phanan
Blue Crack Addict
I really can't see anything other than Vertigo and COBL showing up on a consistent basis. Others may pop up here and there but they will be few and far between.
Which songs from HTDAAB will make it to next tour?
- Thread starter gman
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
shart1780
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Hopefully very few to none.
Peterrrrr
New Yorker
Vertigo(regular), STYCMIOYO, Cobl and CFYT
roy
Refugee
I also think acoustic Yahweh has a pretty good chance. 
david
ONE love, blood, life
Vertigo and maybe Fast Cars?
It depends on the sound of the new album and how the band feels about incorporating older material into a set list with newer material. It also depends on whether or not they're brave enough to let the new material dominate the set list, like they did during Zoo TV.
It depends on the sound of the new album and how the band feels about incorporating older material into a set list with newer material. It also depends on whether or not they're brave enough to let the new material dominate the set list, like they did during Zoo TV.
Mauwer
War Child
Vertigo and COBL , expecting not much more actually.
But if they do have to bring out another Bomb tune , let`s get One Step Closer this time.
Wished they would play it on the last tour.
Cheers ,
Mauwer
But if they do have to bring out another Bomb tune , let`s get One Step Closer this time.
Wished they would play it on the last tour.
Cheers ,
Mauwer
I'm surprised COBL is so widely expected, to be honest. I thought people would say "well, they already have Streets, so why a weak imitator too?" But then again, most of us said there was no way U2 would use all three of Vertigo, ABOY, and Elevation in one set and they did, so ...
coolian2
Blue Crack Supplier
Vertigo and COBL are the only ones that matter.
LAPOE would be alright.
LAPOE would be alright.
BonoIsMyMuse
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Axver said:
I actually thought COBL was better live than Vertigo. It might've just been my personal reaction to it, but I always loved the performances of COBL, but Vertigo seemed too flat and literal of a translation from album to stage to me at times.
I definitely wouldn't complain if they put Elevation to rest for the next tour, though...
BonoIsMyMuse said:
Oh, yeah, I completely agree. COBL was one of the highlights of the tour, and I think it and LAPOE were the HTDAAB songs that had the most impact live. But I remember a lot of comments here about "well, we don't really need two Streets-like songs, do we?", so I'm surprised that on this thread, it hasn't happened.
Joey788
Refugee
Hmm, I'm thinking that Vertigo and COBl will both be setlist standards. An occasional OOTS,Sometimes, and LAPOE might show up.
Vertigo can in many different places in the setlist. I think COBL might actually make a good closer for the entire show. What do you guys think?
Vertigo can in many different places in the setlist. I think COBL might actually make a good closer for the entire show. What do you guys think?
Slapnutz
Refugee
Just what I was about to say. I think Vertigo is a dead cert, and I can see Fast Cars making the odd appearance given their so called new direction.Axver said:
Axver said:
My thoughts, too. They'll always have space in sets for quickie rock songs, but these two are different and they both eat up a lot of space in a setlist.
You'd have to really separate the two songs because dynamically they both do similar things in a set. Closing a set with Streets and opening an encore with COBL seems pretty goofy and would just invite comparisons. The only place it would fit would be early in set 1, maybe bringing up the tone after a slow song.
Still seems redundant. Unless they cut the into and just get right to the kick-in.
Guess they could always dump Streets. And while I have no problem with them tipping sacred cows, people would absolutely freak. It's the money-shot of their shows.
shart1780
Rock n' Roll Doggie
If they dumped Streets for COBL I would freak. COBL can't compare. Not even close.
ZOOTVTOURist
Refugee
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
- Messages
- 1,700
"Vertigo" - that's all, I guess ...
The Disciple
New Yorker
shart1780 said:
While I, on the other hand, if it came down 2 keeping only one, would welcome the change.
Those of you who would freak if Streets got dumped should remember that it missed almost half of the European JT Tour shows and it last failed to appear on 18 November 1989 - when Gloria took its usual place.
While I would welcome removing Streets from a permanent slot, I think One needs to go first. It is the only U2 song that has not missed a gig since its debut (with the exclusion of five songs from the most recent two albums - BD, Elevation, Vertigo, SYCMIOYO, COBL). By the time the next tour rolls around, it will have been 17 years since One debuted in February 1992. Time to give it a rest.
While I would welcome removing Streets from a permanent slot, I think One needs to go first. It is the only U2 song that has not missed a gig since its debut (with the exclusion of five songs from the most recent two albums - BD, Elevation, Vertigo, SYCMIOYO, COBL). By the time the next tour rolls around, it will have been 17 years since One debuted in February 1992. Time to give it a rest.
Slapnutz
Refugee
COBL is a poor man's Streets imo.
INSTCUWSUMVC
Refugee
I think that COBL Vertigo and SYCMIOYO will with OOTS and LAPOE making some appearences
Drop Everything
Here's what I think about upcoming setlists: U2 should drop every old song, except for 3 or 4 from 'Atomic Bomb' which may be needed to prop up the length of the set.
At this point, do we really need the umpteenth version of 'Where The Streets Have No Name' and 'Sunday Bloody Sunday' and 'New Year's Day' and 'Until The End of the World'? I'm not saying they can't resurrect them on future tours, but at this point I'm sick of every single old tune, including those from All That You Can't Leave Behind.
What makes a band -- esp. of old guys -- essential, in my opinion, is their commitment to new material. Now I respect that U2 have always plugged their latest album in each tour. They're very much a "put-out-new-LP-then-plug-it-in-big-tour" kind of band, and that's something good when you're past 40. But I still feel that the past two tours were basically Greatest Hits tours -- and the Greatest-Hits-tour-doldrums is the moment a band becomes obsolete.
For me, when I watched, for example, the Vertigo Tour Video from Chicago, I was totally captivated by two parts of it: the Atomic Bomb songs, and the old numbers from Boy that hadn't been played in 24 years or whatever. All the rest of it bored me, frankly (although I enjoyed 'Zoo Station' because Edge totally owned it).
So, basically I think they should do a long tour of small-to-mid-sized venues, playing about 15 songs a set, with 10 from the new album, 2 or 3 from Bomb, and maybe a couple of covers or resurrected tunes from Boy or October or War.
My thesis is that, in rock, there's an inverse relationship between how many of your old hits you play and how relevant you remain.
Here's what I think about upcoming setlists: U2 should drop every old song, except for 3 or 4 from 'Atomic Bomb' which may be needed to prop up the length of the set.
At this point, do we really need the umpteenth version of 'Where The Streets Have No Name' and 'Sunday Bloody Sunday' and 'New Year's Day' and 'Until The End of the World'? I'm not saying they can't resurrect them on future tours, but at this point I'm sick of every single old tune, including those from All That You Can't Leave Behind.
What makes a band -- esp. of old guys -- essential, in my opinion, is their commitment to new material. Now I respect that U2 have always plugged their latest album in each tour. They're very much a "put-out-new-LP-then-plug-it-in-big-tour" kind of band, and that's something good when you're past 40. But I still feel that the past two tours were basically Greatest Hits tours -- and the Greatest-Hits-tour-doldrums is the moment a band becomes obsolete.
For me, when I watched, for example, the Vertigo Tour Video from Chicago, I was totally captivated by two parts of it: the Atomic Bomb songs, and the old numbers from Boy that hadn't been played in 24 years or whatever. All the rest of it bored me, frankly (although I enjoyed 'Zoo Station' because Edge totally owned it).
So, basically I think they should do a long tour of small-to-mid-sized venues, playing about 15 songs a set, with 10 from the new album, 2 or 3 from Bomb, and maybe a couple of covers or resurrected tunes from Boy or October or War.
My thesis is that, in rock, there's an inverse relationship between how many of your old hits you play and how relevant you remain.
TheBrazilianFly
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Vertigo
City of Blinding Lights
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own (not every night)
Original Of The Species (not evet night - rarely)
City of Blinding Lights
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own (not every night)
Original Of The Species (not evet night - rarely)
major_panic
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Second encore with COBL maybe? Or even closing with it?
last unicorn
Blue Crack Addict
Re: Drop Everything
And what's a long tour? The vertigo tour lasted more than two years, okay maybe minus the hiatus they had to take because of the postponement of the last leg. I don't think the chances of them touring for more than two years are very realistic, they had that in the 80s and, I'm sorry to say, age is also becoming a factor.
I agree that some of the songs need a reinvention, they shouldn't be dropped completely. The very old songs should be brought back as well and they should play more songs from their last two albums, alternatively. I simply cannot imagine them not playing "Streets" or "One", these songs basically sum up what U2 is to the majority of people.
The last leg of the Vertigo tour was basically a greatest hits tour, mainly because Australia/New Zealand didn't get the Elevation tour and had to wait that long for the band to return.
As much as I love the bootlegs, mainly because for Bono's great vocals, I feel it's a shame they didn't play the Boy-songs any more and that they didn't play more from Bomb. But I understand their reasons behind this decision.
That all sounds very sensible and logic to me, but the problem I'm seeing here is: Small venues = more fighting for tickets, more unease about the situation than there already was with the last tour, more fans not being able to get tickets. Then, the non-hardcore fans at the shows will find themselves disappointed by U2 not playing their best known songs.65980 said:
And what's a long tour? The vertigo tour lasted more than two years, okay maybe minus the hiatus they had to take because of the postponement of the last leg. I don't think the chances of them touring for more than two years are very realistic, they had that in the 80s and, I'm sorry to say, age is also becoming a factor.
I agree that some of the songs need a reinvention, they shouldn't be dropped completely. The very old songs should be brought back as well and they should play more songs from their last two albums, alternatively. I simply cannot imagine them not playing "Streets" or "One", these songs basically sum up what U2 is to the majority of people.
The last leg of the Vertigo tour was basically a greatest hits tour, mainly because Australia/New Zealand didn't get the Elevation tour and had to wait that long for the band to return.
As much as I love the bootlegs, mainly because for Bono's great vocals, I feel it's a shame they didn't play the Boy-songs any more and that they didn't play more from Bomb. But I understand their reasons behind this decision.
Re: Re: Drop Everything
No it didn't. Including the postponement, it ran from 28 March 2005 to 9 December 2006. Roughly 3.5 months shy of two years. Had there been no postponement and it had concluded in April 2006 as planned, it would have been just over 12 months long.
And we needed a greatest hits tour because we missed Elevation? That doesn't make sense. Sure, we missed out on the ATYCLB singles, but how does that justify bringing back hits like Desire and Angel Of Harlem? Those songs essentially debuted here on Lovetown! The reason those hits returned was because RAH is U2's most successful album in Australia. Plus, U2 have a tendency to make their sets safer and more full of hits as the tour progresses anyway. It has happened every tour since ZooTV.
last unicorn said:
No it didn't. Including the postponement, it ran from 28 March 2005 to 9 December 2006. Roughly 3.5 months shy of two years. Had there been no postponement and it had concluded in April 2006 as planned, it would have been just over 12 months long.
And we needed a greatest hits tour because we missed Elevation? That doesn't make sense. Sure, we missed out on the ATYCLB singles, but how does that justify bringing back hits like Desire and Angel Of Harlem? Those songs essentially debuted here on Lovetown! The reason those hits returned was because RAH is U2's most successful album in Australia. Plus, U2 have a tendency to make their sets safer and more full of hits as the tour progresses anyway. It has happened every tour since ZooTV.
Re: Re: Drop Everything
Okay, whatever. I'm not bothered about the length of the tour. I just wanted to make my point that it would cool if they played setlists of almost entirely new material, just as they did back in 1980 or 1981.
About the problem of supply and demand -- I've been a U2 fan since about 1988, and, having never seen them live, I tried to get tickets for their Vancouver shows in 2005. Despite queuing/lining up at 9am for them, the first show sold out before I got to the front of the line/queue. They then added a second show (each being 20,000 tix), and that also sold out before I had a chance to buy one ticket. So, do I really care if they play 90-seater clubs or 75,000-seater stadiums? Either way, I'm not going to get tickets unless Bono takes pity on me and spots me a couple free ones.
last unicorn said:
Okay, whatever. I'm not bothered about the length of the tour. I just wanted to make my point that it would cool if they played setlists of almost entirely new material, just as they did back in 1980 or 1981.
About the problem of supply and demand -- I've been a U2 fan since about 1988, and, having never seen them live, I tried to get tickets for their Vancouver shows in 2005. Despite queuing/lining up at 9am for them, the first show sold out before I got to the front of the line/queue. They then added a second show (each being 20,000 tix), and that also sold out before I had a chance to buy one ticket. So, do I really care if they play 90-seater clubs or 75,000-seater stadiums? Either way, I'm not going to get tickets unless Bono takes pity on me and spots me a couple free ones.
dr. zooeuss
War Child
I hope they keep: COBL, Yahweh and OOTS and bring in SometimesYCMIOYO and A Man and a Woman (yes I know they didn't play it on Vertigo), from time to time.
What I think they'll keep: Vertigo & COBL on virtually all dates (if not all dates)
possibly OOTS and Miracle Drug and Love & Peace and Yahweh from time to time..
What I think they'll keep: Vertigo & COBL on virtually all dates (if not all dates)
possibly OOTS and Miracle Drug and Love & Peace and Yahweh from time to time..
Similar threads
- Locked
