Could U2 pull off a 2 hours and a half show?

[LMP]

Well how much do the techical and lighting effects of the show effect what they play, can the screens just do random stuff during songs they randomly play?

 

[dancingcat]

I saw Pink Floyd on 'The momentary lapse of reason' tour in '89 and they played for over 3 hrs with a 20 minute intermission which worked well.I know it's a totally differen't type of gig but it's still an option.

 

[Mullen4Prez]

Croker 3 was over 2 and a half hours.....

 

[Axver]

U2 have definitely been playing for longer this tour, especially in Europe!

 

[AndrewCowley]

Bruce Springsteen tours with the most modest show there is... Just a stage and white lights... If U2 would do a tour like that (which I can't imagine they would) they also could shuffle songs more easely... But since U2 always have a big production, you can't just improvise that easy...

Oh my god, the "big production" excuse again. Pathetic. Seems that for every criticism of what this band does (or does not do) on stage someone rolls out this excuse. Some of you are hopeless. I love this band. I want varied setlists and longer shows since I think given the money they charge this is what we should get in return. But you "big production" excuse people are blind to your feelings. Blind faith!

 

[Neilz]

Oh my god, the "big production" excuse again. Pathetic. Seems that for every criticism of what this band does (or does not do) on stage someone rolls out this excuse. Some of you are hopeless. I love this band. I want varied setlists and longer shows since I think given the money they charge this is what we should get in return. But you "big production" excuse people are blind to your feelings. Blind faith!

Well sorry, but it's the truth! You are now calling me blind to my feelings, well you are now talking a little bit naive! I've been going to concerts for over 15 years with an average of 20 per year... From clubs to stadiums... And you're telling me that this "big production" criticism is just my blind faith? Than you'll have to explain what I've been seeing all this time at all these gigs, cause it's not just U2 who have a very fixed setlist with the big production shows!

The larger your production, the less room to improvise... With U2 it's a little more difficult than that because they are a 4 piece band... A lot of audio is triggered from underworld, so the whole show staff has to know what's coming...

With Bruce, he plays with a 9 member band (which makes 10 in total)... Every audio you hear comes from the band! They can do whatever they want onstage and don't have to talk any improvisation through with their show directors...

So please! if you don't understand this difference, than don't judge me like you just did! If you can't see the difference between a Rolling Stones gig and a Pearl Jam gig, than we can stop this discussion!

 

[KUEFC09U2]

Oh my god, the "big production" excuse again. Pathetic. Seems that for every criticism of what this band does (or does not do) on stage someone rolls out this excuse. Some of you are hopeless. I love this band. I want varied setlists and longer shows since I think given the money they charge this is what we should get in return. But you "big production" excuse people are blind to your feelings. Blind faith!

yes and you people make me sick with this "blind faith" attitude, cant people just enjoy the people who are enjoying the tour go at least a couple of discussions without being called blind followers? if you dont like it fine, but many do

 

[stevec]

Oh my god, the "big production" excuse again. Pathetic. Seems that for every criticism of what this band does (or does not do) on stage someone rolls out this excuse. Some of you are hopeless. I love this band. I want varied setlists and longer shows since I think given the money they charge this is what we should get in return. But you "big production" excuse people are blind to your feelings. Blind faith!

"Blind"? "Pathetic"?

Congratulations - only 16 posts and you're pissing people off already.

Don't presume to anyone else on this board how we "feel", when clearly you have little or no knowledge of what you're talking about.

Your opinion is yours, but pay us the courtesy of allowing us to have ours while you are here.

 

[matt76]

Fight fight fight!!

 

[stevec]

Naaaah, no fights. Just a slapped wrist.

Beer beer beer! Well it's nearly opening time here and I am on holiday after all.

 

[matt76]

Naaaah, no fights. Just a slapped wrist.

Beer beer beer! Well it's nearly opening time here and I am on holiday after all.

Bloody Students!!

 

[stevec]

Bloody Students!!

Ya cheeky bugger

I'm on holiday from work

 

[matt76]

Bloody workers on holiday!

Have a good break!

 

[stevec]

LMAO

Cheers Matt

 

[Relay]

They played for 2 hours and 20 minutes in Gothenburg so they are very close now to do just that

 

[blueeyedgirl]

Bruce Springsteen tours with the most modest show there is... Just a stage and white lights... If U2 would do a tour like that (which I can't imagine they would) they also could shuffle songs more easely... But since U2 always have a big production, you can't just improvise that easy...

Sorry if I didn't make it clear in my earlier post but I was referring to the E Street Band, not the solo tour. He would often drop unannounced songs in, not even telling his band!

And I see there's been mention since in this thread of U2's "big production". I am at a loss really to understand why they can't just have extra musicians (keyboard, second guitar) on stage with them, as do REM and the like, and be done with hiding them in underworld. Noone would think any less of them, they rely on extra music the four don't play to prop up their stage sound already and would make the spontaneity return. Just a thought.

 

[sraphim]

Amsterdam 3 was 2/half hours too... Started at 20:45 and ended at 23:15

same here in Milan...

edit to say: Neilz, I totally agree with you (for once )
a big production DOES not leave much room for improvisation, that's a fact. IMO, not acknowledging THAT means being naive/blind...

 

[KUEFC09U2]

Sorry if I didn't make it clear in my earlier post but I was referring to the E Street Band, not the solo tour. He would often drop unannounced songs in, not even telling his band!

And I see there's been mention since in this thread of U2's "big production". I am at a loss really to understand why they can't just have extra musicians (keyboard, second guitar) on stage with them, as do REM and the like, and be done with hiding them in underworld. Noone would think any less of them, they rely on extra music the four don't play to prop up their stage sound already and would make the spontaneity return. Just a thought.

simple because they know the majority of people dont go to every single show, and most are only lucky to get to see 1, who cares what bruce springsteen or REM do? i dont see the point in comparing, as all 3 are different bands and have there own identitiy and way of doing things