And that's U2's fault.
And that's U2's fault.
No. But they should perhaps bear it in mind
that is childish BVS, quoting just a part of a sentence. You know what I mean. They have a FANTASTIC cataloque of songs and it wouldnt be a bad thing to change the setlist more.
They should bear in mind the small percentage that can't control themselves or may see more than one show?
the thousands who will follow the tour and not(be able to?) see a show.
Now there's an interesting response. So they should think about all those that read setlist and vary it up so they will get more pleasure READING setlists...
I've heard it all.
Perhaps think about it before dismissing it outta hand. Its not as daft as it seems....
I work for an American company and i believe they call it 'Blue Sky Thinking'
You don't work for GM or Chrysler do you?
I'm sorry, I don't think that makes much sense.
Why would a band structure its concerts around fans that aren't going to even see the concerts, rather than for the fans they can at least reasonably assume will be there? A concert is built for the attendees, not the armchair quarterbacks.
Like when Plebans take over set list party like on Sunday and the special brownies are served!Just look at the setlist parties (i know we are only talking about a handful of hardcore fans here) but the interest this tour wanes when Unknown Caller starts as the rest is (at the moment) pretty much set.But boy does the excitement level raise when something different happens
..
Like when Plebans take over set list party like on Sunday and the special brownies are served!
I get rather bored reading the argument "oh well U2 has always done the hits live, therefore why should you expect them to change?" Here's a reason- they've now done more albums, which ought to put more pressure on them to mix things up far more. Yes, the band should play some staples but if they did stuff like EBTTRT nad Discotheque they might be pleasantly surprised by the positive reaction.
I get rather bored reading the argument "oh well U2 has always done the hits live, therefore why should you expect them to change?" Here's a reason- they've now done more albums, which ought to put more pressure on them to mix things up far more. Yes, the band should play some staples but if they did stuff like EBTTRT nad Discotheque they might be pleasantly surprised by the positive reaction.
They should bear in mind the small percentage that can't control themselves or may see more than one show? Should PJ bear in mind the small percentage of casual fans and play more mainstream set lists?
Of course I know what you mean, no one is denying they have a fantastic catalogue. But some of you keep ignoring the fact that this is just the type of show U2 wants to put on. IT'S BEEN THIS WAY SINCE JT. It's a show. It's not just a random collection of back catalogue. They like playing WOWY, it gets a whole stadium singing back to them. This is the type of show they like, I don't know why anyone expects for them to be like Springsteen all of a sudden and decades...
Exactly. We're not asking for Springsteen - hell, the setlist could even stay static, or have the same structure, if you catch my drift. It's just criminal that there's brilliant songs out there that aren't being played, when they easily could.I really don't think anyone on this board actually expects a Springsteen type experience, and if they do, well they are delusional. Everyone here knows exactly what kind of a band U2 is and I think most here acknowledge and are not "ignoring" that the current format is the type of show of U2 obviously wants to perform. Alot of people on this board are simply expressing that they would like to see some variety.
No. But they should perhaps bear it in mind
I really don't think anyone on this board actually expects a Springsteen type experience, and if they do, well they are delusional. Everyone here knows exactly what kind of a band U2 is and I think most here acknowledge and are not "ignoring" that the current format is the type of show of U2 obviously wants to perform. Alot of people on this board are simply expressing that they would like to see some variety.
having defended u2 earlier - by which i mean saying i don't like static setlists and they shouldn't do it but they always have so don't expect change etc, i will say that on paper the setlists are starting to get pathetic even for u2.