2-night sham ?

[mirrorballman]

As much as the defendants here claim that nothing was promised 100% (and yes I agree, it doesn't read anywhere in black and white "listen, we will play two complete different setlists each night, I guarantee you that") it is wrong to completely overlook the fact that besides the initial announcement that they do want to "give us a complete different feeling from night 1 and 2", Bono did talk in interviews about playing between the Innocence and Experience idea in between those two nights and more importantly how obvious is the concept when they only booked pairs of shows all throughout the entire tour?

Even the Rolling Stones article in April reads their initial plan was to go ahead w/ two different shows but now they combined it within one night (Act I and II) in order not to displease anyone.

Again, I don't care I had a great time and I will continue having a great time. I also don't feel cheated or anything, honestly I never ever expected anything more from U2 than changing a couple of songs between 2 nights because that's the most they can do. However it does not change the fact that ticket sales and promo did initially have another theme. Call it "interpretation on our part" but they did not e.g. strictly sell pair of shows for no reason throughout the entire tour.

 

[BVS]

How many songs on this tour have the difficulty of Lemon, Daddy's Gonna Pay, Love Is Blindness, Discotheque, etc.? I would say none.
Zooropa is the only one that comes to mind on the last 2 tours.

Difficulty?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

saying that the band didn't state that there would be a clear difference between night one and night two as part of the release of tickets is simply revisionist history.

they did. end of story.

you can argue that the end result is better than what they had originally set out to do if you'd like, and you might be right. but it was clearly stated that they would have a night one and a night two, that they would have completely different feels to them, and the entire tour was, at first, booked on this premise.


what the stage layout was going to be? that was an assumption, as the band never said anything.

where the red zones would be? again... assumption. nobody said anything.

one night acoustic vs. one night electric? yup... assumption. a good one, and apparently they were thinking of doing just that, but they never actually said it.

the band said there would be two distinct feels from night one to night two, and booked dates based on this plan? fact.

 

[Hallucination]

The PJ argument will never work - I love Bono&Co but they will never be able to be as flexible as such bands.

They cannot be: think about Edge's setup, he's carrying an army already for 20-30 songs, I cannot imagine the work Dallas would have to put in to shuffle 90-100 songs. Besides that Bono isn't the greatest w/ lyrics (of course teleprompters help) and last but not least I'm happy if Adam gets through a setlist without loosing the plot in one of the songs entirely I can't imagine him having a +50 song repertoire...

We can be very happy if they mix up 6-7 songs each night and have a 40-50 song pool for the tour.

Ummm.... how do you pull 90-100 songs out as an example. That's ridiculous. Nobody is suggesting anything remotely close to that. What people are really saying here is there's no reason U2 can't be switching up the set significantly from night 1 to night 2. There's no need for exaggerated numbers like 90-100 songs. If they had 15 songs that were permanent for night 1 and night 2 and then another 20 songs to rotate through the two nights could be vastly different. If they wanted to be really ambitious they could crank that 20 up to 23 and represent POP a little bit. The band could be playing 7-8 different songs per night and still only have 38 songs rehearsed. No need for 90-100 songs. or even 50. They could have two vastly different shows and every now and then toss in a surprise. I think the issue people really have isn't that they should be playing completely different sets each and every night but that the two shows should be significantly different. So far they've been pretty much the same so.....

I agree with you though about what was implied when they booked/promoted this tour. Maybe nothing specific was ever said but the band themselves and the way the tour was booked in pairs of shows STRONGLY suggested the sets would be significantly different between night 1 and night 2.

saying that the band didn't state that there would be a clear difference between night one and night two as part of the release of tickets is simply revisionist history.

they did. end of story.

you can argue that the end result is better than what they had originally set out to do if you'd like, and you might be right. but it was clearly stated that they would have a night one and a night two, that they would have completely different feels to them, and the entire tour was, at first, booked on this premise.


what the stage layout was going to be? that was an assumption, as the band never said anything.

where the red zones would be? again... assumption. nobody said anything.

one night acoustic vs. one night electric? yup... assumption. a good one, and apparently they were thinking of doing just that, but they never actually said it.

the band said there would be two distinct feels from night one to night two, and booked dates based on this plan? fact.

Truth.

They clearly said this was what they were going for. Whether they meant it or not who knows, but they "sold" this tour to fans on the idea that the two shows would be different. I suppose they didn't lie because the shows have been different. Just not to the significance any of us hoped for.

The shows have still be great though. .

 

[trainmaniac]

Edge's gear could be a problem 10 years ago, but with so many FX-II units thrown into his rig now, it's easier than ever to have his rig prepared for no matter which song. So that's not a valid argument anymore.

 

[Galeongirl]

As much as the defendants here claim that nothing was promised 100% (and yes I agree, it doesn't read anywhere in black and white "listen, we will play two complete different setlists each night, I guarantee you that") it is wrong to completely overlook the fact that besides the initial announcement that they do want to "give us a complete different feeling from night 1 and 2", Bono did talk in interviews about playing between the Innocence and Experience idea in between those two nights and more importantly how obvious is the concept when they only booked pairs of shows all throughout the entire tour?

Well they give you a different feeling no? First night excitement, 2nd night dissappointment. Quite different feelings I'd say.


Also booking the tour in pairs of shows means nothing. We ASSUMED this would mean different shows each night, but that was mere conjecture. And yeah, we assumed it based on various things, but still didn't mean we should be feeling wronged for something u2 never did. It didn't happen, shit happens, get over it and enjoy the show!

Edge's gear could be a problem 10 years ago, but with so many FX-II units thrown into his rig now, it's easier than ever to have his rig prepared for no matter which song. So that's not a valid argument anymore.

Edge isn't the reason why they can't play songs. Why do people keep thinking this? For god's sake, he's admitted he's rehearsed 60 different songs for this tour!! He's obviously NOT the problem.
You should be lookin' at the singer incapable of memorising the lyrics to songs they've played on a nightly basis since the 1980s.

 

[mikal]

I've actually received my money back from all 6 shows I've seen so far this tour based on the fact that I wasn't happy with the setlists.

 

[corianderstem]

 

[allaras]

The only thing that disappoints me is they're not playing some of the best songs off the new album. Troubles, Crystal Ballroom, California, This is Where You Can Reach Me Now...

For the amount they charged for these tickets, they should mix it up more. Two different nights would have been great.

I don't want to hear Pride, Sunday Bloody Sunday (shitty version no less), Angel of Harlem and I Still Haven't Found again

 

[Galeongirl]

Troubles has been played... Crystal Ballroom isn't actually ON the album...


For the amount they're charging you? Eh, nobody is forcing you to pay. If you don't want to hear those warhorses which you know you can expect, don't pay the price for a ticket and just youtube the songs you like later. They don't have to do anything depending on the ticket prices, that's a ridiculous argument.

 

[mikal]

I remember this one time I went to a Packers game and they lost...even though they were favored. Didn't get my money back though. Talk about being pissed off.

 

[Hallucination]

The only thing that disappoints me is they're not playing some of the best songs off the new album. Troubles, Crystal Ballroom, California, This is Where You Can Reach Me Now...

For the amount they charged for these tickets, they should mix it up more. Two different nights would have been great.

I don't want to hear Pride, Sunday Bloody Sunday (shitty version no less), Angel of Harlem and I Still Haven't Found again

I really don't understand the people on this forum's fascination with The Troubles. It's a nice song but far from one of the best on the album in my opinion. I sound like a broken record but when they played it in Vancouver it sounded nice but it just didn't fit in the middle of the set list and it's way too somber sounding to be a good closer. Based on seeing them perform it and the vibe I felt in the arena The Troubles is best left off the setlist in my opinion.

I have a feeling the shows in Europe will get The Crystal Ballroom. California is way too good a song for them to ignore for much longer. It just can't follow Vertigo in the set list. It needs to be played in the second set, preferably to open the encore or be the second song of the encore.

I can't see them ever playing This Is Where You Can Reach Me Now. Cool song but not something I picture them doing live.

What's strange is the complete absence of Volcano. That song is a perfect follow up to Vertigo. Strange they've ignored it completely so far.

I'd be fine dropping ISHFWILF, Pride, SBS but not Angel of Harlem. It's an upbeat fun song that gets the crowd singing and it hasn't been completely overdone like Pride.

 

[corianderstem]

I sound like a broken record but when they played it in Vancouver it sounded nice but it just didn't fit in the middle of the set list and it's way too somber sounding to be a good closer. Based on seeing them perform it and the vibe I felt in the arena The Troubles is best left off the setlist in my opinion.

I kind of agree ... although the crowd was so much better the second night, even with the new songs (from my perspective), I wish they had played it the second night to see if it had a different reaction.

It was an odd spot for it, but I don't know where else I would put it, to be honest. I'm glad I got to hear it, at least!

 

[Hallucination]

I kind of agree ... although the crowd was so much better the second night, even with the new songs (from my perspective), I wish they had played it the second night to see if it had a different reaction.

It was an odd spot for it, but I don't know where else I would put it, to be honest. I'm glad I got to hear it, at least!

I'm glad I got to hear it too and I was hoping to hear it. We might be in the minority of others who witnessed it who knows but having the perspective of actually witness in it performed to me it was the one song that didn't fit. It'sa good song but.....

 

[bobsaget77]

Difficulty?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

You act like a child.
Why do you endlessly nitpick all of my posts?

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[BVS]

You act like a child.
Why do you endlessly nitpick all of my posts?

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

You're right next time I guess I should just resort to the "screw you"s and "you're scum" that litter your posts?

Know what you're talking about and quit resorting to the insults when someone challenges you.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[bobsaget77]

You're right next time I guess I should just resort to the "screw you"s and "you're scum" that litter your posts?

Know what you're talking about and quit resorting to the insults when someone challenges you.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Ok. Diemen has asked this crap to stop and I'm trying my best to follow his request, so I'm just going to end this here and now.
This is not the right thread for you to consistently berate me about every single post I've ever made. If this somehow boosts your ego, then keep going on ahead, it doesn't affect my life in the real world. But I won't be belittled by some Google tough guy. End of story.
I'm sorry to the rest of the people viewing this thread for straying from the topic at hand.

Carry on with whatever was being discussed.....


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Well they give you a different feeling no? First night excitement, 2nd night dissappointment. Quite different feelings I'd say.


Also booking the tour in pairs of shows means nothing. We ASSUMED this would mean different shows each night, but that was mere conjecture. And yeah, we assumed it based on various things, but still didn't mean we should be feeling wronged for something u2 never did. It didn't happen, shit happens, get over it and enjoy the show!

I agree with the part about getting over it, and I have.. as I never thought the band would follow through on the idea anyways, cause U2.

But you're wrong to say it was an assumption by fans that the shows were booked to fit a distinctly different night 1 vs night 2.

It's not an assumption. Bono SAID this, in conjunction with the release of the tour dates. It was in the press release and on the website.

U2 iNNOCENCE + eXPERIENCE Tour 2015

The band are heading out on the road again, playing indoor arenas for the first time in a decade.

The iNNOCENCE + eXPERIENCE Tour will see U2 play 19 cities worldwide next year, with pairs of shows in each city. Special shows are being planned for Dublin for the end of next year to benefit the U2-initiated Music Generation project and details will follow once they are finalised. (Full itinerary below and on ourtour page. )

“We are going to try to have a completely different feeling from night one to night two,” said Bono, “and have some fun playing with the idea of innocence and experience. More to be revealed!”

Tickets for all shows go on general sale next Monday - December 8th - but presales to paid U2.com subscribers begin tomorrow, Thursday December 4th.Presales for U2.COM SUBSCRIBERS have now ended.

Songs Of Innocence, gifted by Apple to over half a billion iTunes Music Store customers, has now been streamed 81m times and downloaded by 30m fans.

"The anticipation for a U2 tour is always extraordinary, as it should be," said Arthur Fogel, President, Global Touring and Chairman, Global Music. "Following the record-setting 360° Tour I'm amazed that they still want to be ground-breaking, this time on a more intimate scale."

More news as soon as we get it.

If you reeeeeeeally want to play the semantic game, you could argue that Bono didn't promise two distinct nights... he said they were going to "try" to create a different feeling from night one to night two.

So one could argue that they tried, realized it wouldn't work and canceled the idea... and I guess you wouldn't be far off.

But fans didn't create this magic thought that the booking of shows in pairs meant that they were aiming for two distinct shows. Bono said it in the press release.


Does the change matter to me? Not at all.

But I could see a scenario where, say, somebody with a limited amount of expendable income but is a big fan purchased two cheaper, crappy seats because they didn't want to miss out on the two distinct shows, where they could have gotten good seats at one show.

If I were that person I'd be annoyed to be sitting behind the stage for two nights with obstructed views and no ability to see the screen instead of spending my money on one great seat instead.

so it is a minor detail for most of us, but I'm sure there's a minority out there that the reneging on the two show thing is a pain in the ass

 

[BVS]

BVS, built

Google tough

I like it


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Galeongirl]

I agree with the part about getting over it, and I have.. as I never thought the band would follow through on the idea anyways, cause U2.

But you're wrong to say it was an assumption by fans that the shows were booked to fit a distinctly different night 1 vs night 2.

It's not an assumption. Bono SAID this, in conjunction with the release of the tour dates. It was in the press release and on the website.




If you reeeeeeeally want to play the semantic game, you could argue that Bono didn't promise two distinct nights... he said they were going to "try" to create a different feeling from night one to night two.

So one could argue that they tried, realized it wouldn't work and canceled the idea... and I guess you wouldn't be far off.

But fans didn't create this magic thought that the booking of shows in pairs meant that they were aiming for two distinct shows. Bono said it in the press release.


Does the change matter to me? Not at all.

But I could see a scenario where, say, somebody with a limited amount of expendable income but is a big fan purchased two cheaper, crappy seats because they didn't want to miss out on the two distinct shows, where they could have gotten good seats at one show.

If I were that person I'd be annoyed to be sitting behind the stage for two nights with obstructed views and no ability to see the screen instead of spending my money on one great seat instead.

so it is a minor detail for most of us, but I'm sure there's a minority out there that the reneging on the two show thing is a pain in the ass

Well it's not so much semantics here, more the years of being a U2 fan and the age old cliche that Bono lies..

How many shit has he said over the years, promises made music wise or tour wise, that have turned out ot be bullshit? I honestly do not get why people take his word for the truth anymore, I'll see it when it actually happens or gets an official announcement. Maybe that makes me bitter, but it saves a lot of dissappointment. And I see a lot of people getting dissappointed because they set their expectations really high in return of the things the band say rather than do.

And yes, the scenario of 2 different nights was probably the initial tour idea, and the reason why they started selling 2 nighters. But the moment they didn't give any official info on it and started selling additional nights not in pairs, it was kinda showing something was up already.

I get what you're saying, I really do, but I honestly think that the person getting two crappy seats will still have the time of their life, even if most of the setlist will be the same. It's been like that every tour sofar and probably will always be, yet people still enjoy going to multiple shows.




Oh and to the guy who wanted to hear The Troubles, looks like they're playing it at the next gig, as per U2's instagram referring to it.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Well it's not so much semantics here, more the years of being a U2 fan and the age old cliche that Bono lies..

How many shit has he said over the years, promises made music wise or tour wise, that have turned out ot be bullshit? I honestly do not get why people take his word for the truth anymore, I'll see it when it actually happens or gets an official announcement. Maybe that makes me bitter, but it saves a lot of dissappointment. And I see a lot of people getting dissappointed because they set their expectations really high in return of the things the band say rather than do.

And yes, the scenario of 2 different nights was probably the initial tour idea, and the reason why they started selling 2 nighters. But the moment they didn't give any official info on it and started selling additional nights not in pairs, it was kinda showing something was up already.

I get what you're saying, I really do, but I honestly think that the person getting two crappy seats will still have the time of their life, even if most of the setlist will be the same. It's been like that every tour sofar and probably will always be, yet people still enjoy going to multiple shows.




Oh and to the guy who wanted to hear The Troubles, looks like they're playing it at the next gig, as per U2's instagram referring to it.

Well we're in agreement in that we both never thought it would happen, cause U2

I hope there weren't many people in that or a similar scenario to what I posted... but if there are they should speak up, as I'm sure the Interference community would be happy to help if we could. 3 way ticket swaps have certainly been arranged before!

 

[Salome]

If anyone honestly thought that Bono saying that U2 aims to have consecutive shows with a different feel would translate into half the setlist being different (I already think that 5-7 songs is a whole lot for U2) I will not only buy their left over tickets, I also have a bridge I want to sell them for a really nice price

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

If anyone honestly thought that Bono saying that U2 aims to have consecutive shows with a different feel would translate into half the setlist being different (I already think that 5-7 songs is a whole lot for U2) I will not only buy their left over tickets, I also have a bridge I want to sell them for a really nice price

Yea, great.

 

[Axver]

Edit: ah fuck a duck, I thought I was at the end of the thread and wrote this reply. There was heaps more! My point has already been made! Sorry; ignore.

The press might've quoted it for truth, but there never was any official statement or any credible source other than that they were contemplating that idea way back in december. Before Bono smashed his face and everything.

This is wrong. Why do people keep saying this? It. Is. Wrong.

The tour was announced 2-3 weeks after Bono's accident. The original announcement emphasised - with a quote from Bono - that nights one and two would have a "completely different feeling". Here is the announcement: U2 > News > U2 iNNOCENCE + eXPERIENCE Tour 2015

This is the quote:

“We are going to try to have a completely different feeling from night one to night two,” said Bono, “and have some fun playing with the idea of innocence and experience. More to be revealed!”

That quote was included in the official announcement of almost every show that was added to the itinerary - right up to the addition of the final show in New York in March (but, interestingly, not London 6 or Denver later that month).

No, it doesn't say two completely different setlists or wild variation, but it clearly means substantial differences between the two nights, and I would suggest substantial changes means more than about a fifth to a quarter of the set.

Personally, I think the variation so far would have been welcome and satisfying had there been no expectation created, but it is below what the official promotional material suggested there would be. Essentially I feel that the cynicism I held in December towards the "completely different feel" remark has been justified. Whether this is a big deal or not is in the eye of the beholder. For some of you, it clearly doesn't matter at all. You'd go to the same amount of shows even if the set was entirely static. For some of you, it amounts to a betrayal. You've bought more tickets than you otherwise would've, or at least feel that you won't get what you originally thought you paid for (even if what you will ultimately get will be very enjoyable). I'm somewhere in between.

 

[U2WOJO]

Personally, I think the variation so far would have been welcome and satisfying had there been no expectation created, but it is below what the official promotional material suggested there would be. Essentially I feel that the cynicism I held in December towards the "completely different feel" remark has been justified. Whether this is a big deal or not is in the eye of the beholder. For some of you, it clearly doesn't matter at all. You'd go to the same amount of shows even if the set was entirely static. For some of you, it amounts to a betrayal. You've bought more tickets than you otherwise would've, or at least feel that you won't get what you originally thought you paid for (even if what you will ultimately get will be very enjoyable). I'm somewhere in between.

Agree...variation this tour so far is vastly better then recent tours. I still remember hitting 4 outside broadcast shows in a row (1 was 2 hours away and then next 3 were all one city) and there being not even 30 different songs played between those 4 shows. Variation and U2 have never been the case from day 1, so to expect anything different at this point is foolish.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

 

[jeevey]

I still remember hitting 4 outside broadcast shows in a row

Just gonna go ahead and be jealous over here for a minute.

 

[allaras]

Edit: ah fuck a duck, I thought I was at the end of the thread and wrote this reply. There was heaps more! My point has already been made! Sorry; ignore.



This is wrong. Why do people keep saying this? It. Is. Wrong.

The tour was announced 2-3 weeks after Bono's accident. The original announcement emphasised - with a quote from Bono - that nights one and two would have a "completely different feeling". Here is the announcement: U2 > News > U2 iNNOCENCE + eXPERIENCE Tour 2015

This is the quote:



That quote was included in the official announcement of almost every show that was added to the itinerary - right up to the addition of the final show in New York in March (but, interestingly, not London 6 or Denver later that month).

No, it doesn't say two completely different setlists or wild variation, but it clearly means substantial differences between the two nights, and I would suggest substantial changes means more than about a fifth to a quarter of the set.

Personally, I think the variation so far would have been welcome and satisfying had there been no expectation created, but it is below what the official promotional material suggested there would be. Essentially I feel that the cynicism I held in December towards the "completely different feel" remark has been justified. Whether this is a big deal or not is in the eye of the beholder. For some of you, it clearly doesn't matter at all. You'd go to the same amount of shows even if the set was entirely static. For some of you, it amounts to a betrayal. You've bought more tickets than you otherwise would've, or at least feel that you won't get what you originally thought you paid for (even if what you will ultimately get will be very enjoyable). I'm somewhere in between.

Exactly

I would have bought tickets for one show, not 3. Certainly not at the prices they're charging.

 

[trevgreg]

Exactly

I would have bought tickets for one show, not 3. Certainly not at the prices they're charging.

Well, you could always resell the tickets for the other two shows if you don't want to go to them now (assuming it's not GA/Red Zone, of course).

 

[allbecauseofu2]

I wanna see them play all the songs off the album. Not in the same night or anything. Album took way to long to make and for all that time you can write songs that can be all be played live . Thats more a thing for me then the 2 different setlist idea. They are trying to sell this album as so unbelievably special to them. Well good. Lets see you try all the songs live then. And hopefully they do that. They will never do 2 completely different nights Cause they would Never skip streets. I was thinking they were going switch off for streets and one. As anchors for each night. You wanna have a different feeling for a show dont play streets.