Complain & regret: Why so many songs sound worse on 360 ...

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.
24804WhySoSerious.jpg
 
dal975 said:
I posted the following in another thread but think it appropriate here and I think it goes a long way towards explaining why lots of repeat show, hardcores feel disappointed alot: "I think a major reason why some long-time, loyal, passionate U2 fans are justified in feeling frustrated these days is because U2 is not even pretending to cater to them anymore in terms of live performances. I mean, why can't U2 just play 40 once at the close of a show, even if it is just one verse Bono and Edge acoustically? Don't they know how happy even that little gesture would make those hardcore fans who stayed past MOS? Doesn't the band recall how magical it was for thousands of folks to leave a stadium singing "how long" on the way out? It's the little things like that which are clearly in their control that simply don't occur anymore and while I resign myself to having no expectations, I understand the frustration of fans."

also, i think it is awful when fans are belittled for being excited about reading setlists on the internet and then being disappointed when those setlists never change. It might be one thing if you never got to hear or see clips of the show, but if I wake up one day and see they closed with Bad unexpectedly, or played 40, or what have you- hey, I later get a little 5:00 minute bonus part of my day on Youtube. I couldn't care less that they play MOS for the 61st straight time.
Click to expand...

You bring up a good point here, there is alot I can agree with. These days, a fan base has alot more options for following a band as big as U2, the internet being the most popular option. I am sure many fans rush to youtube when they see a song that hasn't been performed in a while on a set list. I clearly remember the Vertigo gigs in the fall of 2006, getting back to my room at school and rushing to Youtube to find spectacular versions of Bad, One Tree Hill and Out of Control. I know that it is a small minority of people, but they are some of U2's biggest fans.

As for your comment about U2 not even pretending to cater to long time, loyal, passionate fans, I agree with a caveat: only if we are talking about fans who have been around since 1980-83. This is a big caveat, however, as I and alot of other fans think U2's early work is far from deserving of its overlooked status this tour. I am only 22, really got into U2 with Bomb, but I rate War as the 3rd masterpiece. I understand U2 has had 3 very successful albums this decade and gained alot of new fans as a result. That is still not an excuse to play more than 2 songs from ATYCLB every night while Boy October and War sit on the bench entirely, and UF and JT only get the hits played. They need to give the younger fans more credit- if they like the band, they will get into the older material if it is played well live, even if they have not heard it 60000000000 times. I know from seeing half of Boy performed at my first show on Vertigo- I immediately wanted to know where Electric Co, Ocean, An Cat Dubh, Into The Heart all came from.

I will always defend U2 for looking forward and playing new material, that is what keeps them from the legacy act status of so many of their contemporaries. 7 or 8 from Horizon is no problem with me. Its in the overall balance of the set to 2000's material which, with the exception of Horizon, is significantly weaker than the 1st 3 albums. BD, Walk On, Vertigo, COBL is enough to supplement 7 songs from Horizon and make a good showing for the 2000s decade. The other 3 ATYCLB songs can be replaced with 2 Hearts or Electric Co, I Will Follow, Gloria, Another Time Another Place, Surrender, A Sort of Homecoming, Wire, etc. Good high energy tracks that people would like whether or not they know them.

I especially like what you said about 40. The album version comes in under 3 minutes- just play that at 25% of the shows after MOS, and let Larry and the crowd send us home. I still think Love is Blindness/Can't Help Falling was their best closer, but 40 was epic and always had the crowd singing through the exits and into the night.
 
U2387 said:
As for your comment about U2 not even pretending to cater to long time, loyal, passionate fans, I agree with a caveat: only if we are talking about fans who have been around since 1980-83. This is a big caveat, however, as I and alot of other fans think U2's early work is far from deserving of its overlooked status this tour. I am only 22, really got into U2 with Bomb, but I rate War as the 3rd masterpiece. I understand U2 has had 3 very successful albums this decade and gained alot of new fans as a result. That is still not an excuse to play more than 2 songs from ATYCLB every night while Boy October and War sit on the bench entirely, and UF and JT only get the hits played. They need to give the younger fans more credit- if they like the band, they will get into the older material if it is played well live, even if they have not heard it 60000000000 times. I know from seeing half of Boy performed at my first show on Vertigo- I immediately wanted to know where Electric Co, Ocean, An Cat Dubh, Into The Heart all came from.


I especially like what you said about 40. The album version comes in under 3 minutes- just play that at 25% of the shows after MOS, and let Larry and the crowd send us home. I still think Love is Blindness/Can't Help Falling was their best closer, but 40 was epic and always had the crowd singing through the exits and into the night.
Click to expand...

Agreed. My comments about U2 not even pretending to cater to hardcore fans anymore at concerts need a little of the context i had provided in the other thread. On this forum, those fans who express disappintment with the lack of variety with the setlists, especially regarding the encore on the 360 shows, are frequently summarily dismissed with an explanation to the effect of: "95-98% of the people in the crowd don't know and don't care what the set list was during other shows of the tour. U2 does not care that some folks out there enjoy following the tour and the setlists on the internet. U2 plays songs in the order that works for them and that they feel comfortable with. If you actually attend the shows, you will realize how magical the concert is and you will quit complaining about setlists that appear in text form on a web page." Some folks on here adhere very strongly to this school of thought and express it quite frequently.

(For what it's worth, I attended NY 1 & 2 on the 360 tour).

That is fine. I accept that. I have been following U2 long enough to understand their approach to touring and their relationship with their fans. I have no expectations of changing setlists, etc. I enjoyed the shows I attended this year and while I have my own opinions as to what songs I would have preferred to hear, like most of us I loved the fact that they brought back TUF and UV and that I got to hear YBR.

With that said, I believe that there are various minor things (tiny, even) which the band could do during shows which would be the equivalent of winning the lottery to fanatics such as myself who go way back with the band. For example:

1. Bono and Edge could play one verse acoustically of 40 following MOS one time out of every 5 shows.
2. Bono could do a city-specific shine like stars at the end of WOWY during one show in a city if that city has multiple shows.
3. U2 could acknowledge the fact that out of the entire U2 catalog, the generally agreed upon most popular live song amongst the hardcore old school types is Bad, and play it, say, one time out of every say 5 shows.
4. Edge could sing Van Dieman's Land one time out of every ten shows.

In other words, I am trying to come up with things they could do which would not change the show in any substantive manner or interrupt the flow or mood which is so obviously important to the theme they are creating. Because I know that radical changes in setlists, etc. simply will not happen. However, LITTLE things like those i mentioned above would be sooooo gratifying to someone such as myself. They would be absolutely treasured moments and would make the show intriguing to a fan such as myself who enjoys following the tour via U2.gigs and Youtube. Yet, they seemingly never happen anymore. That is where my frustration as a longtime fan arises. Remember how excited the Interference community got during the early european leg of the 360 tour trying to guess which songs U2 would rotate into the coveted 5-8 slots? Why couldn't that at least have continued?

How great would it have been at the end of the Rose Bowl show if they played 40 COMPLETELY OUT OF NOWHERE? Full band 40? Larry the last one left, drumming the crowd into the night? Wasn't that night the special occasion DVD nite? And yet...nothing like that ever seems to occur anymore. Those are the kinds of small things that would cater to hardcore, repeat-show fans which U2 is apparently unwilling or incapable of doing anymore.
 
dal975 said:
Some folks on here adhere very strongly to this school of thought and express it quite frequently.
Click to expand...
And some folks in here adhere strongly to a "I'm a diehard so the band owes me something, don't they know I read the boards everyday?" mentality.

:shrug:


dal975 said:
For example:

1. Bono and Edge could play one verse acoustically of 40 following MOS one time out of every 5 shows.
2. Bono could do a city-specific shine like stars at the end of WOWY during one show in a city if that city has multiple shows.
3. U2 could acknowledge the fact that out of the entire U2 catalog, the generally agreed upon most popular live song amongst the hardcore old school types is Bad, and play it, say, one time out of every say 5 shows.
4. Edge could sing Van Dieman's Land one time out of every ten shows.
Click to expand...
Well Bad was rotated for awhile, it kinda sucks for those nights that didn't get it. But honestly none of these would really do much for me, sure I wouldn't hate them, except maybe VDL, but honestly I wouldn't feel like it's some kind of nod to the super fan or some act of spontaneity...

Honestly it just looks like a list that YOU really want to see, and guess what ever fan wants that one song, even the casuals... There is NO WAY to please all.

To hear 40 again would really be :| for me, I can think of a lot of other suprises worth while than that...
dal975 said:
Why couldn't that at least have continued?
Click to expand...

So now you're admitting it started this way and it was really just the latter dates that didn't change all that much, well except YBR... so really it just boils down to a handful of shows that didn't change enough for you, right?

I don't know your rant comes off very selfish and silly. This is the way U2 has always functioned. To me it's like complaining about Christmas, damnit why does it always come the same time of year, why can't they change it up and instead of Santa the big Bunny comes out, and those damn elves. Sure Christmas is fantastic, but why does it always have to be the same.
 
i am giving examples dude of what would appeal to me. you are free to fill it in with your own preferences.

btw bvs, are you a robot? you are the most negative poster on this site, by far. its like you have an automated response to belittle and degrade. it's all under some guise of being objective and "challenging" others on their viewpoint. well, do me a favor, stop responding to my posts. your constant negativity is tiresome. lets agree to disagree.
 
dal975 said:
i am giving examples dude of what would appeal to me.
Click to expand...
Dude, that's my point. These are things YOU would like. Some fans want to see Pride, some want the best rehearsed show the band can do, some want to see Your Blue Room, and others don't want different setlists every night because they wanted to see Bad and they found out the next night got it.

So why the constant, "why can't U2 do this... why can't U2 do that..."?

That's the part I don't get.


dal975 said:
btw bvs, are you a robot?
Click to expand...

WTF :huh:

Why yes, I'm fucking C-3PO, how did you find out? I've been posting for years and no one's ever figured it out... Good job :up:
 
BVS said:
Why yes, I'm fucking C-3PO, how did you find out? I've been posting for years and no one's ever figured it out... Good job :up:
Click to expand...

Did you read the part about belittling and being constantly negative?

Because you just proved his point. Ease up a little, BVS.
 
He edited that later...

Being negative? What am I being negative about?

The C-3PO line was just a joke, I'm sorry if it came off as "belittling".
 
dal975 said:
you are the most negative poster on this site, by far.
Click to expand...
What do you think I'm being negative about? I'm positive you can find more negative posters, in fact I'm pretty positive the majority of the time. I may come off snarky or sarcastic, but negative is not how I would describe it.

dal975 said:
its like you have an automated response to belittle and degrade. it's all under some guise of being objective and "challenging" others on their viewpoint.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry if anything I typed came off as "degrading", I admit I can be snarky at times, so I apoligize. But it's not meant to be degrading.

But I'm being honest. It's in my nature to challenge folks, and I'm just trying to ask question and show other perspectives to make people think.
 
only u2 can fill a 80,000 seat stadium , with a million selling album, and somehow its weird,lol. The old rule was , (before the internet), if your album sells at least a million, then your still relevant and you can play a ton of stuff from the new album. If not your a cult band. Well, that rule is proly more like 500,000, if not less . NLOTH sold a million anyway. Or perhaps, u2 is a cult band. but their hardcore fans are so big in numbers it sold a million copys. lol. So now u2 are stuck in a limbo. Only in the world of u2 is this going on.
 
I'd like to hear the take on people who claim a U2 show is too scripted, that want a rotating setlist.

If you get a rotating setlist that consists of a standard amount of songs in standard spots like many have proposed... wouldn't that actually mean it's all scripted? And I thought you guys don't want scripted shows?
 
Galeongirl said:
I'd like to hear the take on people who claim a U2 show is too scripted, that want a rotating setlist.

If you get a rotating setlist that consists of a standard amount of songs in standard spots like many have proposed... wouldn't that actually mean it's all scripted? And I thought you guys don't want scripted shows?
Click to expand...

they want it rotating, not scripted, and then scripted to fit their personal needs. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
U2 Show Logistics Question/Theories
Replies
7
Views
732
lazarus
lazarus
MrsSpringsteen
Gilead States Of America
Replies
16
Views
870
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen
cobl04
Kiss the Future documentary
Replies
11
Views
3K
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen
T
Hello from a U2 guitarist in Massachusetts!
Replies
2
Views
1K
bobbvis
B
N
NBA 2023-24 Thread
10 11 12
Replies
332
Views
10K
gump
gump

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom