U2 to Perform First Concerts at MSG Sphere in Las Vegas

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m much more concerned annoyed that I have to travel to Vegas to see this. Do we think this is unique to Vegas or they will tour with AB all around? Is that part of the deal?
 
clerks said:
I’m much more concerned annoyed that I have to travel to Vegas to see this. Do we think this is unique to Vegas or they will tour with AB all around? Is that part of the deal?
Click to expand...



Someone posted that the wording about these dates was not that it was a residency but rather a "launch". Now you could assume it's the start for a proper tour in 2024 at some point but this is "post 2014" U2....so.....who knows.
 
CosmoKramer said:
Someone posted that the wording about these dates was not that it was a residency but rather a "launch". Now you could assume it's the start for a proper tour in 2024 at some point but this is "post 2014" U2....so.....who knows.
Click to expand...



Took that as launching the venue, rather than launching a U2 tour
 
James Dolan late Tuesday pushed out two of the top executives in charge of running his over-budget music venue slated to open in Las Vegas this fall, The Post has learned.

The Knicks and Rangers owner plans to personally oversee the completion of the $2.2 billion MSG Sphere, a source told The Post.
Click to expand...

Since Dolan is incompetent, the Sphere won't be finished until 2025 anyway when Larry is good and healthy. Problem solved!
 
Alas, that only applies to his sportsball teams. MSG and The Forum are two of the top grossing venues in the world (#s 1 and 3, to be exact).

Radio City Music Hall and The Beacon are also in the top 10 of their respective venue categories.

The only reason the board let him do this giant ass project in the first place is because of how successful all of the other venues the company owns are.

If he asked to build a 2 billion dollar basketball team, I'm guessing they would have said no ;)
 
Last edited:
clerks said:
I’m much more concerned annoyed that I have to travel to Vegas to see this. Do we think this is unique to Vegas or they will tour with AB all around? Is that part of the deal?
Click to expand...

I think Vegas is your only option for these Achtung Babushka shows. Playing the material might inspire them to add a few of the songs into the set list for the next full scale tour, but the full AB shows will be just these 12 I think. They won't be dragging the tech on the road with them that The Sphere will provide.
 
Clerks’ issue is that he’s barred from flying commercial ever since his Flair-like “helicopter” incident with an air marshall.
 
Only band I'll buy two airline seats for is Radiohead. Or The Larry Mullen Jr Band.
 
U2387 said:
Exactly. To argue that this is something they're pressing on with regardless of Larry's feelings ignores everything about how U2 have conducted themselves over the years. As a band and as people. Anything is possible, but to any reasonable person who has followed this band over the years, that is simply not a likely scenario.

We are all well aware here that we're in uncharted territory in terms of the same line up sticking together for so long. However, I feel like in the general public, when the topic of longevity and bands comes up, they are either not mentioned or all anyone can say is something about politics or Bono being annoying or spamming phones or whatever other bullshit there is. People are so ignorant they even mention bands like AC/DC, Aerosmith and the Stones in this conversation. All of whom have obviously had multiple line up changes, and no mention of U2.

This is completely unprecedented, and I decided a long time ago to just enjoy the rest of the ride. I used to get more wound up over set list choices, material that was put out that didn't match the quality of the 80s and 90s. Botched kick offs like Invisible Super Bowl and Fallon opening. Etc, etc.

Whatever they do, I'm going to love some of it, like most of the rest, be neutral on some of it and dislike a small percentage of it.

Part of "enjoying the ride" to me is understanding that any group around this long is going to have someone do a stint on the disabled list. It's just reality. The critics have crossed the line from overblown to patently absurd with this! If U2 the 4 guys didn't want this, it wouldn't happen. Full stop.

Anyone ever have a family member miss work from surgery? How about a friend or co worker? Does it happen more or less as you age?

Lost in all this discussion is what you mentioned about AB! Where is the excitement?! Any tour now could well be the last, and even if it isn't, who thinks we're ever getting "Love is blindness," "trying to throw your arms" "acrobat" or "so cruel" ever again outside of a show like this?!

Just enjoy it, people! Here I am thinking the criticism they got when they announced JT 30 was bad! After 8 years of reading set list complaints here, most focused on how the new stuff sucked and we want more of the back catalog, lots of people did a 180 and flipped out that they were going backwards or worse, lazy. No, they're just not doing what YOU want them to do. Big difference.

Now we've got people applying words and principles to the four members of U2 that they never articulated themselves.

That's okay- I hope everyone doing this stays home! More for the rest of us! And I know for a fact these same people are going to want this back when U2 hangs it up.

Which, you would think no one would need to be reminded, will occur sooner than later!
Click to expand...
?
 
U2387 said:
Exactly. To argue that this is something they're pressing on with regardless of Larry's feelings ignores everything about how U2 have conducted themselves over the years. As a band and as people. Anything is possible, but to any reasonable person who has followed this band over the years, that is simply not a likely scenario.

We are all well aware here that we're in uncharted territory in terms of the same line up sticking together for so long. However, I feel like in the general public, when the topic of longevity and bands comes up, they are either not mentioned or all anyone can say is something about politics or Bono being annoying or spamming phones or whatever other bullshit there is. People are so ignorant they even mention bands like AC/DC, Aerosmith and the Stones in this conversation. All of whom have obviously had multiple line up changes, and no mention of U2.

This is completely unprecedented, and I decided a long time ago to just enjoy the rest of the ride. I used to get more wound up over set list choices, material that was put out that didn't match the quality of the 80s and 90s. Botched kick offs like Invisible Super Bowl and Fallon opening. Etc, etc.

Whatever they do, I'm going to love some of it, like most of the rest, be neutral on some of it and dislike a small percentage of it.

Part of "enjoying the ride" to me is understanding that any group around this long is going to have someone do a stint on the disabled list. It's just reality. The critics have crossed the line from overblown to patently absurd with this! If U2 the 4 guys didn't want this, it wouldn't happen. Full stop.

Anyone ever have a family member miss work from surgery? How about a friend or co worker? Does it happen more or less as you age?

Lost in all this discussion is what you mentioned about AB! Where is the excitement?! Any tour now could well be the last, and even if it isn't, who thinks we're ever getting "Love is blindness," "trying to throw your arms" "acrobat" or "so cruel" ever again outside of a show like this?!

Just enjoy it, people! Here I am thinking the criticism they got when they announced JT 30 was bad! After 8 years of reading set list complaints here, most focused on how the new stuff sucked and we want more of the back catalog, lots of people did a 180 and flipped out that they were going backwards or worse, lazy. No, they're just not doing what YOU want them to do. Big difference.

Now we've got people applying words and principles to the four members of U2 that they never articulated themselves.

That's okay- I hope everyone doing this stays home! More for the rest of us! And I know for a fact these same people are going to want this back when U2 hangs it up.

Which, you would think no one would need to be reminded, will occur sooner than later!
Click to expand...

Well said.

The history of U2 has always been the 4 of them sticking together. Its the secret to their longevity and having the same line-up. It seems inconceivable to me that they'd do these shows with a stand in drummer without Larry's blessing.

As for the criticism they get, it does border on the preposterous at times, including from some fans. They have been together for nearly half a century. These are the twilight years of U2, they are nearing the end, so whatever they put out now or decide to do should b e seen as a bonus. New material from them is never going to stand up to their 80s and early 90s peak. What legacy act churns out material these days that is on par woth their best work? Paul McCartney? Nope. The Stones? No chance. Springsteen? No. Madonna? Not a chance. Dylan? No way.

I'm generally happy that they're still active, they're still an amazing live band and still tour, and that they still try and create new music. Some of that new music is poor, some of it is great. I'll take that after 47 years.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
these fuckers are going to put tickets on sale on March 17th, aren't they?
Click to expand...



Or the following Monday. Weekend presales are a mess so they would never…

Fuck, what am I saying? Yeah we’re screwed.

TBF, public onsale makes sense to be announced then, but the ol’ U2.com presale will need to be at least a day or two of advance access (between the apparent two tiers). Bruce dates are being broken out across two weeks, and slotted into different hours for different nights in the same venue, so if they’re thoughtfu…uck, we’re screwed.
 
danm said:
As for the criticism they get, it does border on the preposterous at times, including from some fans. They have been together for nearly half a century. These are the twilight years of U2, they are nearing the end, so whatever they put out now or decide to do should b e seen as a bonus. New material from them is never going to stand up to their 80s and early 90s peak. What legacy act churns out material these days that is on par woth their best work? Paul McCartney? Nope. The Stones? No chance. Springsteen? No. Madonna? Not a chance. Dylan? No way.
Click to expand...

i agree with everything you said, but i'd be remiss if i didn't point out that the new music Depeche Mode is currently putting out is awesome. i know they were never quite on U2's level in terms of size (insert bono fat joke here) and popularity, but they are of the same era, and IMO they're still putting out material that is just as good as their commercial peak.
 
I saw Springsteen last night. He played a joyous 2.5+ hour show that featured many non-original members, no new nusic, exactly the same spare stage setup as everytime I've ever seen him, and plenty of hits (along with a relatively static setlist).

what kept me from enjoying almost three hours with one of rock's greatest showmen and his finely tuned band was the knowledge, gleaned from the standards of some in this forum, that it was nothing more than a CA$H GRAB from a creatively spent artist utterly out of ideas beyond the enthusiastic and energetic playing of beloved music written over the past 50 years. Several times I had to slap the stupid grin off my face and remind myself that i wasn't seeing Radiohead so it sucked and had no integrity. they had a new saxophonist and even gave him Clarence’s last name, but I wasn’t fooled! Nice try, Bruce. The real Clarence Clememons is dead, and I knew in my heart I wasn’t seeing the real E Street Band. I wonder if the aging white boomers around me even understood that?

I plan to hate the Madonna concert I'll see in a few months as well.
 
Last edited:
Irvine511 said:
I saw Springsteen last night. He played a joyous 2.5+ hour show that featured many non-original members, no new nusic, exactly the same spare stage setup as everytime I've ever seen him, and plenty of hits (along with a relatively static setlist).

what kept me from enjoying almost three hours with one of rock's greatest showmen and his finely tuned band was the knowledge, gleaned from the standards of some in this forum, that it was nothing more than a CA$H GRAB from a creatively spent artist utterly out of ideas beyond the enthusiastic and energetic playing of beloved music written over the past 50 years. Several times I had to slap the stupid grin off my face and remind myself that i wasn't seeing Radiohead so it sucked and had no integrity. they had a new saxophonist and even gave him Clarence’s last name, but I wasn’t fooled! Nice try, Bruce. The real Clarence Clememons is dead, and I knew in my heart I wasn’t seeing the real E Street Band. I wonder if the aging white boomers around me even understood that?

I plan to hate the Madonna concert I'll see in a few months as well.
Click to expand...
[emoji3531][emoji3531][emoji3531][emoji3531]
 
Doh, it's: Radiohead’s Philip Selway: ‘If Bono is reading, I know all Larry Mullen’s parts’
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
Interesting Article about the Sphere from a Business Perspective.
Replies
3
Views
903
zoney!
zoney!
MrsSpringsteen
Can A Guitar Player/Expert Explain This To Me Please
Replies
2
Views
957
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen
prbiker15
Sphere Show #1 Setlist Party
14 15 16
Replies
451
Views
21K
dan_smee
dan_smee
Headache in a Suitcase
  • Locked
The Final Countdown - U2 at Sphere - General Discussion Thread Part 3
18 19 20
Replies
574
Views
26K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
prbiker15
U2:UV Boxscore Discussion
Replies
20
Views
2K
DeVaul
DeVaul

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom