The "casual fan" excuse

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Again, no shit. I even said that in the post you quoted....Since I go to muliple shows, I would love to hear different songs. Yet, I UNDERSTAND their logic for playing what they do, and I don't see any point to bitch about it....(Your above post would be fine by me)

In you post above you mention four songs, yet list three.

And please explain how the "Casual Fan" excuse has been "debunked"

Take it easy, dude.

I forget to put Until the End of the World. My bad.

I'm saying I understand it but think it's flawed logic.
 
Can you please state, in a complete sentence, what you think the exact sub-debate was? I'm serious...

I could care less about your "sub-debates" the overall point was that setlist are much more varied now than then and you helped him prove that point.

I thank you. And, I'm serious.
 
As I've said many times, you have to wait a few shows for the "standard setlist" to gel/materialize. All the power to U2 if they actually do start varying the set the way you're presently suggesting... but that's not what we're asking for, nor is it likely (unless they were influenced by my amazing thread).

So why complain after one show?

And to repost your own comment from the first post:

U2 doesn't have to vary their setlist every night - That's not what's being asked for... they just need to know that there is a greater number of songs from which to draw than they seem to realize...

Each tour since Popmart, they have increased the total number of songs that make up the "pool". The last tour, had the highest number of "pool songs" since at least Lovetown. So I'm not sure you are arguing a valid point.
 
Looking at their whole history, they have done a fine job adding to the mix. The band isn't gonna rehearse 70+ songs to play on a single tour. (Bono needs a teleprompter as it is, and can't seem to come in at the right time anyways)

Boy
20 different songs played during 157 shows

October
26 different songs played during 102 shows

War
28 different songs played during 109 shows

UF
31 different songs played during 113 shows

JT
44 different songs played during 109 shows

Lovetown
38 different songs played during 47 shows

ZOO TV
54 different songs played during 158 shows

Popmart
55 different songs played during 94 shows (14 Karaoke Songs, so 41?)

Elevation
51 different songs played during 113 shows

Vertigo
60 different songs played during 132 shows
 
So why complain after one show?

And to repost your own comment from the first post:



Each tour since Popmart, they have increased the total number of songs that make up the "pool". The last tour, had the highest number of "pool songs" since at least Lovetown. So I'm not sure you are arguing a valid point.

Maybe that's the problem... you're using "pool" in one way, I'm using it in another.

Also, was discussing after one show because it's, more or less, going to be that... it's like calling an election.
 
I could care less about your "sub-debates" the overall point was that setlist are much more varied now than then and you helped him prove that point.

I thank you. And, I'm serious.

Isn't it I couldn't care less... wouldn't that make more sense?

Don't say you're "serious" in thanking me, because you're obviously not... I'm debating one side, you're on the other...

I asked you kindly to explain your point... just seeking clarification so as to keep some coherence in our arguments. I'm still not sure you know what you're arguing...
 
Maybe that's the problem... you're using "pool" in one way, I'm using it in another.

Also, was discussing after one show because it's, more or less, going to be that... it's like calling an election.

You make no sense. What other "pool" would we use? They played 60 different songs last tour. More than any other tour in their history.

You sir, are a troll. I'm done.
 
Isn't it I couldn't care less... wouldn't that make more sense?
You are correct sir, thank you.

Don't say you're "serious" in thanking me, because you're obviously not... I'm debating one side, you're on the other...
But you helped prove "my side" so I thanked you.

I asked you kindly to explain your point... just seeking clarification so as to keep some coherence in our arguments. I'm still not sure you know what you're arguing...
Says the person who just helped prove the other side...:huh:

Look, you're doing with Chris what you did with me yesterday, you are arguing semantics in order to throw off the argument because you realized you are wrong. You're transparent.


You do remember what the thread is about, right? I mean you should you started it...
 
Pfan, I like your idea. :up:

However:

They played 60 different songs last tour. More than any other tour in their history.

That kinda says it all as far as actual variety goes.













Oh, and in case anybody didn't catch it:

They played MORE unique songs last tour than in any of their previous tours.

[/thread]
 
You make no sense. What other "pool" would we use? They played 60 different songs last tour. More than any other tour in their history.

You sir, are a troll. I'm done.

So you're saying they've played a greater absolute number of different songs each tour? Isn't that to-be-expected? They didn't have hundreds of songs from which to choose during those early tours (imagine that?). Another way to use the word "pool" would be in the catalogue sense. How are U2 covering their catalogue relative to those early tours? They've been on the decline... but you need to look deeper to derive any useful conclusions from basic information.
 
During the Boy tour, U2 played 20 different songs. During Vertigo, they played like 60. Therefore, variation has increased... this is your argument?

Ever wonder why they sometimes compare things "per capita" instead of in terms of absolute numbers?
 
Pfan, I like your idea. :up:

However:



That kinda says it all as far as actual variety goes.













Oh, and in case anybody didn't catch it:

They played MORE unique songs last tour than in any of their previous tours.

[/thread]

I know you're a Mod but, with all due respect, absolute numbers don't tell the whole story.
 
During the Boy tour, U2 played 20 different songs. During Vertigo, they played like 60. Therefore, variation has increased... this is your argument?

Ever wonder why they sometimes compare things "per capita" instead of in terms of absolute numbers?

Yes but there's a lot of fault in using percentages as well because for the most part setlists stay the same length so Boy would read as they used 100% of their catalogue, JT they used 50%, and so on and so on... You're back to semantics.

Why don't we get back to your original point which is that you think the majority in the stands right now, know the majority of their catalog, and most of us don't believe that to be true. Am I correct in understanding your original premise?
 
Yes but there's a lot of fault in using percentages as well because for the most part setlists stay the same length so Boy would read as they used 100% of their catalogue, JT they used 50%, and so on and so on... You're back to semantics.

Why don't we get back to your original point which is that you think the majority in the stands right now, know the majority of their catalog, and most of us don't believe that to be true. Am I correct in understanding your original premise?

Some of you should really tone down when you post... I've made it clear that what you call "percentages" is not completely accurate (you have to look deeper), we probably won't be able to... but it certainly should not come as a grand surprise that the absolute number of unique songs played per tour is increasing. To present that as some sort-of amazing fact is, frankly, ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure I didn't lead us on to this sub-debate, maybe... it doesn't matter.

And, No, you're not citing me accurately... reread my first post... I think most "casual fans" (better termed average fans) know more than we're giving them credit for.

People have come along and agreed with me...
 
Sorry, I feel the need to state this because some have attributed way too much importance to absolute numbers...

"60 unique songs played during Vertigo"... 18 of those were played less than 10 times. Over 132 shows.


"60" doesn't really tell much of a story, does it...
 
How's tonight's setlist then? Honestly, if you think they should have cut the staples out of tonight's set? I'd call that a bit much.

It's more of the trend that I'm trying to analyze... it's a bit early for that.

But, I think that WOWY, Streets, Pride, SBS, and One every night is far too much.

I think some of the lesser "greatest hits" could also be switched up without affecting fan appreciation (in fact, I think it'd go up).

No complaints as far as NLOTH tracks go...
 
It's more of the trend that I'm trying to analyze... it's a bit early for that.

But, I think that WOWY, Streets, Pride, SBS, and One every night is far too much.

I think some of the lesser "greatest hits" could also be switched up without affecting fan appreciation (in fact, I think it'd go up).

No complaints as far as NLOTH tracks go...

So further switching out to reduce the 5 staples that you listed? Not only is that unrealistic, I think it's rather selfish. Not everyone has seen U2 20 times. Even fewer have heard all the bootlegs. Many people would love to see those 5 songs and 5 more of the other 'overplayed' songs.

Really I'm not sure what the point of this thread is, given how early in the tour it is. If U2 keeps up the way they have, seems to me that this tour will feature the least number of 'warhorses' of any U2 tour, ever.

The people that are agreeing with you represent maybe 0.01% (if not less lol) of the entire U2 fanbase. Noone in the mainstream complains because U2 keeps playing Streets, WOWY, Pride, etc.
 
I am a diehard/know all the songs/love the rare ones/listen to the bootlegs every version possible kind of girl.

And I know damn well that I want those staples in my U2 show. Yes, they may not look too exciting on paper (or screen, rather). But there is a certain energy when those songs get played. You KNOW everybody knows them. Everybody can sing along. Everybody feels the love. These are the songs that made U2 the hit and worldwide success.

Also, With or Without You is my favorite song of all time, and I know I would feel a huge empty gap if it was not played. Say what you like, and yes, it may not be played as well as it has been in the past, but it does not deserve to be retired. That song is beautiful and means the world to me, and I'd like to hear it no matter how it sounds.

I don't mean this to sound rude at all, but I feel like U2 staples are awesome at every show.
 
So further switching out to reduce the 5 staples that you listed? Not only is that unrealistic, I think it's rather selfish. Not everyone has seen U2 20 times. Even fewer have heard all the bootlegs. Many people would love to see those 5 songs and 5 more of the other 'overplayed' songs.

Really I'm not sure what the point of this thread is, given how early in the tour it is. If U2 keeps up the way they have, seems to me that this tour will feature the least number of 'warhorses' of any U2 tour, ever.

The people that are agreeing with you represent maybe 0.01% (if not less lol) of the entire U2 fanbase. Noone in the mainstream complains because U2 keeps playing Streets, WOWY, Pride, etc.

Excellent point. It really is multiple show fanatics and setlist watchers that this really effects in any way :up: Which let's face it we're not even close to the majority of their audience.
 
So further switching out to reduce the 5 staples that you listed? Not only is that unrealistic, I think it's rather selfish. Not everyone has seen U2 20 times. Even fewer have heard all the bootlegs. Many people would love to see those 5 songs and 5 more of the other 'overplayed' songs.

Really I'm not sure what the point of this thread is, given how early in the tour it is. If U2 keeps up the way they have, seems to me that this tour will feature the least number of 'warhorses' of any U2 tour, ever.

The people that are agreeing with you represent maybe 0.01% (if not less lol) of the entire U2 fanbase. Noone in the mainstream complains because U2 keeps playing Streets, WOWY, Pride, etc.

I haven't seen U2 anywhere near 20 times...

Who listens to all the U2 bootlegs? What would be the point?

You're not sure what the point of this thread is... yet you contribute. You think it's silly that we're judging this early, yet you asked the direct question.

I think it'd be more than >.01%. You're twisting what's being asked for... I'm pretty sure even Bono is tired of singing most of these songs... probably feels he has to. Ridiculous.
 
I am a diehard/know all the songs/love the rare ones/listen to the bootlegs every version possible kind of girl.

And I know damn well that I want those staples in my U2 show. Yes, they may not look too exciting on paper (or screen, rather). But there is a certain energy when those songs get played. You KNOW everybody knows them. Everybody can sing along. Everybody feels the love. These are the songs that made U2 the hit and worldwide success.

Also, With or Without You is my favorite song of all time, and I know I would feel a huge empty gap if it was not played. Say what you like, and yes, it may not be played as well as it has been in the past, but it does not deserve to be retired. That song is beautiful and means the world to me, and I'd like to hear it no matter how it sounds.

I don't mean this to sound rude at all, but I feel like U2 staples are awesome at every show.

That's cool... thanks for expressing yourself without resorting to insults.

I just ask you to imagine if WOWY wasn't played every show... then you caught it that one, magical show. And Bono sang it with a a special passion/I can't wait to sing this song.
 
Yeah I definitely understand them not being played at every show, but then I just think, what about that one girl out there who is like me and has waited years and years to hear it? And the anticipation of the show for months and months...it finally comes...and they don't play it. It's a let down. I completely support U2 mixing up the set list - and maybe only playing 3-4 warhorses a night, but I do feel they are necessary. I understand your opinion though! I just remember the last time I saw them - hoping and praying that it would come.

And as for Bono not wanting to sing the old songs, you can definitely tell the look of satisfaction the entire band has after playing a song the audience goes wild for. I remember after playing Streets when I saw them in DC in 2005, the crowd was going so crazy that Bono said "Wow, that was incredible, thank you, don't want to forget this." The band plays for that sort of reaction which comes from their greatest hits! :)
 
I'm not twisting anything, and no, my initial question was not direct, it was quite clearly rhetorical. You then listed 5 staples and said that it would be too much for them to play them every night. This thread and the others like it are what is tired and ridiculous. Let the band play whatever damn songs they feel like. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe they actually like playing them? <--rhetorical, btw.
 
I'm not twisting anything, and no, my initial question was not direct, it was quite clearly rhetorical. You then listed 5 staples and said that it would be too much for them to play them every night. This thread and the others like it are what is tired and ridiculous. Let the band play whatever damn songs they feel like. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe they actually like playing them? <--rhetorical, btw.

Example: Bono did not want to play Pride at all during the PopMart Tour, but the rest of the band wanted to, so they did. You could tell Bono wasn't into it.
 
Back
Top Bottom