOT of people, especially casual fans and first time goers, would leave the stadium or arena very let down if they didn't hear one but instead got, I don't know, LWTSH. (The same argument can be made to a lesser extent on mixing up the set list night to night).

Having said that, I thought the performances of several of the warhorses on the last tour, and in particular One, sounded just like U2 going through the motions, and if you can't play a song like One and mean it, it's maybe better to just not play it at all. But that's speaking as someone who knows all those songs really well, has seen them played live, and doesn't necessarily need to hear them played again (especially badly). Most casual fans probably wouldn't even notice.

So, yeah, I'm on the fence on that one.

Precisely. It's not because U2 can't have a few songs they play every night, it's because they've hardly played an inspired version of One since the 90s.

 

[Tim Wallach]

"One" is but one in an ever-lengthening list of songs that need to be put to rest live.

I was thinking about this and couldn't disagree more (with all due respect). While there are a number that don't do much for me live anymore because I incessantly attend shows, I tried to put it in perspective:

- This is one of the greatest live bands ever to inhabit the earth. They tour every four or five years and own some of the best songs ever written (of which "One" is amongst the best)
- I'm not sure how in any way, shape or form it can disappoint me or bore me to have to put up with seeing U2 play that song live with me in the room
- So then I extrapolate to the 90% of fans at the show who are attending the only show they'll see by U2 and I think of how pissed they'd be if it didn't get played
- Finally, I thought of suitable replacements. And while, like everyone else here I have my cult favorites, the reality is there aren't realistic, crowd-pleasing replacements

Hence, I emphatically am on the side of One staying as a key piece of the set.
(However, some that aren't nearly as strong or don't have nearly the cache with casual fans have become war horses too, so maybe they can do something acoustic other than Stuck or Stay for instance).

 

[mama cass]

I have mixed feelings on deleting songs like "One" from the set list.

A lot of people here, I think, who go to multiple shows on every tour, can tend to get into a bubble on stuff like this. For the majority of people at any given U2 concert, it will be the only show they attend that tour. And for a good number them, it will be their first U2 concert ever. So I can see U2 not wanting to disappoint people who pay very good money and expect to hear songs like One and WOWY. A LOT of people, especially casual fans and first time goers, would leave the stadium or arena very let down if they didn't hear one but instead got, I don't know, LWTSH. (The same argument can be made to a lesser extent on mixing up the set list night to night).

Having said that, I thought the performances of several of the warhorses on the last tour, and in particular One, sounded just like U2 going through the motions, and if you can't play a song like One and mean it, it's maybe better to just not play it at all. But that's speaking as someone who knows all those songs really well, has seen them played live, and doesn't necessarily need to hear them played again (especially badly). Most casual fans probably wouldn't even notice.

So, yeah, I'm on the fence on that one.

i'm not even on the fence... One should stay - it's easily one of U2's greatest songs...

 

[Danny Boy]

What is that even supposed to mean?

It means renewal rates for U2.com were down year-over-year due to the annual gift not containing a CD, so they have instructed their unpaid minions to send out cryptic messages.

 

[mama cass]

I was thinking about this and couldn't disagree more (with all due respect). While there are a number that don't do much for me live anymore because I incessantly attend shows, I tried to put it in perspective:

- This is one of the greatest live bands ever to inhabit the earth. They tour every four or five years and own some of the best songs ever written (of which "One" is amongst the best)
- I'm not sure how in any way, shape or form it can disappoint me or bore me to have to put up with seeing U2 play that song live with me in the room
- So then I extrapolate to the 90% of fans at the show who are attending the only show they'll see by U2 and I think of how pissed they'd be if it didn't get played
- Finally, I thought of suitable replacements. And while, like everyone else here I have my cult favorites, the reality is there aren't realistic, crowd-pleasing replacements

Hence, I emphatically am on the side of One staying as a key piece of the set.
(However, some that aren't nearly as strong or don't have nearly the cache with casual fans have become war horses too, so maybe they can do something acoustic other than Stuck or Stay for instance).

ha you just beat me to it

 

[mama cass]

What is that even supposed to mean?

tour announcement soon i would imagine?

 

[Danny Boy]

Precisely. It's not because U2 can't have a few songs they play every night, it's because they've hardly played an inspired version of One since the 90s.

I have been crucified for saying this before, but it was time to put One to bed when they dedicated it to Michael Hutchence...

"Is it getting better..."

"No, as a matter of fact it wasn't getting better, so I fucking killed myself."

 

[LadySpinHead]

What is that even supposed to mean?

U2.com member mixer/album release party at Bono's house.

 

[Hollow Island]

I have mixed feelings on deleting songs like "One" from the set list.

A lot of people here, I think, who go to multiple shows on every tour, can tend to get into a bubble on stuff like this. For the majority of people at any given U2 concert, it will be the only show they attend that tour. And for a good number them, it will be their first U2 concert ever. So I can see U2 not wanting to disappoint people who pay very good money and expect to hear songs like One and WOWY. A LOT of people, especially casual fans and first time goers, would leave the stadium or arena very let down if they didn't hear one but instead got, I don't know, LWTSH. (The same argument can be made to a lesser extent on mixing up the set list night to night).

Having said that, I thought the performances of several of the warhorses on the last tour, and in particular One, sounded just like U2 going through the motions, and if you can't play a song like One and mean it, it's maybe better to just not play it at all. But that's speaking as someone who knows all those songs really well, has seen them played live, and doesn't necessarily need to hear them played again (especially badly). Most casual fans probably wouldn't even notice.

So, yeah, I'm on the fence on that one.

Anyone would notice a song being played badly and without heart.

Since U2 have so many songs that are classics and that people would want to hear at their first show, U2 should just make a list of things they have to play and pick five of them for each show.

Surely U2 know that as soon as an artists tries to please the audience, the art suffers.

 

[Hollow Island]

I hope to hell U2 leave the acoustic guitars at home on the upcoming tour.

 

[powerhour24]

Seriously, please play Stay full band.

 

[Steve_Bono]

And Android has an 80% worldwide smart phone market share. And people listen to music on smart phones now, not iPods.

Soon again... what dominance?

Sent from my android cause iphones are for old people

I can't stand new functionally irrelevant technology. The old compact Disc Player works just fine for playing music.

 

[mama cass]

Seriously, please play Stay full band.

(i'm not even planning on going this time round, but that would be gorgeous)

 

[powerhour24]

One should stay if it stops being speechified and gets a new lease on life. I didn't think any of the other war horses were done weakly last tour, Sunday Bloody Sunday especially seemed revitalized. It'd be pretty cool if they did that arrangement they did of it for that One Campaign video last year (though it would break my avowed agreement above to no acoustic guitars).

 

[Danny Boy]

I can't stand new functionally irrelevant technology. The old compact Disc Player works just fine for playing music.

What? So does my Teac tape deck but so what?

 

[trevgreg]

Surely U2 know that as soon as an artists tries to please the audience, the art suffers.

I don't exactly see people demanding their money back after every show they play. Obviously, something is going right then.

The set list argument has been beaten into the ground over and over, but there are a few details I'll throw in there.

- So then I extrapolate to the 90% of fans at the show who are attending the only show they'll see by U2 and I think of how pissed they'd be if it didn't get played

Unfortunately, it's the 10% perspective that usually becomes the most said on message boards. It's easy enough to say that they have enough hits to alternate every single night or should go through the work to add variety. But it's not like we don't go to other shows for other artists either. Would we want to hear nothing but obscure album tracks and b-sides at those shows? We might go to ones where we only hear 3 or 4 tracks we're familiar with, and unless the artists is absolutely mind-blowing, we're not going to consider that a 'great' show. It's just not happening. We might enjoy it somewhat or look up a few tracks afterward, but I highly doubt it's one we can fully invest ourselves in.

- Finally, I thought of suitable replacements. And while, like everyone else here I have my cult favorites, the reality is there aren't realistic, crowd-pleasing replacements.

I don't even know if playing obscure-such-and-such is going to satisfy the 10% in the end either. If they pull out some album track off of War, are we going to know every word and sing along? A lot of us will, but even a lot of the hard-core fans can't name every single track by the band, much less remember or know the lyrics/music.

 

[powerhour24]

U2 has a dozen albums, they don't even have to get into b-sides to find plenty of material that would be worth reviving.

Hollow Island makes a good point, a rotation of the war horses could do well to please most in a utilitarian way by having plenty of the greatest hits but not taking up so many slots as to be the same show over and over to the hardcore fans. Plus it leaves room for the new material, which if they forgo in favor of more greatest hits they'd be breaking their own principle for touring based on material they're excited about rather than just selling tickets on old glory.

 

[subnet]

I have always thought Exit should make a return.