U2: Band in Crisis?

[lemonfly]

I'm pretty sure the recent Rolling Stones tours got great reviews but does that make them any more relevant as a band creating fresh, exciting music??

Yea, great live reviews for a band that have been playing together since the last ice age does not = relevance. Having said that, U2 are still much more of an ongoing creative concern than The Rolling Stones were in 1995. But, but, but as fans we do live look at the band through a prism. I was at a Stones forum a few months ago and their fans were talking like they were still musically relevant. I'd say a good 70 percent of music fans probably feel U2 shot their load years ago.

 

[Utoo]

Why don't people fucking understand that they are opening with 4 Achtung songs and have brought back Zooropa because they have a fucking Achtung/Zooropa remaster to sell this fall???? It is NOT simply looking fondly on the past. Good god, even bringing Unforgettable Fire into the mix in 2009 wasn't some stroke of brilliance---they were fucking selling the damn UF remaster that year!

This author talks about Edge reminiscing about the Achtung era and makes it seem as if he's thinking about them as the Glory Days. He fails to mention that they have been digging through the Achtung-era vaults to create the remaster and that that's why he's reminiscing about that period of time. How can you do so much research for a fairly well-written article, and actually take quotes from articles that were written about the AB remaster, and not put 2 & 2 together?

The whole "U2 need to reconnect with Ireland" bit is BS stemming from the stupid tax issue. Gotta love how he says that the band should reconnect with Ireland, and yet also refocus on what he thinks is their greatest era: Joshua Tree and Rattle & Hum---the time in which their songwriting was blatantly aimed at experiencing America.


*Disclaimer: I'm trying not to do the usual fanboy "oh, let's trash anything written negatively about U2." Rather it's getting quite annoying seeing both new and longtime members here trashing the 2011 360 Tour as a nostalgia act because of the Achtung section when its inclusion is blatantly obvious (and not just a Greatest Hits run). As I've said elsewhere, the majority of NLOTH plays better in an arena, not stadiums. While these final legs of 360 are in unusual circumstances due to their delay, the greatest hits argument is just plain silly. If they drop the Achtung section and don't bring any NLOTH back in, then make your argument. In the meantime, just drop it already.

 

[Utoo]

I think I've seen a few comments on this site from people who were disappointed with a show here or there (I think there was a comment to that effect about Baltimore?), but it seems to me that they're resulting in overwhelming raves, including some comments about a show being "one of the best I've ever seen" from fans who have seen eleventy gajillion shows.

Yeah, I was at Baltimore & was very surprised to see that comment. I definitely think the Baltimore show beat out 2009's Landover, MD & Charlottesville, VA shows that I saw.

The truth is that they're simply lighting it up right now. While many of us loved the Glastonbury performance, that may have actually been their lowest point so far on 2011 in that they didn't hit it out of the park. It seems like most of the fans at the 360 gigs seem to think that they did.

Because of their age, they're going to be plagued by the "The Next Album Must Be Amazing To Keep U2 Relevant" argument with every single "next album" they make. It sucks, but that's the way it goes.

 

[Mrs. Garrison]

i love u2



ETA

thanks to military obligations back in the early 90's i missed Zoo Tv, which is highly regarded as u2 @ their best. I watched it over and over on VHS until i had all of the songs memorized, but its really not quite the same. PoPmart was my first show, got completely bombed so i dont really remember that one, watched it over and over again on VHS and loved that release. My first real concert experiences was Elevation Tour X 4, which was great.

But i admit i love the really really big productions....and the setlist the other night was just perfect for me. Got to hear some great songs off of Achtung Baby, my favorite album, with the massive stage and production. This is truly the greatest show on earth.

like i said, i love u2

 

[vaz02]

Its a fair article. Calm down people

 

[U2girl]

It was also sad when they did the same thing on Popmart...and Vertigo...

Fuck U2, and all their ways. They've walked the road to destruction far too long now.

Popmart had 7 Pop songs by the end of the tour. And Vertigo had mostly 4 on the last leg, with Saints are coming and/or Window in the skies added. Elevation had 6.

Now they're down to a measly 3 off NLOTH, and re-appearing North Star.

Exactly what is the same ?


And the remaster theory...the shoving of 4/5 AB songs early on didn't happen until 2 shows before Glastonbury.

 

[Galeongirl]

What part of the 2010-2011 360 tour is NOT in support of NLOTH is so hard to grasp? Even EDGE himself stated that. Why do you fucking clutch onto the idea of that this still is the NLOTH promo tour for all this time?

 

[Galeongirl]

OH and to the rest of the thread:

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

My three favorite acts... u2, Pearl Jam and bruce Springsteen... are all considered to be "classic rock," "dad rock," and yes, "nostalgia acts" by those who are not fans of said bands.

And I'm a.o.k. with all of that.

The difference between the three acts is that two of the three don't care about public perception and just release whatever the hell they want. The other is obsessed with this ancient concept of relevancy in an era where there's no true state to measure said relevancy.

Their current set list gives me hope that they're getting comfortable with who they are. We'll see when the new album eventually comes out.

 

[kramwest1]

I don't think any of you are taking U2's crisis seriously enough.

I said Onoz and OMGz.

Oh wait,



There.


-serious as a heart attack from too much potato salad on Independence Day.

 

[bono_man2002]

I guess I should pre-emptively post this picture here too, in anticipation of the inevitable "Greatest Hits Band = ONOEZ ZOMG" discussion.

Pretty much my thoughts on every thread in the new album forum until about this time next year!

The difference between the three acts is that two of the three don't care about public perception and just release whatever the hell they want. The other is obsessed with this ancient concept of relevancy in an era where there's no true state to measure said relevancy.
.

Its not just the band either. I think its the majority of the people running the show.

 

[rjhbonovox]

Popmart had 7 Pop songs by the end of the tour. And Vertigo had mostly 4 on the last leg, with Saints are coming and/or Window in the skies added. Elevation had 6.

Now they're down to a measly 3 off NLOTH, and re-appearing North Star.

Exactly what is the same ?

Yeah gotta agree. Even that massive failure (but fucking brilliant album) Pop was supported throughout the whole tour. But I suppose u also have to factor in the fact that this 360 tour has been going on a year too long. I'm right in thinking that it would have been done and dusted by now if it wasn't for Bonos back injury? But I suppose taking that into account they should still be playing at least 5 songs from the last album. Can't understand why dropped Breathe and NLOTH. Thats crap I reckon. And why didn't they try and factor in Fez/Being Born, Winter and Cedars to keep it fresh.

 

[corianderstem]

My three favorite acts... u2, Pearl Jam and bruce Springsteen... are all considered to be "classic rock," "dad rock," and yes, "nostalgia acts" by those who are not fans of said bands.

And I'm a.o.k. with all of that.

The difference between the three acts is that two of the three don't care about public perception and just release whatever the hell they want. The other is obsessed with this ancient concept of relevancy in an era where there's no true state to measure said relevancy.

Their current set list gives me hope that they're getting comfortable with who they are. We'll see when the new album eventually comes out.

Well said.

After I don't know how many bitchy posts I directed at you lately (sorry, man), I think I'm finally realizing we're more or less on the same page.

 

[doctorwho]

Popmart had 7 Pop songs by the end of the tour. And Vertigo had mostly 4 on the last leg, with Saints are coming and/or Window in the skies added. Elevation had 6.

Now they're down to a measly 3 off NLOTH, and re-appearing North Star.

Exactly what is the same ?


And the remaster theory...the shoving of 4/5 AB songs early on didn't happen until 2 shows before Glastonbury.

As I wrote earlier in this thread, I saw U2 at Oakland on June 7th. They did three AB songs in their first 10 - and that was it for that album. They also did two NLOTH songs in the first 10 (and played two more later in the show) along with tracks from R&H, Zooropa and ATYCLB.

Granted, that's just one show - but it demonstrates that U2 are NOT starting all shows with four AB songs, that they are still playing four tracks from NLOTH and that they are also tapping into Zooropa, R&H, ATYCLB, HTDAAB, JT, War and even October. There's a snippet of Pop too.

U2 ended PopMart with more Pop songs, but they also didn't have a long break. Plus U2 didn't have to worry about ATYCLB, HTDAAB or NLOTH - three albums that sold over 8M copies in the U.S. and about 27M worldwide - because those albums did not exist.

And I agree with the person who said marketing plays a big role. U2 are re-issuing remasters of AB and Zooropa. Why not revisit those songs live again? It's great marketing and for fans who missed ZOO TV, this is a nice way to hear some of those tracks. I, for one, loved hearing "Zooropa" and enjoyed the return of "Hold Me...Kill Me". So I loved the setlist.

What I don't get is that if U2 had returned to performing a similar setlist in 2011 that they did in 2009, that author would then be complaining how static and unimaginative U2 are. He'd be disappointed that after nearly a year off, U2 couldn't throw in more older tracks and some new ones. But when U2 do just that, now this author complains that U2 are relying too much on old material and not playing enough of their last album. It really is a lose-lose for this band.

 

[bono_man2002]

U2 ended PopMart with more Pop songs, but they also didn't have a long break. Plus U2 didn't have to worry about ATYCLB, HTDAAB or NLOTH - three albums that sold over 8M copies in the U.S. and about 27M worldwide - because those albums did not exist.

What I don't get is that if U2 had returned to performing a similar setlist in 2011 that they did in 2009, that author would then be complaining how static and unimaginative U2 are. He'd be disappointed that after nearly a year off, U2 couldn't throw in more older tracks and some new ones. But when U2 do just that, now this author complains that U2 are relying too much on old material and not playing enough of their last album. It really is a lose-lose for this band.

Yeah, plus PopMart finished within 12 months of starting, this tour has been a little shorter, but its dragged on forever because of Injuries.

The second part is very well said Heck the setlist is even an improvement on 2010! I'm dying to get to one of these last shows, but I know I can't. EBTTRT, The Fly, Zooropa, Stay!? C'mon, I'd love to hear these songs!

 

[digitize]

Granted, that's just one show - but it demonstrates that U2 are NOT starting all shows with four AB songs, that they are still playing four tracks from NLOTH and that they are also tapping into Zooropa, R&H, ATYCLB, HTDAAB, JT, War and even October. There's a snippet of Pop too.

I'm sorry, but your data is outdated.

U2 Nashville, 2011-07-02, Vanderbilt Stadium, 360° Tour - U2 on tour

And for even more, and somewhat more recent than Oakland:

U2 Baltimore, 2011-06-22, M&T Bank Stadium, 360° Tour - U2 on tour

Every show since Anaheim II, including Glaso, has begun with four AB songs.

 

[Mrs. Garrison]

. And why didn't they try and factor in Fez/Being Born, Winter and Cedars to keep it fresh.

Because they are playing stadiums.

They are trying to WIN people over, not piss them off or make them head for the beer stands, crappers, or even the EXIT.

 

[cobl04]

As I wrote earlier in this thread, I saw U2 at Oakland on June 7th. They did three AB songs in their first 10 - and that was it for that album.

you do realise One is on AB right?

 

[marik]

Just the fact that they can put on a record breaking tour off the back of a failure of an album should alone prove how much new material factors into the public consideration when it comes to U2. Not. At. All. And I think 360 is less of a Greatest Hits tour, and more of an Event Tour. That has greatest hits wrapped in (ie the size of U2's back catalogue), but the sheer size of it all is/was the big draw. The success or failure of No Line was not a factor. It's failure didn't hurt it, and success couldn't have possibly made it any bigger or better (from a bums-on-seats point of view.)

So that is where they're at. And they'll probably continue to be that way from here on out. As long as they manage the market right - don't turn up in town too often - they'll forever more be able to float huge tours (in scope at least) whenever they want, and new material... whatever.

Bono has this silly wish to float U2 songs up in the charts, seemingly equating this alone to 'relevancy', so if he's still got that bee in his bonnet there are sure to be more cock ups to come, but really, as far as their legacy is concerned, all they need to do is close the respect/credibility gap. In other words, they just need to release stuff that is good. That's it. Continuing to keep pushing on this desperate Vertigo-Boots-Hit Single line will just continue to widen that gap, even though it's success or failure will have no impact on Really Big U2 and the Really Big U2 Tours. Look at No Line. Great album. A few shit songs. Three of them were singles, tanks the reputation of the whole album (and along with it 'current' U2 seen as being over it), but it has absolutely no effect on their business. What difference would a naff hit single make versus a naff dud single? Not a lot. Maybe a Grammy? Look at Vertigo. Hit single. Worked. Get them anything? In reality, or on balance, not that much more or less than the failed Boots.

I agree with most of this perspective.
but with vertigo, it didnt get them one of their best songs ever. it got them a song people will remember forever. adding another song title to the list people will rattle off as universally known u2 songs- adding to their legacy. (where as i dont think a title off No Line will be remembered- thus doesnt add to legacy)

 

[cobl04]

maybe this was their plan all along. they gave the tour an ambiguous title that had nothing to do with the album (unlike every other tour they've ever done) so maybe they always planned on dropping the focus.

 

[bono_man2002]

I don't think so. Had the tour ended this time last year, they'd have eventually mixed up the setlist, yes but I don't think we'd have seen a drastic change in openers or Zooropa. A lot of the AB stuff has come back cause well its the 20th anniversary this year and they're obviously doing a lot studio work with those tunes, therefore the tracks in in their heads and onto the setlist.

Hindsight is 20/20 though, from purely a setlist party watcher, I'm pleased in the changes that have happened since they got to south america. As a U2 fan who saw them last year, I'm fucking jealous

 

[doctorwho]

I'm sorry, but your data is outdated.

U2 Nashville, 2011-07-02, Vanderbilt Stadium, 360° Tour - U2 on tour

And for even more, and somewhat more recent than Oakland:

U2 Baltimore, 2011-06-22, M&T Bank Stadium, 360° Tour - U2 on tour

Every show since Anaheim II, including Glaso, has begun with four AB songs.

The fact that some shows have 4 AB songs immediately and some do not just proves that NOT all shows are the same and setlists vary.

There you go - a U2 that mixes the setlist. Isn't that what all the fans want?

you do realise One is on AB right?

Oopsy - my bad. Yeah, one more AB track was done late in the show (I was focused only on the beginning). Still - the horror of having 4 AB tracks. I vomited in disgust at U2 playing such great music.

 

[powerhour24]

It does if nobody cares about the songs.

And that's the point. Many older acts still release albums. Those acts where everyone other than the diehard fans care about said albums? Yup.

And just to be straight... I happily go and see a few of these acts whom are considered nostalgia acts by the same u2 fans who can't face reality about what non u2 fans consider u2 to be.

And I'm fucking pumped about going to see u2 in Jersey in a few weeks. And love the current set list.

So the people in the crowd decide whether the band is a nostalgia act? The band was proud of their music and played it. These other bands you're talking about may occasionally release new albums, but how much of that material was played? And how many of those acts are really the same band that was made famous? Sure U2 sells out stadiums on its name more than on NLOTH, but they don't tour whenever they could constantly just to sell to those fans despite all the boatloads of cash they could rake in by doing so, they only come out when they have something new to show to the world. Again the 2011 tour is akin to the lingering dates on PopMart and Vertigo, and 360 only lingered on to nostalgia mode because of Bono's injury and the AB anniversary.

I'm not acting like they're not well into the second half of their career, but they don't belong in conversation with names like the Rolling Stones.

 

[powerhour24]

maybe this was their plan all along. they gave the tour an ambiguous title that had nothing to do with the album (unlike every other tour they've ever done) so maybe they always planned on dropping the focus.

I think the reason why the name was changed from Kiss the Future Tour in reference to NLOTH was because they truly did intend for it to span multiple albums.

 

[corianderstem]

Auto-correct? Or are you inventing new verbs?

 

[silkensky]

They can sure as hell do a lot worse than opening with four awesome songs from arguably their best album. Yes the remaster is coming up but I also think they're just in that kinda mood anyway, and it fucking rocks. I don't think they're worried about this crisis shit... they're having fun right now.

 

[powerhour24]

Auto-correct? Or are you inventing new verbs?

Yeah, iOS, you know how it is. Span turns into either Spanish or Spam.

 

[Niceman]

I agree with a lot of what the article said in the first half. I don't see how their relationship with Ireland is the problem.

Yeah, U2 is going through a bit of an identity crisis. It's a problem. I don't like seeing U2 touring "their career" instead of focusing more on new material. That's not the band I know. That's not the band I want them to be.

The next album may be the most important one they've ever released.

 

[Galeongirl]

Yeah, iOS, you know how it is. Span turns into either Spanish or Spam.

ONOZ U2 r spammerz! Get them off the interwebz!!!!

 

[Earnie Shavers]

maybe this was their plan all along. they gave the tour an ambiguous title that had nothing to do with the album (unlike every other tour they've ever done) so maybe they always planned on dropping the focus.

Going for '360' over 'Kiss The Future' was pure marketing, I would think. They wouldn't have been planning to 'drop' No Line from the outset. But it was a tour/concept wholly separate from the album, both thematically and in terms of consideration for the actual music, which is unique for them and I would suggest a little bit... I mean, it was obviously wildly successful (both commercially and genuinely) but it's not necessarily a good turn for the band. That is to me a little bit 'Rolling Stones' territory, even if what U2 put in and get out is very different. Despite it's success, I would definitely chalk that up in any list of 'Where are U2 really at these days?' But No Line, I would guess, would have had far better and longer representation if it had simply been an arena tour.

The next album may be the most important one they've ever released.

'Most'? No. But it will certainly set up and determine how their final phase goes, and thus play a large degree in determining their legacy. Really - harsh chat here - there are probably only a couple of U2 albums to go. Not much room for fucking up, one way or another.

Another misguided chase for the bottom (even if in reality, like No Line, it's only a few songs, but they happen to be the shopfront window) and the 'U2 Story' will forever take an ugly turn at the end. If they say 'fuck it' and just go for it without 'hit single' consideration, while gaining critical appreciation, then there'll be a lot of respect there but given it would almost certainly lead to lesser sales again, they'll have to cop a narrative of not being as big as they were, and not as 'relevant' in the way they seem to define that. Or they'll somehow manage both critical and commercial, and succeed, which would safely lock them in as some sort of all time something. I think they'll obviously be gunning for that last option, but I don't quite trust that that simply doesn't mean they'll end up with the first option. Nothing we've heard post No Line really inspires much hope, either in what we've heard musically or in what we've heard from them in terms of how they read the No Line 'failure'. But a good thing: none of what we've heard is from the Danger Mouse stuff.

But yeah, it's not the most important. But they do have a red pill/blue pill choice here that they haven't had since post-Pop, but I'd say the stakes are elevated to roughly the same as post-R&H.

Personally, I'd just like some really great music. No bullshit. No sense that you're listening to stuff that's been compromised via one eye on what an imaginary focus group might be suggesting, which even on the better end of No Line, you do get some sense of. I don't need them to suddenly be a genuinely exciting, 'relevant' band again, I'd be quite happy for them just to release very high quality, far quieter or smaller, 'mature' albums that break no real new ground, but really sound like a band with their experience, both in years and musical fucking around. No Line as a whole is great, but you can't tell me that after all this time, that's the best they can do.

Outside of my own enjoyment, I would like to see the band have a bit of a 'golden age' at the end. It would be a shame if a respect for or appreciation of U2 remains decidedly uncool/unacknowledged until the morning after they quit or their plane crashes or something, and then there's a sudden and widespread 180 turn on them (and you know that's exactly what will happen.) More articles with headlines like this (if not quite the backhanded nature of it): Isn't it time we learned to cherish U2? as a reflection of a genuine re-think (or acceptance, or 'brave' acknowledgment) but U2's musical output and career decisions from here on out will almost wholly determine whether or not they actually get to see that sort of thing take hold. Another album like either Atomic Bomb or No Line and they've fucked it, basically.