Best show since ZooTV

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

That's not telling people what to think, that's just plain common sense.

If someone wants to know what the shows are like, they'd get far more informed opinions from people who actually attended the shows. It's not controversial or big-brother-thought-police oppression to suggest that people give more weight to the opinions of those who've actually seen the shows than those who haven't.
 
I´ve attended lots of gigs I talked about them with a lot of people who were there with me and you would be surprised how many of them were not able to describe what they liked or disliked about the show, what part of it they enjoyed and if so why, if they liked the concept of the show, etc. Many of them weren´t even able to tell that the bass player was off the beat half of the concert... I don´t say I don´t respect opinion of people who already attended IE show, but if any member of this forum comes, watches and listens to bootlegs and write his analysis about it I don´t consider it to be less important or something. It just doesn´t make sense.
 
For me the shows I saw in San Jose were my favorite of any other tour. Not because of the set list because honestly I don't care much about that, but the visuals, the stage set up, how close you are with the band in GA no matter where you are, the energy, that light screen - it was just phenomenal for me.
 
but if any member of this forum comes, watches and listens to bootlegs and write his analysis about it I don´t consider it to be less important or something. It just doesn´t make sense.


It IS less important though. A concert is meant to be experienced live and in person. No recording or video can properly reproduce that no mater what anyone says. Reviewing concerts based on bootlegs and videos is like reviewing a resturant without eating the food and just going on what the food looks like and what people tell you what it tastes like.
 
but if any member of this forum comes, watches and listens to bootlegs and write his analysis about it I don´t consider it to be less important or something. It just doesn´t make sense.


Then your "logic" fails you.

If magazine A writes a concert review based on being there and concert B writes one based on a bootleg, guess which magazine the thinking people will give more credit to?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Can't we just set up a "ask thavidesco" thread where you ask him/her a question, maybe seeking advice, whatever, and no matter what you ask he/she tells you that U2 need to play more songs from the new album, but they also have to be the specific songs he likes best from that album.

As for the original post, I had a blast at both of the shows I attended but I cannot place this tour above some of the Popmart, Elevation and even Vertigo shows I saw.

I do prefer it to 360 for sure, though.
 
For me the shows I saw in San Jose were my favorite of any other tour. Not because of the set list because honestly I don't care much about that, but the visuals, the stage set up, how close you are with the band in GA no matter where you are, the energy, that light screen - it was just phenomenal for me.

I just watched part of San Jose from Cedarwood Road to Until the End of the World (i like typing that out) and all i can say is - oh shit - that was pretty damn good.

I do hope they come a little closer to me next year. I need a couple of shows. I'm a greedy bastard but im worth it.
 
I´ve attended lots of gigs I talked about them with a lot of people who were there with me and you would be surprised how many of them were not able to describe what they liked or disliked about the show, what part of it they enjoyed and if so why, if they liked the concept of the show, etc. Many of them weren´t even able to tell that the bass player was off the beat half of the concert... I don´t say I don´t respect opinion of people who already attended IE show, but if any member of this forum comes, watches and listens to bootlegs and write his analysis about it I don´t consider it to be less important or something. It just doesn´t make sense.

So you're the kind of guy who prefers to watch a video instead of experience the real thing, eh?

It's all beginning to make sense now
 
If you haven't been to a show yet, and you're not planning on going, you should probably let the tour get out of a time zone before you judge its place in history. U2's tours always get stronger as they go on.
 
It IS less important though. A concert is meant to be experienced live and in person. No recording or video can properly reproduce that no mater what anyone says. Reviewing concerts based on bootlegs and videos is like reviewing a resturant without eating the food and just going on what the food looks like and what people tell you what it tastes like.

I've known this since day one but when I was editing and posting my video from LA Night 4, I was shocked how different the general vibe of the show, not to mention the audio and to a lesser extent, the visuals translate to a far lesser experience than actually being at that show. Even watching the Rose Bowl 360 Tour Blu-ray doesn't come close to the epic scale of actually being at that show.

Granted, my camera is old and fairly primitive now and as a photographer, I'm no Michael Mann but the effect of watching and listening to clips no matter how well recorded (especially the volume of the live sound) is so far removed from the experience of being there due to the the narrow tunnel vision you have watching something like this even on a large screen (I have a 65" Plasma).
 
I'm no Michael Mann

For me, the action is the juice.

Look, the fact that more than one person has to type "it's not the same as being there" is wrong on so many levels that it's impossible to know where to begin.

Someone the other day complained that they "were seeing" a song on the setlist too often and it was annoying them. Christ.

I'm not saying one cannot look at a setlist and maybe evaluate how good or bad that list of songs seems to them, but, I mean, beyond that, any other opinion is invalid. If you are or were not there, you really don't have much to say...I mean, you might think you do, but you don't. And no amount of incessant, repetitious babble is going to change that.
 
I found U2 a few months after Zoo TV left my area... but in time to watch live (was it pay per view) of them overseas....

So I've seen POP, ELEVATION, VERTIGO, 360 and soon this one...

I totally loved POP, but I mean I was waiting 5 years to see them live so they could have done anything... I don't really remember it expect loving every second of it... I still remember the feeling of having to go out and buy that record at MIDNIGHT at a record store... that was great feeling...

Anyway, 360 was my least favorite... after those 2 arena tours with better material and more intimate, it was hard to beat. I never liked big stadium shows. Smaller is always better (wink).

So I've super pumped that they came back to arenas. I HOPE this tour is the best one I've seen.

But I don't recall leaving any U2 show and feeling disappointed. Maybe deaf...
 
How about that Ignore feature though? It's a neat one. You can imagine it coming in handy sometimes.
 
For me, the action is the juice.

Look, the fact that more than one person has to type "it's not the same as being there" is wrong on so many levels that it's impossible to know where to begin.

Someone the other day complained that they "were seeing" a song on the setlist too often and it was annoying them. Christ.

I'm not saying one cannot look at a setlist and maybe evaluate how good or bad that list of songs seems to them, but, I mean, beyond that, any other opinion is invalid. If you are or were not there, you really don't have much to say...I mean, you might think you do, but you don't. And no amount of incessant, repetitious babble is going to change that.

Stop talking, okay Slick?
 
Hey guys, I´m not so stupid that I wouldn´t know that being somewhere in person is a whole different experience. If a person A visits an event and writes about it is a lot valuable than if the same person sees/hears the event only recorded for example. That´s obvious logic. It would be perfect if it is always easy like this. But you have to keep in mind that lots of people have very different music taste, very different style of considering things or even limited abilities when rating. So, you see, it´s not that easy. It is always very individual and for me it is the most important if I can trust the person´s opinion from previous experience.
 
I've been to plenty of gigs on 360, and I have to say that 2009 was the dud of them. Even though I absolutely love NLOTH to death, it's my 2nd favourite U2 album... it didn't work out well. In 2010 it was fun with the new songs, but the REAL change was the energy with the band. Bono's cocky "I'm a cyborg" new persona, having so much fun with the crowd, it was brilliant. I didn't really care about the setlist at all.
Then 2011 came and it was even better. And there, the setlist did make the impact. Zooropa, so much AB stuff, goddamn awesome. Plus the energy that was already around in 2010. It all added up, for me those shows were the best I've ever seen.

Granted I have not seen shows live pre 360, so I cannot judge what they were like. I do know that from the reviews of people here who've seen the shows, I'm pretty psyched for September!
 
Personally in all of the shows I've been to starting from the War Tour forward it was hard to top a specific Joshua Tree Tour show in Foxboro.... all of the ZooTV (Arena-leg) shows especially Albany. But if there's one I would pick out is a later 360 show at the new Giants Stadium - not sure what happened that night but Edge was literally on fire (I think the heat index that evening was, idk 110 degrees). What a great show that was! All the post 9/11 shows were pretty emotional too but I still think that 360 show in East Rutherford.
 
Back
Top Bottom