Why didnt U2 like Vertigo Discoteque

[Screwtape2]

It should be pointed out that on the last two tours when U2 has made an attempt at a song that they felt didn't work it was played was significantly lower than those in the past. Look at how long the songs that didn't work were played on Popmart compared to Elevation and Vertigo.

Popmart: Do You Feel Loved 6 times, Angels 23 times, Miami 62 times
Elevation: Peace On Earth 3 times, Wild Honey 11 times
Vertigo: Crumbs 7 times, Discotheque 2 times

 

[Chizip]

zootv opened with what, 7 or 8 new songs in a row? thats pretty daring.

 

[U2Man]

zoo

 

[Screwtape2]

zootv opened with what, 7 or 8 new songs in a row? thats pretty daring.

Compare that to how the Vertigo shows began on the first leg. One or two songs from the new album before waiting eight to nine songs before you heard another track from the album. So much for daring.

 

[Blue Room]

So now its down to setlist order instead of how many played? Whats the difference? Also some are saying the staticness of the setlist is the problem yet some are pointing to one of the most static tours they have done Zoo TV.

Just emphasizes that no matter what U2 do not everyone is going to be happy. There is always going to be a dissenting opinion. Even if the shook up the setlist there would be people complaining about that. Why was "X" song not played. Why are they playing "X" song. Etc...

 

[Screwtape2]

So now its down to setlist order instead of how many played? Whats the difference? Also some are saying the staticness of the setlist is the problem yet some are pointing to one of the most static tours they have done Zoo TV.

Just emphasizes that no matter what U2 do not everyone is going to be happy. There is always going to be a dissenting opinion. Even if the shook up the setlist there would be people complaining about that. Why was "X" song not played. Why are they playing "X" song. Etc...

If you've been reading the last few pages the main point is that U2 is hypersensitive about their image and what they play. Setlist order and the number of times certain tracks were played are a part of that point. Mixing up the setlists and the ZooTV are also a part of that. All you've done is disgard people's opinions in this thread as simple bitching with a smug, self-righteous attitude. You're the one who is always asking for sources, tell me how looking at the order and number of times a track is played isn't an effective way of showing a relationship between the "failure" of Pop and subsequent setlists?

 

[Blue Room]

If you've been reading the last few pages the main point is that U2 is hypersensitive about their image and what they play. Setlist order and the number of times certain tracks were played are a part of that point. Mixing up the setlists and the ZooTV are also a part of that. All you've done is disgard people's opinions in this thread as simple bitching with a smug, self-righteous attitude. You're the one who is always asking for sources, tell me how looking at the order and number of times a track is played isn't an effective way of showing a relationship between the "failure" of Pop and subsequent setlists?

Smug? I said it shows how people have dissenting opinions no matter what U2 do. How is that smug. All I was pointing out is that some say Zoo was daring because they played 7 straight from Achtung. Fair enough, but then there are others that say they need to mix up the setlist, that is what would be daring. Its a contradiction because Zoo was completely a static setlist. How is pointing that out smug?

 

[coolian2]

Smug? I said it shows how people have dissenting opinions no matter what U2 do. How is that smug. All I was pointing out is that some say Zoo was daring because they played 7 straight from Achtung. Fair enough, but then there are others that say they need to mix up the setlist, that is what would be daring. Its a contradiction because Zoo was completely a static setlist. How is pointing that out smug?

Because you're right.

 

[bono_man]

Does anyone have an mp3 of that? Thats fantastic!

jonedwards80@hotmail.com

thanks

 

[U2girl]

Disregarding 3 albums worth of work

Playing the same setlist for the whole tour

 

[An Cat Gav]

I think that the difference with Zoo Tv was that they were so confident in the quality of their new material that they dared to play 7 new songs in a row, maybe they didn't feel so confident about later material. Also, one of the main objectives with Achtung and Zoo Tv was to move away from the 80's U2 almost as if they were a new band. Pre UF material didn't apperar for many many months.
I don't have a problem with setlists staying roughly the same each night so long as each song is brilliant enough to warrant it's place, and no other song would be good enough to replace it, I think that was the case with Zoo Tv.

 

[coolian2]

I think that the difference with Zoo Tv was that they were so confident in the quality of their new material that they dared to play 7 new songs in a row, maybe they didn't feel so confident about later material. Also, one of the main objectives with Achtung and Zoo Tv was to move away from the 80's U2 almost as if they were a new band.

To be fair, i can't see 7 straight HTDAAB songs meshing together too well in a setlist

AB could manage it because the material was different, it suited the opening run of a show, while most of HTDAAB belongs more in the middle of a show when it isn't in full rock mode.