U2: Showmanship or Musicality?

[jick]

And you're saying they don't play like a cohesive unit? Seriously, mate, you're just being ridiculous. Do you go to a concert and sit there, listening for them to do something wrong, or do you go there and get into the music? You do the latter of course, and probably don't notice any wrong notes. Honestly, I couldn't tell you any instances where U2's played a wrong note because I SIMPLY DON'T CARE. They make bloody incredible music, and if Edge plays one insignificant sour note in the middle of an otherwise incredible solo, I couldn't care less. Every boot of them that I have sounds incredible the way it is. You're just harping on about such petty stuff that it completely crosses the line of pedantic.

Go find a bootleg, second show of Elevation. They "tried" to sing Angel Of Harlem, Edge hits the wrong chords - Bono messes up the lyrics big time. Obviously, they did not even rehearse the song and played it there and then. Check out their rough version of A Sort Of Homecoming on the Slane day 1. If U2 wants to play a song, at least they should prepare and rehearse for it. It's part of professionalism. Ok, so sour notes are fine, even the best bands hit those sour notes. But when what is evident is an obvious lack of preparation (and yes it has been well documented that Bono was reading the lyrics to Stay in the earlier Elevation performances, ditto for Edge when he was singing Numb in Zoo TV), then it shows lack of professionalism for a band of U2's stature. Opening night in Popmart Las Vegas was just an obvious lack of preparation. U2 should come to gigs prepared or don't play at all. At least let the paying public get their money's worth.

Take a look at Where The Streets Have No Name. Larry cues with his drumstick, Edge always comes in perfectly, the timing with the red screen and the synth is perfect, the crew backstage know the exact moment when to flash all the lights, and Bono has perfectly timed his run to reach the tip of the heart when it's time to sing the first line ---- obviously U2 have prepared well for this routine and it shows. This is what many call the high point of most U2 shows. Why? Because the band, the orchestration, the lighting crew, and even the backstage musicians all work together in perfect unison. If U2 tries they can always get it.

Check out the Elevation WOWY, it seems "spontaneous" that Bono picks out a chick, but it is actually prepared for. During the rehearsals shown in the documentary, Bono was practicing even on the exact part of the floor where to lie down.

U2 are mostly prepared musicians, but there are just those momentary lapses where they lose focus and don't show their professionalism by giving lame versions, unrehearsed versions, lyric reading, etc. U2 are already pushing 50, maybe its time to add a bit more professionalism into their routine. And this can be done without sacrificing showmanship.

Cheers,

J

 

[Angela Harlem]

This really sours the experience for you Jick? This is an honest question. I agree with Axver's reply above completely, it really doesn't or at least shouldn't matter. If these errors make the difference between a great show and a good show for you, then I think you're missing out in a way. I've only been to 2 concerts which compared to many people on this board is almost nothing, so perhaps I am not the most knowledgeable on this topic, but I can only recall one instance and I think it was ZooTV where one wrong note was played and it stood out for me, I remember laughing. I can't even tell you which song it was because it does not matter. To me. I don't want to go to a show and hear a pristine studio reproduction live, nor do I want to hear something which sounds nothing like the original. I want to hear U2 play live, I want to hear Bono talk (about what I don't really care, because it is to hear him say anything which brings us to them directly), I want to see them making this music which captivates us, I want to hear it as they play it. I wouldn't expect it to be perfect, because that is the studio sound. I want to hear them playing it right there and then, if there are mistakes, so be it.

 

[CrashedCarDriver]

definitely showmanship

but thats also something like the rolling stones and david bowie are into as well

musicality is led zeppelin, you dont see the edge go effing crazy with his guitar solos as what jimmy page does

 

[martha]

I'd take unrehearsed, spontaneous songs that aren't played very often any day. Bono had to read the lyrics to those songs because the band doesn't play them that often.

Just for a reference, I was at a Springsteen concert once when Bruce himself forgot the lyrics to Born to Run for crying out loud! Now, he's performed that song a few times, so he should have known the lyrics.

jick, I understand what you're talking about. I have high expectations from professional musicians who've been performing together for years and who demand high prices for their tickets. But I think you're splitting hairs. Think back to the Elevation shows you saw in person (and I can only assume that you saw some shows in person, and aren't basing your entire argument on dvd and bootleg shows), weren't U2 better as musicians than any opening band you saw? Weren't they tighter, better rehearsed, more mature in their musical vision, than, say No Doubt? And if you're only basing you're opinions on the limited knowledge that comes from recorded shows, then you need to do better research, maybe actually attend a show in person.

One more point; you admit that you don't know about U2's rehearsal and pre-show routines. Then why are you commenting on those rehearsals and pre-show routines? This is the second time you've sounded off about something you know little about in this thread. More research and experience would make your points hold up better.

 

[jick]

jick, I understand what you're talking about. I have high expectations from professional musicians who've been performing together for years and who demand high prices for their tickets. But I think you're splitting hairs. Think back to the Elevation shows you saw in person (and I can only assume that you saw some shows in person, and aren't basing your entire argument on dvd and bootleg shows), weren't U2 better as musicians than any opening band you saw? Weren't they tighter, better rehearsed, more mature in their musical vision, than, say No Doubt? And if you're only basing you're opinions on the limited knowledge that comes from recorded shows, then you need to do better research, maybe actually attend a show in person.

One more point; you admit that you don't know about U2's rehearsal and pre-show routines. Then why are you commenting on those rehearsals and pre-show routines? This is the second time you've sounded off about something you know little about in this thread. More research and experience would make your points hold up better.

That is funny for Bruce to forget the Born To Run lyrics. Actually, some opening bands seem better than U2 because they try so hard and are so tight. They want to make good music because they are usually bands not yet big who wanna make it big. They are hungry. The downside is that they mostly look stiff onstage and the crowd is not into them (they are all busy buying their hotdogs). But U2 is much more relaxed onstage. They actually look like four friends playing onstage (as opposed to four professional musicians). The last time U2 looked stiff and lost onstage was the first leg of Popmart but ever since then they have looked loose, relaxed and unfazed by the pressure, the crowd, or their mistakes. And I do commend them for it. They are indeed good showmen and that's why I started this thread to deal with U2's showmanship.

I have a different view when it comes to musicality. I think U2 can still be good showmen while improving their musicality if Bono stops reading lyrics. Bono never did it pre-Elevation, and most of the time he was busy closing his eyes and feeling the song (as opposed to opening his eyes, staying immobile onstage, and reading lyrics). Another improvement would be to rehearse songs so that there will be no spontaneous songs. All they need is preparation. They can rehearse let's say 40 songs, while the actual concert will be only 22 songs, so they still have many alternate songs to be ready for. The local showbands and coverbands in cheap clubs here have even more than 50 songs in their repertoire without reading lyrics. I'm sure U2 can do the same. Preparation is the key. By the way, by the time Elevation his Boston (and it shows in the DVD) Bono has already gotten his act together for Stay and was no longer reading the lyrics. That song turned out to be one of the highlights of that DVD for me.

Cheers,

J

 

[martha]

Another improvement would be to rehearse songs so that there will be no spontaneous songs. All they need is preparation. They can rehearse let's say 40 songs, while the actual concert will be only 22 songs, so they still have many alternate songs to be ready for.

I gotta agree with this.

 

[Blue Room]

All they need is preparation. They can rehearse let's say 40 songs, while the actual concert will be only 22 songs, so they still have many alternate songs to be ready for. The local showbands and coverbands in cheap clubs here have even more than 50 songs in their repertoire without reading lyrics. I'm sure U2 can do the same. Preparation is the key. By the way, by the time Elevation his Boston (and it shows in the DVD) Bono has already gotten his act together for Stay and was no longer reading the lyrics. That song turned out to be one of the highlights of that DVD for me.

Cheers,

J

See, this just shows me how little you know about U2. U2 rehearsed around 45 songs prior to Elevation. When they get to the actual stage show rehearsal (Ala Miami for Elevation) they weed it down to a base structure setlist. Then they focus on trying to get those songs right. So the others fall by the wayside. U2 chooses their setlist based on what they feel flows well live and they have a catalog of songs they have worked on when they reach the dress rehearsal phase. Thats why especially during the first shows of a tour the setlists are completely static. They feel they need to get into the flow and pattern of playing live and where the tour is at before they tinker with the setlist. If you look at the setlist count at the end of Elevation the number of different songs played is right around 45 I believe. Also, where are you getting that Bono reads most of the lyrics?? He actually rarely does this. They dont even have a teleprompter on stage like ALOT of major acts do. Here is the thing. U2 have been together and playing live since 1978. They have soldout arenas and stadiums accross the planet and have sold millions of albums and have millions of fans. They are obviously doing something right despite what you think Jick. To constantly be critical of every little thing in the face of their enormous success is just ridiculous. Almost seems like bitterness and envy. Jick once you sell near 100 million albums and sellout out arenas and stadiums accross the planet you can do it your way and tell U2 they are doing it wrong LOL

U2's shows have always been about the overall experience of the concert. Not, what note was played on X song. If you go into a U2 show looking for musical perfection it isnt going to happen. Yet somehow people almost always come away from a U2 show impressed and feel they got their moneys worth. Hmm, imagine that. Jick, I saw your precious Rush play two summers ago and I was bored out of my skull most of the show. OMG Pert played X beats in a 20 second time frame!!! YAAAAWWWNNN LOL Give me a front man that can actually move the crowd anyday. That is Bono all the way. Oh, and they play good music as well, despite what you say 90% of the time. I can see you at the U2 show, arms folded praying for a bad note and then telling everyone around you about it even though they dont give a crap! LOL

Heres the thing, look back at every one of your posts that are in this frame of mind. How many people of agreed or even cared about it? Not many, so I have no idea why you keep posting it. When someone is nothing but constantly critical they have a different agenda than just being a fan. That is what most of us are here for. Go to the Rush board and post there or go trolling on the Bon Jovi board!! LOL

 

[Angela Harlem]

Jick can you respond to my questions? Also how many shows have you seen live?
I'm curious about what you think.

Thank you.

 

[intedomine]

is there anything really wrong with showmanship?????

 

[jick]

Jick can you respond to my questions? Also how many shows have you seen live?
I'm curious about what you think.

Thank you.

Popmart Tour `97, Second night of the Giants Stadium series in NJ - my one and only treasured show! How many have you seen and what was your favorite? (Or don't respond if this is going too far off topic!)

Cheers,

J

 

[Salome]

so basically you're opinion on what U2 should and shouldn't change in their live performances is based on going to 1 show and some recordings

that we be about the same if I would rent some porn and then give you advice on how to improve your sex life



ah well
some would say that little flaws add some charm others would say they could have done better and most don't even noitice them and wouldn't care less
I fit in the third category
maybe that's the reason that I've been overwhelmed with every U2 show I've been to

 

[Angela Harlem]

Well seeing as Salome has brought up porn, I dont reckon this is going too far off topic
I've only seen 2 shows. ZooTV in 93 and Popmart some time in 97. Both were Sydney shows. Never been outside the country to see them...So many people here have.
One day...!

 

[jick]

so basically you're opinion on what U2 should and shouldn't change in their live performances is based on going to 1 show and some recordings

that we be about the same if I would rent some porn and then give you advice on how to improve your sex life



ah well
some would say that little flaws add some charm others would say they could have done better and most don't even noitice them and wouldn't care less
I fit in the third category
maybe that's the reason that I've been overwhelmed with every U2 show I've been to

You don't need to attend a live show to know that there are ghost musicians playing backstage. You don't need to attend a live show to know the wrong notes or hear the unpreparedness of the band. So are you saying everyone who writes reviews for the live album UABRS, R&H, or the Boston DVD are not in the position to do so if they weren't personally in the show? Please clarify your logic and analogy.

Cheers,

J

 

[MrBrau1]

You're right, they are a terrible band. They'll never make it to the big time.

 

[Liesje]

You don't need to attend a live show to know that there are ghost musicians playing backstage. You don't need to attend a live show to know the wrong notes or hear the unpreparedness of the band. So are you saying everyone who writes reviews for the live album UABRS, R&H, or the Boston DVD are not in the position to do so if they weren't personally in the show? Please clarify your logic and analogy.

Cheers,

J

Yeah, but in retrospect it's so much easier to go back and nitpick EVERY single stupid mistake. I highly doubt the people actually AT the shows even notice, or really care. I don't know too many people who are more concerned with the technicality (is that a word) of the concert than the overall feelings. Sure you can go back and watch the concerts on DVD and VHS and see or hear all the mistakes, but where's the fun in that?

I don't really know anything about putting on a concert, but I'm guessing that your expectations of preperation and rehearsal would = mega bucks for the band.

And not that you'd care, but I'm also guessing the reason the first Slane show wasn't as rehearsed as you'd like it to be because Bono's dad died that day. It's obvious you have excessively high expectations of the band, but saying that they should have more thouroughly rehearsed that concert seems a little over the top, not to mention entirely insensitive.

 

[LCK]

jick- doesn't sound like you'll be needing your tickets to the next tour. Can I have them pretty please?

 

[Salome]

You don't need to attend a live show to know that there are ghost musicians playing backstage. You don't need to attend a live show to know the wrong notes or hear the unpreparedness of the band. So are you saying everyone who writes reviews for the live album UABRS, R&H, or the Boston DVD are not in the position to do so if they weren't personally in the show?

even though as a rule I distrust critics at least 99,4% of them has the common sense to review a concert based on the total experience

my guess would be that the only reason why you don't seem to want to be able to judge a concert as 1 experience instead of 8 ingredients thrown together is that you don't have a clue wat concerts are about

not that there is anything wrong with that
I don't know a lot about many things

but I guess at least I don't try to annoy other people on those things on the internet

 

[martha]

I tell ya, the showmanship at the Sports Arena in '83 when Bono went into the audience kinda made up for the dodgy playing way back when. But if you were able to listen to that show on a boot, you'd be wondering about their "musicality."

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i give martha the award for greatest posts in this thread

as for your bono reading the lyrics to stay... elton john, mick jagger, steven tyler, paul mccartney, billy joel, ozzy osbourne, rob halford, gene simmons, axl rose, billy corgan, and francis albert sinatra are all know to use, or have used, teleprompters on stage to remember all the lyrics to their songs.

bono needing to remember the lyrics to one song frankly, to me, is no big deal.

ya know... are u2 is technicaly perfect as, say, the e street band? no... the way springsteen can pick out just about any song in his entire catalogue on any given night, let the band know, and they just play it and play it to near perfection is simply amazing. pearl jam is very similar in that vein. they can pull just about any song they've done out of a hat and just play it. do i wish u2 would do that? absolutely... it would be great if all of a sudden they just ripped off two hearts, wire & rejoice in the middle of a set. but that's not gonna happen... could they do it if they really wanted to? i'm sure they could... but with all the production that goes into a u2 show, it's very hard to do. even the elevation tour, low-tech by u2 standards, had superior lighting, special effects and showmanship then most other acts. but it's not about any one thing... it's about the complete package. can they play sunday bloody sunday with the same precision and tempo they once did? no... but shit... it's sunday bloody sunday. the opening chords still still bring chills to my spine, even at a slightly lesser pace. there is nothing i have experienced in my life that compared to hearing the organ intro to streets kick in for the first time, with the roar of the madison square garden crowd in the background, the red lights rising behind the stage, the first strike on edge's guitar... i'm chokin' up just thinkin' about it.

is u2 the greatest musicians on earth? absolutely not... they never have been. individualy i don't think any of the 4 could've had a major musical career on their own... even bono. but when you put them together and let them play, the whole is greater than the individual parts could ever be. there's just somethin' about the 4 of them playing togehter that's just plain right.

so sure there are other acts who are better musicaly, better professionaly, better showmen, better singers, better songwriters... but most of them can't hold a candle to the u2 "experience." i dunno... maybe i can't explain it. it just is.

 

[livehead]

Rush and U2= Apples and Oranges

Jick,

You are forgetting one important fact. That Rush in Rio DVD was filmed in front of an audience that was seeing their favorite band for the first time in its 30 year existence. Rush has never played Brazil in 30 years, so the anticipation was over-the-top, as was the crowd's reaction. That was the exception, not the norm for Rush. Meanwhile, U2 gets crowds going crazy every tour they do.

As for musical integrity, nobody has it more than U2. They play to their abilities, they don't try and fake anything. I see no harm in U2 using sequencers (Bad, Streets, etc) to enhance their live sound, because we all know what Bono and Edge can do with just a microphone and acoustic guitars--they can move a crowd of 60,000. (Stay, Staring at the Sun on the B-stage).

Enjoy Rush and U2 for different reasons, but trying to compare the two is totally apples and oranges.

 

[verte76]

I can't judge a band on technical mistakes or whatever. So Edge flubs a chord.........that's beside the point. U2 has always been about passion, feeling the music and getting it across to an audience. Saying U2 is a lousy band because of technical limitations is about like accusing someone of being a lousy visual artist because they can't draw a perfect circle without a compass. Guess what? I can't draw perfect circles without a compass. Someone can perfectly reproduce something in a photographic fashion and it's technically perfect, but cold as ice. No one can remember the name of some idiot who was considered the greatest painter in early nineteenth century France because no one looks at his art anymore. (They have probably never heard of him) It's technically perfect and cold as ice, totally devoid of any inspiration or emotion. Creativity? What a joke. Inspiration, emotion, creativity, spontaneity--that's what I feel at a U2 concert. It's a composite of melodies, lyrics, visuals, etc, etc, that comes together as an incredible, intense experience. That'll keep me in ticket lines as long as U2 is touring. I wouldn't have used the word "musicality" for this argument. I would have used "technique". They do judge "musicality" in figure skating competition, to say how the skater used his/her/their music. So it is a word but I don't know if I'd agree with using it here.

 

[LCK]

There are some public figures to whom showmanship means everything and to this end they rehearse every detail carefully, obsess over image, and nothing is left to chance or spontaneity. Where I come from we call them politicians.

Then there are some public figures who love what they do so much that they eagerly haul their arses out on stage and perform their hearts out with all their genuine warmth and spontaneity and ad libbing and guts and if on occasion they f*ck up its okay because they're human and its not worth sacrificing all the warmth and spontaneity and ad libbing and guts and love of what they do just in order to obsess over perfection. These are called musicians and U2 is the very best example around.

 

[jick]

Sure you can go back and watch the concerts on DVD and VHS and see or hear all the mistakes, but where's the fun in that?

And not that you'd care, but I'm also guessing the reason the first Slane show wasn't as rehearsed as you'd like it to be because Bono's dad died that day. It's obvious you have excessively high expectations of the band, but saying that they should have more thouroughly rehearsed that concert seems a little over the top, not to mention entirely insensitive.

So we are on a different wavelength. Since I don't have the benefit of seeing U2 easily, I will settle for my DVD and VHS copies. And that is precisely why the band releases stuff on video, to reach a wider audience - the one who have never seen them or don't get the chance to see them often. So if some elitist fans find no fun in watching the DVDs and VHS tapes, so let it be. But that won't stop me from having fun watching my Boston and Slane DVD.

It's not insensitive to diss the first Slane show. It was a great show. The only thing I am dissing is one song - A Sort Of Homecoming. If U2 weren't prepared for the song, they shouldn't have even bothered playing it. Those precious 4 minutes would have been better suited to a more prepared song.

Take Kite for example. In the first few shows, U2 did not even try playing it because they were not yet ready. I think they first played it in Phoenix. They only played it when they sort of nailed it down during their rehearsals. So it baffles me why U2 prepare well for some songs, while they sometimes go to mental lapses to allow songs they are not yet ready to play into their setlist.

Cheers,

J

 

[Liesje]

So we are on a different wavelength. Since I don't have the benefit of seeing U2 easily, I will settle for my DVD and VHS copies. And that is precisely why the band releases stuff on video, to reach a wider audience - the one who have never seen them or don't get the chance to see them often. So if some elitist fans find no fun in watching the DVDs and VHS tapes, so let it be. But that won't stop me from having fun watching my Boston and Slane DVD.

Jick, you are the master of taking things WAY out of context and twisting people's words! Not only that, but you change your own statements so quickly in order to put others down. Don't think I'm blind to your subtle hypocracy.

I've never been to a U2 concert, Jick. AND I LOVE to watch concerts on DVD or VHS. So if I'm your idea of an "elitist" fan, and I've never been to a concert, I must say I feel rather complimented!

The only thing I am dissing is one song - A Sort Of Homecoming. If U2 weren't prepared for the song, they shouldn't have even bothered playing it. Those precious 4 minutes would have been better suited to a more prepared song.

Because they were (FINALLY!) back a Slane castle! The song was meant more for nostalgic value and for their return to Slane after 20 years as a "homecoming". I don't understand how you fail to see that....

 

[martha]

*pats jick on the head*

It's okay. Soon you'll find that you can't have things both ways. You can't complain about their recorded performances on one page, then call people who "find no fun" in those same recorded performances "elitist."


My chain is done being pulled, dear jick.

 

[livehead]

It's been 20 years, have the boys learned how to play Like A Song yet? I'm waiting!

 

[Liesje]

It's been 20 years, have the boys learned how to play Like A Song yet? I'm waiting!

AMEN! I'm dying to hear that live.

 

[Joshua_Tree_Hugger]

I *like* the fact that Edge hit the wrong chord and Adam and Larry blotched up their AOH entry at Slane. If I wanted note-perfect recordings I'd listen to the studio recordings!

The whole purpose of live shows should be what U2 represent - improvisation and showmanship. If they were just to play the songs as they "should" be played, then why not stay at home and listen to your CD instead of going out and seeing them live?

 

[Axver]

It's been 20 years, have the boys learned how to play Like A Song yet? I'm waiting!

Personally, I think the Dundee 26-02-83 performance was pretty good, so I don't see why they didn't continue playing it.

Originally posted by jick
The only thing I am dissing is one song - A Sort Of Homecoming. If U2 weren't prepared for the song, they shouldn't have even bothered playing it. Those precious 4 minutes would have been better suited to a more prepared song.

Am I the only person here who finds that statement really stupid? It's only four minutes, and I bet four amazing minutes if you were there. On a bootleg is one thing, being there is completely different. Yes, I agree, they probably should have prepared more, but so what? It's not something to cause such a stink about.

 

[jick]

I *like* the fact that Edge hit the wrong chord and Adam and Larry blotched up their AOH entry at Slane. If I wanted note-perfect recordings I'd listen to the studio recordings!

The whole purpose of live shows should be what U2 represent - improvisation and showmanship. If they were just to play the songs as they "should" be played, then why not stay at home and listen to your CD instead of going out and seeing them live?

I disagree. Using your statement, what makes a live song different from the album version is that it isn't note-perfect and this is what you *like*.

I think what makes the live version different is that the band would use a different arrangement, and the song will have a different feel to it. To me, the band should always strive for note perfection, even on the live recordings. And even if they are note perfect and without mistakes, it won't make me like them any less --- maybe you won't like them as much because note-botching seems to be what you like in live recordings.

Cheers,

J