U2 360 Set List - what do you think?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
As I recall (probably incorrectly), Bono said his favourite U2 tracks were Please and Stay and Miss Sarajevo... which is why it surprises me that the former hasn't appeared (even in acoustic form) since the Elevation Tour.
 
As I recall (probably incorrectly), Bono said his favourite U2 tracks were Please and Stay and Miss Sarajevo... which is why it surprises me that the former hasn't appeared (even in acoustic form) since the Elevation Tour.

He mentioned Your Blue Room a couple of times as well, and that one has never been performed live. And I recall he named Acrobat once as one of his favourites. Bono has developed a taste for U2 songs, although he claims he never listens to them. That would explain the often lyric fuck-ups though.
 
If Bono's favorite U2 songs are Please, Stay, Miss Sarajevo, Acrobat, and YBL... the man's got good taste in his own music. Hasn't he put Gone in that list before, too?

And I find it interesting that all of those songs are from U2's three most publicly (incorrectly!) maligned albums: Zooropa, OS1, and Pop.
 
I have a feeling the song Zooropa is going to make an appearance. It just seems like it is time.

PS: Plus Bono shouldn't have problem singing it.
 
I have a feeling the song Zooropa is going to make an appearance. It just seems like it is time.

PS: Plus Bono shouldn't have problem singing it.

Fingers crossed- of U2's many poor setlist decisions in recent years, the continued absence of Zooropa is probably the worst.
 
I know it's so much easier to resort to hyperbole, but I don't think anyone in this conversation has ever asked U2 to play Pop and October in their entirety rather than the hits, merely to mix in a song or two from them occasionally, because, you know, some people like those albums.
ok, now without hyperbole

U2 axes City of Blinding Lights and Beautiful Day and will play Out of control and Last night on earth
do you really, really think this is going to be considered as an improvement by the general concert goer?
do you even think that you would rate it as a better concert if you had attended it
or just a concert with 2 surprises?

They heavily catered for early 80's U2 last tour, now it's mid 80's turn. Achtung Baby is 90's U2, it's not the full spectrum of 90's U2 but it's a valid part of that sound and they've heavily playing it this tour as they did last tour . Yes it's a tad annoying the band don't seem to rate Zooropa or Pop but they're not beholden to your tastes or mine. I'm not particular sure what occasionally including a song from Pop or Boy would do except allow some fanboy to tick a setlist box.

this :up:
 
ok, now without hyperbole

U2 axes City of Blinding Lights and Beautiful Day and will play Out of control and Last night on earth
do you really, really think this is going to be considered as an improvement by the general concert goer?

not beautiful day (it is a must play now), but removing COBL for OOC is at worst a lateral move. It's better to me personally, and I think most 'average' fans don't see that as better or worse on the whole. I like COBL, its good live song- but it is in no way a must play song, or even a huge hit. It could be easily switched out, and the show would be just as good.

Take out songs like COBL, In A Little While, Stuck, or Elevation and put in a Pop song and a Boy/October one in their place. No one is going to be crushed if those songs are not played. Would anyone care if the played Discotheque, HM,TM, KM, KM, or EBTTRT instead of Elevation? Or Staring At The Sun instead of Stuck? Rotate Walk On with Please (would be perfect with Streets being right after). Rotate Gone with UTEOTW, at the very least that makes the show as good (I think it would be a pretty good improvement), and no way its worse.

There are ways for them to get songs from Pop, and early stuff in without making it a show of rarities, and obscure songs. Those I mentioned are pretty even swaps in terms of commercial success.
 
There are ways for them to get songs from Pop, and early stuff in without making it a show of rarities, and obscure songs. Those I mentioned are pretty even swaps in terms of commercial success.
yes, they could
but apparently they don't really want to and the concerts wouldn't be really better
so what's the point?
 
yes, they could
but apparently they don't really want to and the concerts wouldn't be really better
so what's the point?

But it would be much better to a lot of fans, if instead of being so focused on certain eras, they could cater to more of their fans, and given their catalog a more even representation without sacrificing anything. They are never going to please everyone, but they are going to please less of their hardcore audience when they ignore large sections of their catalog. If you are agreeing that the show would be as good with those exchanges- then why not do it? If the answer is because they don't want to- then why discuss anything they do? If that is your point, then why even come on this board. Its not like these thread are here to inform U2 what to do.

I am not complaining, I will enjoy it either way but that is because I like all their albums. I do however, see that its a fairly valid complaint if Zooropa/ Pop or Boy-October (to a lesser extent since they were represented last tour) era is your favorite and they are completely ignoring it. Especially Zooropa and Pop, since they have been almost completely ignored except for the tours supporting those albums.
 
dear U2,

please play the exact setlist i want you to play. if you don't, you suck.

sincerely,

mikal
 
dear U2,

please play the exact setlist i want you to play. if you don't, you suck.

sincerely,

mikal

Why do you enjoy distorting people's concerns so much? Is it the lure of a cheap joke? Whichever setlist they play they will never "suck". All the critics of the current setlist are saying is that they would like to hear other prominent songs that haven't been played in a while- they're not talking about obscure songs, they're not talking about fantasy setlists where half of Pop gets played- all they want is a bit more variety within the current structure.
 
Why do you enjoy distorting people's concerns so much? Is it the lure of a cheap joke? Whichever setlist they play they will never "suck". All the critics of the current setlist are saying is that they would like to hear other prominent songs that haven't been played in a while- they're not talking about obscure songs, they're not talking about fantasy setlists where half of Pop gets played- all they want is a bit more variety within the current structure.

Songs like UF? Ultraviolet? Stay?
 
Why do you enjoy distorting people's concerns so much? Is it the lure of a cheap joke? Whichever setlist they play they will never "suck". All the critics of the current setlist are saying is that they would like to hear other prominent songs that haven't been played in a while- they're not talking about obscure songs, they're not talking about fantasy setlists where half of Pop gets played- all they want is a bit more variety within the current structure.

would you stop picking on me? that was a sincere letter, and i hope the band reads it.
 
Frankly at this point Pearl Jam are just playing to the diehards which is a position they chose themselves to be in, and fair play to them but they're not a valid comparison.

Although one can say a significant portion of the usual PJ audience are hardcore fans, it's kinda silly to think that a band that still sells out (or nearly sells out if you will) arenas all over the world is "just playing to the diehards".

Agreed that they are not a valid comparison to U2 though.
 
My only problem really is that is just a laugh that nothing from POP get's played.

Who on earth would oppose to songs as Gone, Mofo, Please, Discotheque just to name 4 songs off POP? Come on U2 just do it please.
 
Although one can say a significant portion of the usual PJ audience are hardcore fans, it's kinda silly to think that a band that still sells out (or nearly sells out if you will) arenas all over the world is "just playing to the diehards".

Agreed that they are not a valid comparison to U2 though.

Nah, other fans turn up obviously but a band who don't do videos, radio or singles are by default catering to their pre-existing fan base. Pearl Jam stepped off the traditional promotion rodeo a long time back.
 
Nah, other fans turn up obviously but a band who don't do videos, radio or singles are by default catering to their pre-existing fan base. Pearl Jam stepped off the traditional promotion rodeo a long time back.

They still do the radio and singles thing. The promotion for their last album was quite aggressive (at least for their standards), the reception was partially successful, with the self-titled selling more than its predecessor. They're going the more accessible, poppy route music-wise even more on the new album, which makes me very sceptical. The shows will still kick ass though. :drool:

Probably more so than U2. :wink:
 
Add more songs to the setlist.

Over the last couple of months, I have had the honor to see Paul McCartney, Biily Joel and Elton John in concert (B. Joel and EJ performed together). As one would expect they were all awesome. U2 360 tour setlist only has 23 songs on it, the other concerts I went to each artist performed around forty songs. Did anyone who has been to a 360 show feel they could have performed a couple of more songs, or did the whole concert mesh really well with only 23 songs. I am seeing u2 on Sept. 24 and would like to know other people's opinions on this subject.
 
Over the last couple of months, I have had the honor to see Paul McCartney, Biily Joel and Elton John in concert (B. Joel and EJ performed together). As one would expect they were all awesome. U2 360 tour setlist only has 23 songs on it, the other concerts I went to each artist performed around forty songs. Did anyone who has been to a 360 show feel they could have performed a couple of more songs, or did the whole concert mesh really well with only 23 songs. I am seeing u2 on Sept. 24 and would like to know other people's opinions on this subject.

FORTY songs? Seriously?
 
I think having one encore makes it feel a little short. The main set sags in the end for me (Pride/Walk On). They would be better making it 16 songs and having two encores. Still, I wouldn't say no to 26 songs... don't think I could handle 40 though - I've already had to crouch in Moment of Surrender twice after all-day queuing.
 
FORTY songs? Seriously?


Paul McCartney - This set list was performed on Friday 17th and Saturday 18th July at Citi Field, NYC.


Drive My Car
Jet
Only Mama Knows
Flaming Pie
Got To Get You Into My Life
Let Me Roll It / Foxy Lady
Highway
The Long And Winding Road
My Love
Blackbird
Here Today
Dance Tonight
Calico Skies
Mrs Vanderbilt
Eleanor Rigby
Sing The Changes
Band On The Run
Back In The USSR
I’m Down
Something
I’ve Got A Feeling
Paperback Writer
A Day In The Life/Give Peace A Chance
Let It Be
Live And Let Die
Hey Jude
---
Day Tripper
Lady Madonna
I Saw Her Standing There
---
Yesterday
Helter Skelter
Get Back
Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band / The End


Paul McCartney = 33 songs

//////////////////////////////////////////////////


Elton John and Billy Joel / March 2, 2009 / Jacksonville, Fla. (Jacksonville Veterans Memorial Arena) - Tour Kick Off


Elton John/Billy Joel:

"Your Song"
"Honesty"
"Don't Let The Sun Go Down On Me"
"Ode To Joy" -> "My Life"

Elton John:

"Funeral for a Friend/Love Lies Bleeding"
"Saturday Night's Alright for Fighting"
"Burn Down the Mission"
"Madman Across the Water"
"Tiny Dancer"
"Goodbye Yellow Brick Road"
"Daniel"
"Rocket Man"
"Levon"
"I'm Still Standing"
"Crocodile Rock"

Billy Joel:

"Prelude/Angry Young Man"
"Movin' Out (Anthony's Song)"
"Allentown"
"Zanzibar"
"She's Always A Woman"
"Scenes from an Italian Restaurant"
"I Go To Extremes"
"River of Dreams"
"We Didn't Start the Fire"
"Be Bop A Lula" -> "It's Still Rock N' Roll To Me"
"Only the Good Die Young"

Elton John/Billy Joel:

"The Bitch Is Back"
"You May Be Right"
"Bennie and the Jets"
"Birthday" -> "Back in the USSR"
"Candle in the Wind"
"Piano Man"



EJ = 11
BJ = 11
EJ+BJ = 10
Total = 32


////////////////////////////////


40, too much
but still, OVER 30 songs a night



BTW: the Rolling Stones played about 20 songs per night the last tour
 
BTW: the Rolling Stones played about 20 songs per night the last tour

the stones are 94 years old(each) so you can not blame them.
Last year I went to the Cure(same age group as U2)
36 songs were played and the next night a completely different concert setlistwise. It is not that their songs are easier to play(on the contrary).

that is U2 I guess and I can "live"with it..

What I do "blame"the guys for is the fact that they teased us with DM (one of my absolute favourites U2 songs ever ) on their website and then decide not to play this gorgeos song. I was so excited to hear this live and they just didnt know what to do with it(emotionwise or that sort of crap) and dropped it...why the hell did they post it on their website then?

it would have been SO beautifull but no...let's play an uninspired version of WOWY for the 238239238th time


oh well :wave:
 
I think 23 songs is too short. I wouldn't expect them to do 30 but a figure like 25 or possibly 26 would be very nice. It would allow a Pop-themed encore :love:
 
It's really hard to judge a setlist by "how many" songs. I would venture a guess and say that Elton and Paul abbreviate some of their songs quite a bit...

The Stones I would think probably extend some of their songs for solos and what not?

A night that has Bad and MOS you have 2 songs that clock in close to 7+ minutes...
 
setlist + tweaking

1)Breathe
2)No Line On The Horizon
3)Magnificent
4)Elevation
5)Until The End Of The World/ daddys' gonna pay for your crashed car snippet
6)Beautiful day
7)City Of Blinding Lights
8)Vertigo/I will follow snippet
9)Mofo
10)I'll Go Crazy If I Don't Go Crazy Tonight(Remix)
11)Sunday Bloody Sunday/ Rock The Casbah(Snippet)
12)One
13)MLK
14)Walk On
15)Where The Streets Have No Name/40(Snippet)
16)Bad/ riders on the storm snippet/ sympathy for the devil snippet/hallelujah snippet
_____________

17)Get on your boots
18)Stand up comedy
19)The fly (intense distorted extended ending segues into)
20)Unknown caller
21)the unforgettable fire
22)Ultraviolet(Light My Way)
23) moment of surrender/october snippet/love is blindness snippet

_____________

24) please/tomorrow snippet
25) the first time/all I want is you snippet



almost completely destroyed U2360 setlist...to fit my needs :lol:


Boy: (1 snippet)
October: (2 snippets)
war: 1
the unforgettable fire: 3
the joshua tree: 1
rattle and hum: (1 snippet)
achtung baby: 4 (+1 snippet)
zooropa: 1 (+1 snippet)
pop: 2
all that you can't leave behind: 2
how to dismantle an atomic bomb: 2
no line on the horizon:7
 
It's really hard to judge a setlist by "how many" songs. I would venture a guess and say that Elton and Paul abbreviate some of their songs quite a bit...

The Stones I would think probably extend some of their songs for solos and what not?

A night that has Bad and MOS you have 2 songs that clock in close to 7+ minutes...

and the other side is counting MLK as one of the songs every night, plus there are bono and edge only acoustic versions of songs and elevation and vertigo which are both barely 3 minutes.
I am not complaining, but its not like u2 is coming out and playing really long songs that are all extended. Their songs are pretty much average length.

the number of songs they are playing is a pretty true indicator for u2, especially when their shows are usually right at two hours.
 
and the other side is counting MLK as one of the songs every night, plus there are bono and edge only acoustic versions of songs and elevation and vertigo which are both barely 3 minutes.
I am not complaining, but its not like u2 is coming out and playing really long songs that are all extended. Their songs are pretty much average length.

the number of songs they are playing is a pretty true indicator for u2, especially when their shows are usually right at two hours.

I think you may have slightly missed my point. My point is that when I've seen Elton in the past, or Paul on TV appearances they play a 2 or 3 minute version of what normally would be a 4 or 5 minute song. They are playing abbreviated versions in order to get all their hits in. Prince does this a lot too, but he does more medley style. I haven't really paid attention to Vertigo this tour, have they taken a verse or chorus out to shorten it?

My point is that if you want to judge a show by length then judge it by time and not the amount of songs...
 
They just need another encore.

1. Breathe
2. No Line On The Horizon
3. Get On Your Boots
4. Magnificent
5. Beautiful Day
6. MW
7. One
8. UTEOTW
9. Unknown Caller
10. The Unforgettable Fire
11. City Of Blinding Lights
12. Vertigo
13. I’ll Go Crazy If I Don’t Go Crazy Tonight (remix)
14. Discotheque
15. Sunday Bloody Sunday
16. Walk On
17. MLK
17. Streets
18. Bad/40
Encore 1
19. SUC
20. Hold Me Thrill Me Kiss Me Kill Me
21. IGWSHA or Original.. or Stay (Full Band)
Encore 2
22. Ultra Violet (Light My Way)
23. With Or Without You
24. Moment Of Surrender
 
^^Thats a great setlist, the addition of Discotheque and that entire first encore are very fitting, though I cant see them ever doing Hold Me, Thrill Me again, perhaps something like Gone?

As much as I enjoyed the show in Milan I did notice the crowd became a little more muted by the time Pride and Walk On came about, so I think such songs would be better appreciated if the set was broken up a little.

The set they're playing is still great as is, though.
 
Last year I went to the Cure(same age group as U2)
36 songs were played and the next night a completely different concert setlistwise. It is not that their songs are easier to play(on the contrary).

that is U2 I guess and I can "live"with it.. l

Actually, that's a very interesting point, as i'm also a very big Cure fan! I like your analogy here..... but there are some differences, I think. Yes, The Cure are in the same age group, but are at VERY different stages in their career (and lineup). U2 are huge right now, although honestly I don't really remember a time post '87 where they really weren't (although arguments can be made for or against this point.....and this really isn't my point, lol), and The Cure, one can argue crested for their '89 World Prayer Tour (Disintegration)......they have carved themselves a nice little niche' these days but are definitely NOT the stadium world tour band that they were back in the late '80's. I think they maintain their fans right now, who really are the hardcore Cure fans by doing just that....mixing up their setlists every single night. They don't have to worry about selling out stadiums, pleasing multiple age groups of fans to the same extent that I think U2 has to. It's just a whole different thing with 2 different bands, attracting two different crowds at 2 different stages of their careers.

Interestingly enough, I did take a look at the setlists for the Cure during their '89 tour (Stadiums) and you know what? They went for multiple, multiple shows where they only changed up *one* song from evening to evening. There you had a band at the top of their career, one of the biggest grossing acts of 1989, huge ticket.....and they only modified their setlist by one song....every night.

Overall, I think U2 is doing a pretty good job with their setlist this tour.....now, should U2 ever *gasp* wane in their popularity and no-longer be able to play anything other than smaller summer venues then we might see completely different setlists from night to night!

(somehow I think this scenario will never happen....lol)

Just my rambling thoughts!

Cheers!:wave:
 
Back
Top Bottom