***SPOILERS*** U2 eXPERIENCE + iNNOCENCE Tour - Rehearsals/Soundcheck Thread #2

[Headache in a Suitcase]

I'm just thinking of what's a U2 concert going to be like without Streets? It's hard for me to imagine.....

Go listen to Red Rocks.

Go listen to anything pre 1987.

Go listen to Irving Plaza if you need something a bit more modern.


They have a prolific song book. One song does not make or break their shows.


Look I think skipping all of the Joshua Tree songs this tour is unnecessary, but this whole idea that it's just not a U2 concert unless they play Streets is baffling to me.

 

[mofo82]

So this is completely unrealistic but the nerd in me would love to see them play a show that was SOI & SOE back to back OR in any order + b-sides like Crystal Ballroom, Lucifer’s Hands. Not for the typical reactions you’d get during a normal show, but to hear the collective whole and see what the band envisions when all together. I think it’d be a great show, focused.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

This thing needs a "Like" button.

WRT to the omission of "Streets" from the setlist: if you went to a Sinatra concert and he failed to sing "My Way," you'd burn the fucking place to the ground.

I've been to many Springsteen shows where he didn't play Jungleland. It took me 7 shows before I heard Thunder Road. I have still yet to hear him play The River, and I saw him play a 4 hour show on a tour called The River Tour (which was the best show I've ever seen).

I've seen Pearl Jam without them playing Alive or Jeremy or Better Man. Heck, I even saw a show where they skipped Even Flow, a song that they always play and is a monster live, and I didn't even noticed they skipped it until the show was over.

If you have confidence that U2 are still able to bring it in a live setting, then the lack of Streets should not be this deal breaking thing.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

good songs.

they don't have to place warhorses, but playing a lot of mediocre to terrible songs is not a good plan.

I would much rather hear streets or wowoy live for the 35th time than american soul, song for someone, all because of you, your the best thing, cedarwood road, Elevation ....
It's not a matter of new songs, its playing mediocre songs.

They could easily tell the Dublin section by rotating other songs. The could tell the same story just as powerfully with songs rotate in. Doesn't have to be the same exact section. I really loved that part, and was powerful- because of the story-telling. It doesn't need to be the exact same.

Good is subjective - moreso with a band like U2 than many others.

 

[RH87]

Good post. Whenever I've gone to a concert it's not until after the fact I realize they didn't play a certain song. This is especially true of a band/performer that has an extensive catalog.


As for U2, I've only ever seen them live once before in 2005 in Anaheim. I am really looking forward to seeing them at The Forum on May 15. I recently purchased the U2 in Paris DVD, and realized a lot of these songs that I was lukewarm to come across totally differently in a live performance. It doesn't necessarily make it a great song, but in the context of the show they pull it off.

 

[Mack_Again]

honestly I can kinda imagine Pixies concert without Where's My Mind so probably you guys should be able to imagine U2 concert without Streets

 

[jphelmet]

Good is subjective - moreso with a band like U2 than many others.

I agree. There are some that this set may end up being their dream setlist, as hard as that is for me to imagine.

I also agree with your point they don't have to play streets. They have tons of great songs that can make a great show. I think they could have a great show without streets, vertigo, elevation and beautiful day (I would personally like to see that).

The problem I see is taking out streets and replacing it with all because of you or replacing it with American Soul. It's not like they are benching Streets for Bad, or they are rotating wowoy for nyd. They are effectively taking their biggest songs and playing cedarwood road and song for someone in their place. I think this set is going to get tweaked pretty quick because they are going to see and feel the difference in the last third of the show.

They quickly abandoned A Sort of Homecoming on JT shows, because they said it felt like it was too long before they got to the JT. It was a run of 5 songs! For a band that cares so much about what people think of them, and trying to please the masses, I think they are going to bail on at least part of this setlist fairly quickly (hopefully the last third)

 

[trevgreg]

honestly I can kinda imagine Pixies concert without Where's My Mind so probably you guys should be able to imagine U2 concert without Streets

I think they've played it at all three shows I caught, haha. Yet again, they do have a unique way of doing their set list. Black Francis just calls out random songs and they go right into them. I think maybe the final song or two are ever the only ones set in stone? Otherwise, they're one of the few gigs I go to where I genuinely don't know what to expect 90% of the time.

I've been to many Springsteen shows where he didn't play Jungleland. It took me 7 shows before I heard Thunder Road. I have still yet to hear him play The River, and I saw him play a 4 hour show on a tour called The River Tour (which was the best show I've ever seen).

I've seen Pearl Jam without them playing Alive or Jeremy or Better Man. Heck, I even saw a show where they skipped Even Flow, a song that they always play and is a monster live, and I didn't even noticed they skipped it until the show was over.

If you have confidence that U2 are still able to bring it in a live setting, then the lack of Streets should not be this deal breaking thing.

I would think something like Born to Run would be the equivalent of Streets for a Springsteen show? Not sure exactly since I’ve only seen him the one time (and yes, it was fantastic… didn’t hurt that he played all 20 songs from The River either, which let this “casual fan” of his know what to expect for 2/3 of the show, lol).

I think for any band or show, being disappointed in a song not being played just comes down to what type of fan you are and where you’re expectations are, depending on what songs you know. I still remember hearing a morning DJ saying how Pearl Jam disappointed her because the show kind of dragged on (ie, 3-hour set with many songs she didn’t know) and how Jeremy wasn’t played. So one way isn’t really the be all, end all.

I guess you can fault people for not knowing what to expect or only being a “casual” fan. But for me, there’s probably only 3-6 bands out there that I follow closely enough to know just about every song to some degree. And I go to a lot more shows than just those bands in recent years too. It probably wouldn’t be the end of the world if I didn’t hear one particular song for any act I see, but I’m probably not going to see the show in the first place unless I know at least a few.

 

[trevgreg]

They quickly abandoned A Sort of Homecoming on JT shows, because they said it felt like it was too long before they got to the JT. It was a run of 5 songs! For a band that cares so much about what people think of them, and trying to please the masses, I think they are going to bail on at least part of this setlist fairly quickly (hopefully the last third)

Respectfully, I think most musicians are playing live because they enjoy it and also seeing the crowd connecting to their songs, rather than looking to up their cred with people like us who read what they play each night.

As for ASOH… just my perspective, but it did strike me as a bit “meh” when I caught it at the second Chicago show last year. I enjoyed hearing it and it was okay in the end, but I wouldn’t have held it as a highlight of the show. The crowd didn’t seem to be into it as much as the other pre-JT songs either. I suspect that had a little bit of the reasoning for not playing it as much after those first few shows either.

 

[jphelmet]

I guess you can fault people for not knowing what to expect or only being a “casual” fan. But for me, there’s probably only 3-6 bands out there that I follow closely enough to know just about every song to some degree. And I go to a lot more shows than just those bands in recent years too. It probably wouldn’t be the end of the world if I didn’t hear one particular song for any act I see, but I’m probably not going to see the show in the first place unless I know at least a few.

How many U2 fans each night fall into that category of knowing every song? I would bet it's not near the majority.

I think the majority is there to hear the hits, and this setlist is lower in songs that the casual fan is going to a U2 show for.

 

[jphelmet]

Respectfully, I think most musicians are playing live because they enjoy it and also seeing the crowd connecting to their songs, rather than looking to up their cred with people like us who read what they play each night.

As for ASOH… just my perspective, but it did strike me as a bit “meh” when I caught it at the second Chicago show last year. I enjoyed hearing it and it was okay in the end, but I wouldn’t have held it as a highlight of the show. The crowd didn’t seem to be into it as much as the other pre-JT songs either. I suspect that had a little bit of the reasoning for not playing it as much after those first few shows either.

I loved it, but I may have been in the minority. I waited 25 years to hear it live though.

I agree with your point, and that is exactly why I am saying I think this set gets tweaked. There are definitely going to be some lulls where they are not connecting, especially like wowoy or streets does every time they play it. I think they will not be able to stand it and go back to the tried and true huge songs. I think the last 3rd gets a couple warhorses dropped in / replacing songs pretty quickly.

 

[tommycharles]

At the SOI show I saw in '15, the person I was with (a long time fan who has been to their gigs before) said "they already played this one!" when Still Haven't Found started. They had not, obviously, but I relay that as evidence of how little it matters in the moment. You might get to the parking lot and think "wait, what about Streets", or WOWY, or Mercy, or whatever, but it won't stop you from enjoying the show in the moment.

Live music is an experience, not a spreadsheet.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

I think they've played it at all three shows I caught, haha. Yet again, they do have a unique way of doing their set list. Black Francis just calls out random songs and they go right into them. I think maybe the final song or two are ever the only ones set in stone? Otherwise, they're one of the few gigs I go to where I genuinely don't know what to expect 90% of the time.



I would think something like Born to Run would be the equivalent of Streets for a Springsteen show? Not sure exactly since I’ve only seen him the one time (and yes, it was fantastic… didn’t hurt that he played all 20 songs from The River either, which let this “casual fan” of his know what to expect for 2/3 of the show, lol).

I think for any band or show, being disappointed in a song not being played just comes down to what type of fan you are and where you’re expectations are, depending on what songs you know. I still remember hearing a morning DJ saying how Pearl Jam disappointed her because the show kind of dragged on (ie, 3-hour set with many songs she didn’t know) and how Jeremy wasn’t played. So one way isn’t really the be all, end all.

I guess you can fault people for not knowing what to expect or only being a “casual” fan. But for me, there’s probably only 3-6 bands out there that I follow closely enough to know just about every song to some degree. And I go to a lot more shows than just those bands in recent years too. It probably wouldn’t be the end of the world if I didn’t hear one particular song for any act I see, but I’m probably not going to see the show in the first place unless I know at least a few.

You obviously won't be able to please everyone, and no matter what you do someone will be disappointed with something (i.e. your example of somebody complaining that the show was too long... a baffling thing for me to complain about).

I'd put Born To Run is more With or Without You to Jungleland's Streets.

One doesn't disappoint and was a massive hit, while the other grew beyond what it already was in a live setting and is truly magical to hear.

Jungleland and Streets also have similarities in that it has a big lead up before it gets to the first verse.

I've seen Bruce 10 times, I've only seen Jungleland 4 times.

 

[TheGeekyU2Fan]

I'm just thinking of what's a U2 concert going to be like without Streets? It's hard for me to imagine.....

 

[YBORCITY]

Go listen to Red Rocks.

Go listen to anything pre 1987.

Go listen to Irving Plaza if you need something a bit more modern.


They have a prolific song book. One song does not make or break their shows.


Look I think skipping all of the Joshua Tree songs this tour is unnecessary, but this whole idea that it's just not a U2 concert unless they play Streets is baffling to me.

I've been to shows pre-'87, so I've actually seen them live before JT and I'm not knocking them for not playing streets, it's just going to be weird. While I've seen Streets live over 50 times it's just going to be different. I don't think one song makes a concert certainly but it's personally one of my fav's and will miss it.... But don't misinterpret what I'm saying - I won't be selling my tix over them not playing it.

 

[popacrobat]

JT30: they sold out, they're a dinosaur act, they're the Rolling Stones

e/i: I wish they'd play more old songs

what else do you expect?

i'd definitely prefer if they closed the show with Streets after 13, but if they don't? oh well.

I wish they'd have stuck to the "We don't want to play anything before 1987" bit if that is the case. Please semi-acoustic instead of Sunday Bloody Sunday for the innocence segment would be awesome, but obviously the crowd doesn't know it as much, and it would likely be a bathroom break for a bunch of people.

Pride and I Will Follow can also take a seat, but again, these are big, crowd pleasing songs and they're playing in front of a big crowd.

I'm excited to get to see an early show, and I'm pretty interested to see what they do specifically for STL, having had a show there canceled last summer. Plus I'm going to Cards-Cubs Saturday too soo click clack.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

How many U2 fans each night fall into that category of knowing every song? I would bet it's not near the majority.

I think the majority is there to hear the hits, and this setlist is lower in songs that the casual fan is going to a U2 show for.

Beautiful Day
I Will Follow
Sunday Bloody Sunday
Elevation
Vertigo
Desire
Pride
City of Blinding Lights
One

These are all hits


Whose Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses
Until The End Of The World
Acrobat

These are off one of their two biggest albums.

They're not out playing obscure b sides. There are plenty of songs here that are well known to most in attendance, and I'm sure more will be added.

 

[Partyslammer]

I've been to many Springsteen shows where he didn't play Jungleland. It took me 7 shows before I heard Thunder Road. I have still yet to hear him play The River, and I saw him play a 4 hour show on a tour called The River Tour (which was the best show I've ever seen).

Have you ever seen a Springsteen E Street Band show where "Born To Run" wasn't played? That song is basically the U2 equivalent to Streets, at least as a iconic live song, not Jungleland or Thunder Road.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Have you ever seen a Springsteen E Street Band show where "Born To Run" wasn't played? That song is basically the U2 equivalent to Streets, at least as a iconic live song, not Jungleland or Thunder Road.

Disagree.

You obviously won't be able to please everyone, and no matter what you do someone will be disappointed with something (i.e. your example of somebody complaining that the show was too long... a baffling thing for me to complain about).

I'd put Born To Run is more With or Without You to Jungleland's Streets.

One doesn't disappoint and was a massive hit, while the other grew beyond what it already was in a live setting and is truly magical to hear.

Jungleland and Streets also have similarities in that it has a big lead up before it gets to the first verse.

I've seen Bruce 10 times, I've only seen Jungleland 4 times.

I can't speak for all Springsteen fans, but I would have to imagine most would trade Born To Run for Jungleland or Incident any day.

 

[trevgreg]

How many U2 fans each night fall into that category of knowing every song? I would bet it's not near the majority.

I think the majority is there to hear the hits, and this setlist is lower in songs that the casual fan is going to a U2 show for.

Right and that’s what I was getting at. Heck, I actually post here and there’s some early songs of theirs that I probably wouldn’t totally be familiar with if they played them. Like Headache said though, you can't please everyone. One of the friends I made in this band's GA line over the years even told me at a show three years ago "I want to hear the hits!" Wasn't exactly big on hearing SOI stuff since he wasn't really that into the album.

I loved it, but I may have been in the minority. I waited 25 years to hear it live though.

I agree with your point, and that is exactly why I am saying I think this set gets tweaked. There are definitely going to be some lulls where they are not connecting, especially like wowoy or streets does every time they play it. I think they will not be able to stand it and go back to the tried and true huge songs. I think the last 3rd gets a couple warhorses dropped in / replacing songs pretty quickly.

I hear ya. Like I said, I didn't mind it... but I could also see why it didn't exactly warrant sticking around either. Adjustments in the set are bound to happen each tour though, and I imagine this won't be an exception.

 

[innominata8]

I think the real difference with Streets is that it has been played at every show on every tour for the past 29 years. There aren't a lot of other bands that put a live song out there and find that it develops such a following over decades. While there have always been tons of other 'workhorses' rotated in and out (WOWY, Vertigo, Bad, Elevation, IWF, NYD, etc...), Streets has been a constant and is clearly very near & dear to the band. The crowd response is always epic - anyone see people sitting in the stands when the arena/stadium is bathed in blood-red light as the song is starting? Edge has been clear that he wanted to conjure up the "ultimate U2 live-song" and he did just that. I think the band had to think long and hard about not including it in the setlist given it's historical prominence in live shows. I'm also going to bet that they will eventually miss the crowd response and bring it back at some point in the tour, even if only intermittently.

 

[YBORCITY]

I think the real difference with Streets is that it has been played at every show on every tour for the past 29 years. There aren't a lot of other bands that put a live song out there and find that it develops such a following over decades. While there have always been tons of other 'workhorses' rotated in and out (WOWY, Vertigo, Bad, Elevation, IWF, NYD, etc...), Streets has been a constant and is clearly very near & dear to the band. The crowd response is always epic - anyone see people sitting in the stands when the arena/stadium is bathed in blood-red light as the song is starting? Edge has been clear that he wanted to conjure up the "ultimate U2 live-song" and he did just that. I think the band had to think long and hard about not including it in the setlist given it's historical prominence in live shows. I'm also going to bet that they will eventually miss the crowd response and bring it back at some point in the tour, even if only intermittently.

Well said and I'm saying this purely from a personal note. I will notice that it's not being played but I'm over the moon about seeing them again. This in my mind is all "gravy", they're still touring and I'm lucky enough to see them a few more times at least as we are definitely closer to the end than we are to the beginning

 

[jphelmet]

Beautiful Day
I Will Follow
Sunday Bloody Sunday
Elevation
Vertigo
Desire
Pride
City of Blinding Lights
One

These are all hits


Whose Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses
Until The End Of The World
Acrobat

These are off one of their two biggest albums.

They're not out playing obscure b sides. There are plenty of songs here that are well known to most in attendance, and I'm sure more will be added.

So a 1/3 of the set is massive hits. That was my point, that is low for U2. I+E on the first leg that number was closer to 2/3. This tour is much less than previous tours, and that is why I think they add more and rotate out some other songs.

They are treating their new music like they are still a relevant band as far as new music goes, and that is not the case. I think they will realize fairly quickly a large part of their audience doesn't want to see 11 new songs.

 

[innominata8]

Well said and I'm saying this purely from a personal note. I will notice that it's not being played but I'm over the moon about seeing them again. This in my mind is all "gravy", they're still touring and I'm lucky enough to see them a few more times at least as we are definitely closer to the end than we are to the beginning

Ditto here. I am going to miss it. I have my 19th & 20th shows coming up next month and I would have loved to have seen the song's latest iteration.

 

[U2387]

So a 1/3 of the set is massive hits. That was my point, that is low for U2. I+E on the first leg that number was closer to 2/3. This tour is much less than previous tours, and that is why I think they add more and rotate out some other songs.

They are treating their new music like they are still a relevant band as far as new music goes, and that is not the case. I think they will realize fairly quickly a large part of their audience doesn't want to see 11 new songs.

Precisely.

Especially for the money they're charging.

Especially since a decent hit like Hold Me Thrill Me is going to be pre recorded.

Especially when American Soul and 13 get played every night while they've dropped the idea of playing showman , one of the strongest new songs, and have yet to touch Little Things or Red Flag Day.

Like it or not, this isn't 2001 or 2005 where U2 3.0 had massively popular and relevant new material. I wish like hell it was, as I think both Innocence and Experience are stronger works than ATYCLB and HTDAAB. But it's not. U2 haven't had a hit in 14 years.

People here either get this point or they don't. The whole last 2 threads have shown as much.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

I disagree whole heartedly with the premise that you need to play a set list of 3/4s hits to be entertaining to non die hards.

We're not talking about the band sitting up on a small stage with some mood lighting playing nothing but B sides.

There's plenty of hits still in the set, and as long as they put on a good show, they'll be fine. They might need to tweak a song or two, but this idea that they are going to go out and stink up the joint and send half the arena home bored out of their minds wanting their money back is utterly ridiculous.

And believing this doesn't make someone a sheeple who thinks they're still relevant, either... wherever the hell that came from.

 

[Partyslammer]

Disagree.


I can't speak for all Springsteen fans, but I would have to imagine most would trade Born To Run for Jungleland or Incident any day.

Hey, I'd trade Streets for A Sort Of Homecoming... until I heard that reworked version they played last year.

 

[DeVaul]

Need a full-out ASOH which sounds weird when you say it aloud.

 

[jphelmet]

I disagree whole heartedly with the premise that you need to play a set list of 3/4s hits to be entertaining to non die hards.

We're not talking about the band sitting up on a small stage with some mood lighting playing nothing but B sides.

There's plenty of hits still in the set, and as long as they put on a good show, they'll be fine. They might need to tweak a song or two, but this idea that they are going to go out and stink up the joint and send half the arena home bored out of their minds wanting their money back is utterly ridiculous.

And believing this doesn't make someone a sheeple who thinks they're still relevant, either... wherever the hell that came from.

not sure who you are responding too, but it seems like you are now arguing against a strawman. I haven't seen anyone say anything like this.

You think that the last 1/3 of this set is going to make for a great show and be really well received? (Notice I didn't say stink up the joint, or people demand their money back) You think playing 11 new songs, of which none of them are hits, is a good idea?

 

[dtc]

Streets hasn't been played at every gig since 1987. Several Joshua Tree gigs, including Elland Road in Leeds, did not get Streets. We got Stand By Me & C'mon Everybody instead.

http://www.u2gigs.com/show546.html

Lucky old us eh lol.

Probably has over last 29 years but it was by no means a given in 1987.