Next Album Rumours Thread V - Your Song Ruined My Life

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
a911fc29f8f6cfa7d67a7125ed7652e8.jpg

Davis Guggenheim should make a doc about the lead-up to this shoot.
 
Am I the only one here who likes YSSML? I guess so...

I'm grateful for whatever they choose to give us at this point. If anyone has earned retirement at 60, it's U2.

it's fine. i like it. it's not entering my top 10 anytime soon, and i'll probably forget about it by January - but it's a harmless, semi-catchy pop song attached to an animated movie.
 
revisitng old songs.. new keys sigs/arrangements

I'm guessing they're trying to redefine their legacy a bit..position themselves as songwriters, as much soundscapers.. get ready for the likes of a a piano centric downtempo Ultraviolet

i'm envisioning something in line with the acoustic takes they showed on From The Sky Down

 
No idea what a spenk is or how anybody could have a problem with what Adam said there surely?

I've seen a few bands recently celebrate the 20th (or whatever) anniversary of an album by just going out and touring the album in theatres and small arenas - play the album in full with a second half of greatest hits - low key, low cost (for them), done and dusted, everyone's happy.

Are U2 just too big to do that sort of thing now? No massive lightshow, video walls or even themes, just play the music and sell a few t-shirts?
 
You can't really call someone out for a clip that's been edited from a larger context to fit a documentary's narrative. For all we know, Adam has some really shitty views on gender in music, but this looks like he's recounting a conversation he might have had with Phil one time while talking shit on guitar players.

I'm not familiar with Nadine either, and I read that she was recently attacked, so I don't know if she's working through some stuff, has always been a shit-stirrer, has an agenda against Adam or what... but at this point in my life, throwing something like this out into the ether "just cuz" just seems mean spirited.

It also plays into a facet of Twitter that I just cannot understand - people amplifying things they hate. Whatever documentary that is looks like something that approx. 456 people have watched prior to whatever free marketing it's now receiving, though I bet this all blows over before The Streisand Effect takes.
 
Are U2 just too big to do that sort of thing now? No massive lightshow, video walls or even themes, just play the music and sell a few t-shirts?

My understanding of the industry is rusty and antiquated, but something along the lines of:

They're big enough to do whatever they want, but too big to do something like this and have it be sustainable. Especially now that U2's entire career hinges on their ability to tour for Live Nation, the amount of people that U2 employ to go on the road is far too large for touring anything smaller than arenas. Even essential crew - many of whom are probably on retainer and/or full-time employees - would create bloat, because while the venues are smaller... the rest of the tour remains the same size. By that I mean, a lot of buses (lots and lots and lots of buses - band/production/management), hotels, tour crew, local crew, etc.

They'd have to charge thousands of dollars per ticket to be able to cover the cost of touring, and trying to justify that when they could sell out stadiums, or multi-night arena runs.

That's not to say they couldn't really dig in, pare everything down and do it... but we all know that'll never happen.
 
They're big enough to do whatever they want, but too big to do something like this and have it be sustainable..

I just feel like their production doesn't scale well. Even the largest arena is too small. My first I+E concert was up behind the stage at the United Center and I was basically looking right at one of the flown subwoofers. I was wearing earplugs AND headphones, but decided to go "bareback" briefly at one point. I suspect the monster low end gave me very slight tinnitus for a while after. No "bareback" for JT30 at Soldier Field, needless to say...
 
Last edited:
My understanding of the industry is rusty and antiquated, but something along the lines of:

They're big enough to do whatever they want, but too big to do something like this and have it be sustainable. Especially now that U2's entire career hinges on their ability to tour for Live Nation, the amount of people that U2 employ to go on the road is far too large for touring anything smaller than arenas. Even essential crew - many of whom are probably on retainer and/or full-time employees - would create bloat, because while the venues are smaller... the rest of the tour remains the same size. By that I mean, a lot of buses (lots and lots and lots of buses - band/production/management), hotels, tour crew, local crew, etc.

They'd have to charge thousands of dollars per ticket to be able to cover the cost of touring, and trying to justify that when they could sell out stadiums, or multi-night arena runs.

That's not to say they couldn't really dig in, pare everything down and do it... but we all know that'll never happen.

if they wanted to tour smaller, they could absolutely tour smaller. there's no requirement to take the same number of crew on the road each tour. the typical touring band's crew is actually much smaller than you would expect. most of the people who are hanging the stage, setting the t-shirts up, etc. are locally hired union workers. the guy hanging the speaker isn't getting on a bus at the end of the show to go to the next gig.

the truck drivers are the truck drivers - but you only need as many truck drivers as you need equipment, so with a smaller stage setup you'd have fewer trucks. you typically don't see a ton of tour busses set up outside arenas anymore. that's becoming less and less of a thing. most shows i'd say you have two to three tops - and that's usually for gigs that have more than two acts.

if they don't do it, it's only because they don't want to (i.e. there's more money to be had with arenas/stadiums).
 
Last edited:
I actually think it's more perception. U2 is an arena/stadium band. If they want to do a cool one off theater show like the Apollo gig, that awesome because it's totally exclusive and gets attention. But I really don't think they want to do a tour of theaters. Can you imagine the coverage from Pitchfork and Stereogum?

U2 goes from biggest tour of all time to touring 2000 seat theaters!! LOL!!!
All the geniuses on Twitter that had to go on anti-depressants after getting a free album would also be buzzing.

IMO, if they were to do anything for ZooTV 30 (which i firmly believe they should NOT)
they should do multiple nights in arenas in big markets and leave it at that. Get back to the studio.
 
Arenas for new stuff and - if they ever dared - oddities (acoustic/b-sides/deep cuts), stadiums for Hits.

Sure they could do arenas for Hits, too, but why work that hard?
 
U2 in theaters would have a face value of around $500 and still be impossible to get.

$500 face value and instantly on the secondary market for $2000

It would be filled with 60 year old bald corporate exec douches, and their young wives or gf's.
 
As long as they film it and actually release it on streaming platforms, I don’t care who is actually at a show.
 
As long as they film it and actually release it on streaming platforms, I don’t care who is actually at a show.

I totally disagree. when it comes to live shows, the audience is about a quarter of the performance. U2 shows up through Vertigo, vs. 360 and onward that just don't have the same energy there. Or shows from Italy or South America where the crowd is younger and going apeshit is just a cool part of the experience.

Can place most of the blame on cellphone video becoming usable right about that time period, along with the audience getting older.

I don't usually say too much stereotypical old guy shit. But I do really feel sorry for people 30 and under that never experienced concerts without a half motionless crowd with phones in front of their faces.
 
Well, they *could* run a lottery for fanclub members but having erased for no apparent reason the three-tier-seniority system they briefly established a dozen years ago, I’d just end up pissed off.

Yes, this is all about me.
 
Can place most of the blame on cellphone video becoming usable right about that time period, along with the audience getting older.



I don't usually say too much stereotypical old guy shit. But I do really feel sorry for people 30 and under that never experienced concerts without a half motionless crowd with phones in front of their faces.


There’s something to this. I love having a few photos from a show but it can be a distraction.

I saw a concert a few years ago that employed the Yondr pouch system and it was one of the best experiences.
 
Ironically, the very phenomenon you mention has been a boon for me as someone with fairly severe social anxiety. At 44 I was on the field for JT30, about fifteen feet from the B-stage. There was no pushing or fighting to get or maintain that spot. My first rock concert, at sixteen, was Simple Minds in 1989 at the Westfalenhalle in Dortmund, where I saw U2 three years later (the Rhine-Ruhr region being one of the biggest markets for both acts). GA floor. We arrived early enough to stand a few rows in front of the stage, but bailed during the opening act and went up to the first balcony to stand up there by, you guessed it...the "old" people. We were literally concerned for our physical safety on the floor, much less comfort. By the way, I had the same American football linebacker physique I do now, with a few more extra pounds to boot. Not so much the good old days of concerts for me...
 
Apropos concert artefacts, I still have my inflatable PopMart lemon. I just don't know what to blow it up with--a bike pump doesn't seem to work. Give it some Viagra perhaps? :cute:
 
Back
Top Bottom