SPOILERS U2 eXPERIENCE + iNNOCENCE Tour Rehearsals/Soundcheck Thread SPOILERS

[Headache in a Suitcase]

For those wondering about where the no Joshua Tree songs came from... here's Edge's interview from Rolling Stone.

Not a definitive "no, we will absolutely not play any Joshua Tree songs" statement, but a "we probably won't play any Joshua Tree songs, but I'm gonna leave the window open in case this shit don't work" statement.

Also touched on the possibility of doing mostly Innocence and Experience songs... which we saw a little of in yesterday's rehearsals.




Have you thought much about the set list or that's too far away?

We're not at that stage, but we'll start thinking about it pretty soon. What's interesting is that we've got these two albums are are companion releases: Songs of Innocence and Songs of Experience. I mean, we could do a tour of just those two albums. That would an interesting proposition. It's probably not what we're going to do, but there are very interesting options to explore. Are we just going to play this new album and some classic U2 songs or are we going to do songs from Songs of Innocence too? In some ways, I'd like to perform Songs of Innocence again because we didn't do as many shows last time as we could have and I think as a show it really worked. I'd love to do some more. At this point, we have the freedom to do what we want.

Might you do no songs from The Joshua Tree just to counterbalance this year's tour?

I think it's pretty clear that having played those songs for the summer and actually most of the year if you really think about it, it would be a good idea to take a break from it.

It would be unheard of to do a show without at least "Where the Streets Have No Name."

Yeah. I think that maybe we've done one tour without "Where the Streets Have No Name" in the set. I wouldn't say it would be unheard of, but it would be unusual. But I wouldn't rule it out. We have a lot of songs and we like to rest them from time to time because sometimes they get to a place where it starts to lose its deeper resonance. The emotional aspect of any U2 song is the jumping-off point. You never want to be in a situation where you're playing a song that feel like you're doing it by rote.

 

[The_acrobat]

My thought is, WHY are they rehearsing The Showman so much? It seems like it should be a pretty standard, straightforward song to play live. Just a strum-a-long, sing-a-long moment on the b-stage, similar to Party Girl. Why do they need to rehearse it so many times?

 

[Axver]

My thought is, WHY are they rehearsing The Showman so much? It seems like it should be a pretty standard, straightforward song to play live. Just a strum-a-long, sing-a-long moment on the b-stage, similar to Party Girl. Why do they need to rehearse it so many times?

Some special lighting or segment to go along with it, perhaps?

I'd prefer if they didn't play it at all.

 

[YBORCITY]

Wow, did I miss a lot in here the few days...... I could care less if the "casual fan" doesn't recognize Acrobat, it's an ass-kicking song that WILL be epic live. People that are saying Acrobat would be a show stopper needs to have their head examined....

 

[Hewson]

Some special lighting or segment to go along with it, perhaps?
.

Maybe that will make it a little more better.

 

[innominata8]

I've reread your posts again, and if that's not what you're saying, then I have no idea what you're saying.

You're saying that people who go to U2 concerts won't know Acrobat because they owned a lot of CDs?

I'm saying that there is a lot of good music out there and i'm not sure it's reasonable to expect that anyone who goes to a concert (U2 or anyone else) should know every song on a band's particular album.

 

[CosmoKramer]

Wow, did I miss a lot in here the few days...... I could care less if the "casual fan" doesn't recognize Acrobat, it's an ass-kicking song that WILL be epic live. People that are saying Acrobat would be a show stopper needs to have their head examined....

A lot of it depends on U2 really and if they can make it translate live in the “U2 magic” type of way.

I think of Volcano....I like the song but live it was atrocious and lacked the energy that the studio track had(California too). The flip of that is RBW, which was more engaging live than it was on the album.

All my opinion but it comes down to U2 and how they release the beast.

 

[innominata8]

he's saying that Acrobat was not and is not well known, even though it is on a hugely successful record. that record was hugely successful due to a whole bunch of songs not named Acrobat.

this is not really that hard to understand.

Thank you. I didn't think this concept was such a difficult one to comprehend...

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

I'm saying that there is a lot of good music out there and i'm not sure it's reasonable to expect that anyone who goes to a concert (U2 or anyone else) should know every song on a band's particular album.

But we're not talking any album.

If they were playing Wire, I'd expect big fans to to nuts and casual fans to have no idea what they were playing.

If they played Twilight, same deal.

But there are two albums that anyone who considers themselves a fan of U2 over the age of 30 absolutely owned and played the shit out of, front to back, and that's Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby; unless you're under the assumption that there are large swaths of people who pay 3 bills to go see U2 who only have the greatest hits albums. There certainly are some, but yo think that the majority who go don't at least know those two albums is just wrong, especially on an arena tour.

 

[innominata8]

I just don't understand this argument that Acrobat is going to flop with the majority of the crowd. It's an irrationality borne from this idea that it's somehow a super duper deluxe rarity because - and only hardcore fans would even care to know this - it's never been played live before.



The Blackout, Love Is Bigger, and Lights of Home are three of the four best songs from SOE, so nah.

Axver: I don't think anyone is arguing it'll be a 'flop' with the crowd. The 'argument' is that it isn't a very recognizable track. I think it's unreasonable to expect that the majority of people with know all of the tracks on an album. The album is 25 years old at this point and a lot of people may have hopped on the U2 bandwagon after this album or are just to casual of a fan to know every track.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Axver: I don't think anyone is arguing it'll be a 'flop' with the crowd. The 'argument' is that it isn't a very recognizable track. I think it's unreasonable to expect that the majority of people with know all of the tracks on an album. The album is 25 years old at this point and a lot of people may have hopped on the U2 bandwagon after this album or are just to casual of a fan to know every track.

Why does Ultra Violet get such a big reaction then?

Not a single.

End of the album.

Right next to Acrobat.

Under your argument, Ultra Violet would be just as obscure to the majority as Acrobat.

But clearly it isn't.

 

[innominata8]

The casual Stones fan doesn't recognize all those songs on those albums. A lot of them have not even listened to them. People do go just for the hits. My dad saw the Stones live and The Who and Stevie Nicks. Never owned an album from any of them. When you play to 60,000 people, there's going to be tons that are there just because it's an event or because they know the hits. Next time you go to one of those shows and actually sit in the seats, throw out some relatively mild trivia to anybody near you. They seriously won't be able to name or hum album cuts from classic albums, etc.

A guy I knew from college went to see The Stones in 2005 and they busted out "Sweet Virginia"...he said absolutely nobody around him recognized the song or was even excited by it. This is THE exact same reaction that U2 gets if you're actually in the stands like I've been when they bust out these deeper album cuts (or truly obscure rarities). The bulk of those people in the cheap seats know them from their radio hits and the copy of The Best of 1980-1990 sitting in their dashboard.

Exactly.

 

[innominata8]

No worries. Over the years it's become clear that you're never open to new information or an opposing viewpoint.

Headache: No you're wrong!

Somebody Else: Well, from my experience or this data set, it shows that...

Headache: Does not compute!



Remember the time when you pretended to be on the "sensible Left" for months and then later admitted that Bloomberg is your cup of tea as far as politics goes? Yeah, I'm sure dozens of us on this forum just loved being condescended to for months on progressive politics from a guy that's never even considered himself to be much of a liberal.

But I've got no real axe to grind or to argue with you per se. All I'm saying is that I've actually sat in the upper tiers for this band. The people around me didn't know "Stay" or "Fast Cars" or the SOI songs (which is kind of ironic given how it was released), etc.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Not that I want to debate the point of a lunatic, but they aren't playing to 60,000 people. This is an arena tour, and an expensive one.

The odds of having people who just want to check a band out go way up on stadium tours where there is a greater inventory of cheap seats, and go way way down in a 20k arena where the most common ticket price is $350.

And for fucks sake of course there will be people who don't recognize the song. Nobody's arguing that every single person will absolutely know it, just that a majority will.

 

[innominata8]

Oh fuck this "I've been in the cheap seats and nobody knew Big Popular Song X" nonsense.

I was in the cheap seats at Boston I, May 2005. During Running to Stand Still, the random dude next to me, with whom I had not interacted until this moment, turned to me and we bellowed the "still running" bit to each other despite the fact Bono wasn't singing it yet, we were just following the melody. Every single person in my shithole thousand-miles-away section stood for the entire damn gig and sang out 40 at the end.

So two can play this silly anecdote game.

hehe...i remember seeing you in the balcony that night

 

[Hewson]

But we're not talking any album.

If they were playing Wire, I'd expect big fans to to nuts and casual fans to have no idea what they were playing.

If they played Twilight, same deal.

But there are two albums that anyone who considers themselves a fan of U2 over the age of 30 absolutely owned and played the shit out of, front to back, and that's Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby; unless you're under the assumption that there are large swaths of people who pay 3 bills to go see U2 who only have the greatest hits albums. There certainly are some, but yo think that the majority who go don't at least know those two albums is just wrong, especially on an arena tour.

There'll be plenty of fans who don't recognize Acrobat at first and suddenly when the chorus comes in remember the song as they heard it a number of times 25 years ago but not much since.

But if played right it will go over well regardless, just like Exit did last summer, just like Wire would if it ever sees the light of day again, cause the songs have a ton of energy live and will get the crowd going whether they know the lyrics and can sing along or not.

 

[innominata8]

It's clearly because nobody knows Acrobat.

Dude, you're a troll...

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

None of the Acrobat truthers want to tackle the Ultra Violet question, huh?

 

[Axver]

Axver: I don't think anyone is arguing it'll be a 'flop' with the crowd. The 'argument' is that it isn't a very recognizable track. I think it's unreasonable to expect that the majority of people with know all of the tracks on an album. The album is 25 years old at this point and a lot of people may have hopped on the U2 bandwagon after this album or are just to casual of a fan to know every track.

I'm not saying they're all going to leap up in down in recognition like Pride.

But if Ultra Violet got a good reaction from the largest crowds U2 have ever played to, Acrobat - a song that could not be more alike Ultra Violet in release status, and therefore in how many people will know it - should also get a good one unless U2 play it like shit. This is the central point.

The reaction might vary a little based on type of song (UV has a catchy chorus, Acrobat rocks hard, so both should do well). The amount of people who go "oh yeah I recognise this" will be practically the same. The people who jumped on the U2 bandwagon more recently, or who are too casual a fan to know every track, are going to recognise Acrobat to the same extent as they did UV.

We're not talking about With a Shout here, you know? But to be clear, again, it's also not like we're talking about WOWY, in case that's what some of the "Acrobat's not recognisable" crowd think is being suggested here. It'll be somewhere in the middle, just like a whole bunch of songs before it.

 

[Axver]

I really do feel like I'm repeating myself, and parroting Headache, far too much here. I didn't think the idea that "a decent amount of people are gonna recognise Acrobat to some extent" would need to be talked about this much.

I mean, come on, if you were going to argue "nobody's gonna know The Electric Co.", I'd completely agree with you, and look at where we are - it has two successful recent tours under its belt.

Acrobat's gonna be just fine if it gets out of rehearsals and Bono doesn't break into a rap halfway through or something.

 

[innominata8]

But we're not talking any album.

If they were playing Wire, I'd expect big fans to to nuts and casual fans to have no idea what they were playing.

If they played Twilight, same deal.

But there are two albums that anyone who considers themselves a fan of U2 over the age of 30 absolutely owned and played the shit out of, front to back, and that's Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby; unless you're under the assumption that there are large swaths of people who pay 3 bills to go see U2 who only have the greatest hits albums. There certainly are some, but yo think that the majority who go don't at least know those two albums is just wrong, especially on an arena tour.

The example I'd cite is the last tour. I was lucky enough to catch 2 shows and while all of the songs went over very well, there were several songs on the B-side that a lot of people weren't familiar with. The other example I'd cite is Springsteen's last tour. It was also an album-based tour and myself and several of my other 'casual fan' friends didn't like the album enough to go and see a whole bunch of songs we didn't really know.

 

[innominata8]

Why does Ultra Violet get such a big reaction then?

Not a single.

End of the album.

Right next to Acrobat.

Under your argument, Ultra Violet would be just as obscure to the majority as Acrobat.

But clearly it isn't.

again, I'm not saying that acrobat won't get a reaction. I am saying that many won't know it. Also, UV has been performed before (2 tours I believe). Acrobat is kind of a 'lost track' for many.

 

[blueskies]

Then again, does all of the audience need to be familiar with every single song? That would be a greatest hits tour and I hope we can all agree that we don't want that.

 

[womanfish]

I can't believe The Showman is even being considered. What a waste of space from a band with a catalog like theirs. p.s. I really hate The Showman.

 

[Hollow Island]

U2 fans know Acrobat. It's not a lost track, and it's not obscure. It's on a beloved, iconic album that sold 18 million copies. There's nothing controversial about it being in the set. It's exciting!

 

[Hollow Island]

has Red Flag Day been rehearsed?

 

[blueskies]

I can't believe The Showman is even being considered. What a waste of space from a band with a catalog like theirs. p.s. I really hate The Showman.

It's a song that was literally written with a live performance in mind. So it only makes sense to play it live. Plus I love it, it's going to be a fun moment.

U2 fans know Acrobat. It's not a lost track, and it's not obscure. It's on a beloved, iconic album that sold 18 million copies. There's nothing controversial about it being in the set. It's exciting!

Yes.

has Red Flag Day been rehearsed?

No. At least not in Laval. Keep in mind that they rehearsed in Monaco / South of France before.

 

[innominata8]

Then again, does all of the audience need to be familiar with every single song? That would be a greatest hits tour and I hope we can all agree that we don't want that.

I hope there are songs people aren't familiar with! Part of the reason I'm such a big fan is I've seen many lesser-known songs done live and then went back to the albums to discover them. This is the case for U2 and most other bands I've seen.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

U2 fans know Acrobat. It's not a lost track, and it's not obscure. It's on a beloved, iconic album that sold 18 million copies. There's nothing controversial about it being in the set. It's exciting!

Thank you.

 

[Bean_Counter]

It seems they are excluding all of JT? If the argument there is that they played those songs every night last summer then why include IWF, SBS, Pride, BD, and One; which were also all played nearly every show last summer? I'd rather hear Streets over any of hose and with their catalog there are lots of other 'hits' to rotate in for this upcoming tour.

I would make the argument that with the price point of the current tickets and having toured so recently in stadiums, none the less, that 75%+ of the attendance will be superfans that may be tired of those war horses (IWF, SBS, Pride, BD, One, et al) and would welcome other less played or never played songs.

I am really looking forward to Acrobat and Horses; but also wish we could get Drowning Man, Arms around the world, MOFO, Kite, or Seconds.