Radiohead discuss the "madness" of static setlists

[LemonMelon]

I think I'll make a Coldplay setlist next, to round it out.

Yellow
Yellow sped up (AKA White Shadows)
Clocks
Clocks slowed...wait, no, there's no difference at all (AKA Speed of Sound)
Trouble
Trouble again with no difference (AKA The Scientist)
Shiver
The Scientist with no difference really (AKA Fix You)

Yellow
Some other crappy B-side
Clocks
Yellow

There's your set. Wasn't it great? And they never change there's either!

 

[xaviMF22]

That's because Pablo Honey sucks with the exception of Creep and Stop Whispering.

Pop is a great record, one of my favorites, but the way some people defend it on here like their first-born child is ridiculous.

Pablo Honey sucks period...yes Creep is crap

 

[LMP]

Yellow
Yellow sped up (AKA White Shadows)
Clocks
Clocks slowed...wait, no, there's no difference at all (AKA Speed of Sound)
Trouble
Trouble again with no difference (AKA The Scientist)
Shiver
The Scientist with no difference really (AKA Fix You)

Yellow
Some other crappy B-side
Clocks
Yellow

There's your set. Wasn't it great? And they never change there's either!

now let's wait for tehu2fly to make the definitive version.

 

[AtomicBono]

Rotating setlists my ass.

Listen, I appreciate that a lot of people who have careers or the money can save up for several non-tour years to attend a marathon string of eight shows in several states/provinces.

You make up about 5% of the audience.

I considered myself lucky enough to attend ONE Vertigo show, considering how hard tickets were to get, and I only got to get GA tickets by chance and a very lovely, friendly person from one of the mailing lists.

What I'm getting at is.... don't complain about the frigging U2 setlists. They're there so that Little Miss WOWY can hear the song she danced to at her prom, Mr. Pride Oldypants can listen to the tired rendition of his favourite song, and I can hear Until the End of the World live.

Just about anything live that seems spontanious is planned to look so, and there is no Santa Claus.

That is all.

you rock. And I sure know what you mean about not being able to follow the band around. I considered myself xtremely lucky to go to two Vertigo shows, and probably the only reason I was able to get tickets was they fucked up my presale code for leg 1 and gave me a new one, so the old one was still good for leg 3 and I think I had someone else help me pay for Cleveland. But yeah, can't follow the band around, so if they had a static setlist that included Discotheque and Mofo, I wouldn't complain

I don't think U2 need to be more "spontaneous" than just rotate sets a bit more. Rotate. Not "here we're gonna play MERCY OMGF LOZLZ!!!11 and now THINGS TO MAKE AND DO BUT I FORGOT THE WORDS SO I'LL JUST TALK OVER IT LOLK!!!11" Just have like three components of the set with three different configurations (not every song has to be different with each config), and put them together different ways. That way there would be more variation but U2 wouldn't have to rehearse like 100 songs. They could probably play about as many different songs as they did on Vertigo, MAYBE a bit more, and just switch around which nights they do which songs, and perhaps some of the order. Does that make any sense?

Really though, I make suggestions on here, but when I actually see U2 I'm just thrilled to see them, so I don't give a fuck what they play, I know I'll love it.

I disagree that Pablo Honey sucks. My least favourite Radiohead record prolly, but it doesn't suck. I enjoy pretty much the whole record

 

[phillyfan26]

Simple for me. Play a general setlist with 3 or 4 songs you mix up every night.

And about the lighting and crew thing - they have the setlist set before the shows, so the crew knows what's going to happen and has time to prepare. If they throw a curveball, you can go with just the lights on and no effects, right?

 

[gareth brown]

That's because Pablo Honey sucks with the exception of Creep and Stop Whispering.

Pop is a great record, one of my favorites, but the way some people defend it on here like their first-born child is ridiculous.

Pablo Honey's great in it's own way, I'm not going to pretend it's their greatest album like some people may do about 'Pop' but there are some great tracks among the 'crap'! 'Blow Out' for example. Best track on the album.

 

[theu2fly]

Another Radiohead setlist:

01) 2+2=5
02) Airbag
03) Morning Bell
04) Lucky
05) Packt Like Sardines In A Crushed Tin Box
06) Dollars And Cents
07) Where I End And You Begin
08) My Iron Lung
09) Maquiladora
10) Palo Alto
11) I Might Be Wrong
12) Like Spinning Plates
13) Pyramid Song
14) Sit Down, Stand Up
15) Backdrifts
16) There There

17) The Bends
18) A Punch Up At A Wedding
19) Scatterbrain
20) How To Disappear Completely

21) Fake Plastic Trees
22) Creep
23) Karma Police

 

[doctorwho]

imagine going to vertigo expecting what theyve been doing then getting some of these:

out of control
a sort of homecoming
dirty day
11 o'clock tick tock
discotheque
mofo
IYWTVD
walk on
exit
red hill mining town
desire
ultraviolet
two hearts beat as one

wouldnt you be more excited than normal?

As a fan who saw many shows, sure, this setlist, while a tad unrealistic (as even acknowledged by you), would be fun.

But if I was seeing just one show, as I sadly had to do during PopMart, I would be disappointed. I want to hear songs from the new album. With the most recent tour, obviously HTDAAB songs are needed. I'd be livid not to hear them because I'd feel U2 was truly glorifying their past at the expense of the present.

With the 6-9 new songs they do from their current release, that leaves 11 to as many as 14 songs (if U2 are in that generous mood) for older material. And there are classics I want to hear in person, even if I've heard them before. These include "Streets" and "One", etc.

And hence the problem.

Radiohead doesn't have hits. O.K., they've had a few hit songs, but really, they are about a mood. Their songs on any given album just blend right into each other (one of the drawbacks of U2's "Joshua Tree", save for 2 songs, and I'm glad U2 broke out of that mode!). So they can mix things up because really, it all blends. In other words, there's no "Vertigo" to mix in with a "Miss Sarajevo". There's no "Desire" to toss in with a "One". There's no "Streets" to toss in with an "An Cat Dubh". There's no "Out of Control" to toss in with "Sometimes...". And because U2 has had so many hit songs over the years, there is demand from the average concert attendee to hear these songs.

All of that said, I do think U2 can actually do both. That is, they can do their 7 or so songs from their new album. They can have their crowd favorites, and then they should do a section in the middle of the show that is unique. That is, a block of 3-5 songs that varies every night. This way fans will have no idea of what this block will be. In fact, I think for their next tour (or if they resume their current tour), this would be ideal. U2 can even draw attention to this block calling it the "wild" part of the show. This would excite fans that see multiple shows and remove complaints about the static set-list as each night could be different. This would also give U2 the freedom to really explore old songs and have fun with them. If something doesn't work, who cares? They only did it once and they can toss it aside in the future - but at least they tried it again and the lucky fans that heard that song will cherish the memory.

So while U2 can never be a Radiohead or Dave Matthews Band - and not only do I not mind this, but I'm happy for it - they can have a bit of fun if they have this "wild" 3-5 random song section each night.

 

[U2Man]

Sadly totally unrealistic, doctorwho. If U2 goes so far as to bring in a new 4 seconds Beatles snippet at a show, all their fan sites explode in joy. That says a lot about what we are used to. There's absolutely no way we'll see 3-5 songs rotated every night. I like your idea, though.