Not impressed by the set-list!

[Salome]

thank god concert experiences do not equate reading a couple dozen setlists

 

[No spoken words]

If people who have the gall to criticize the band are whiners then the rest, including you, are wannabe sycophants.

Praise when it is due (the album is really good), criticize when neccessary 9set lists are awful).

You never really do understand the point of my posts, nor do you fully read them. I have trouble dealing with dense people, it's a long-time failing of mine. Criticizing the band is not the issue here, nor is it something I'm immune to.

And, how do you not grasp that different people think praise or criticism are due at different times? Or are you one of these clowns that deems themselves the arbiters of good taste?

And, talk to me when you've seen a show this tour, please.

Either way, you're a broken record and it's not offensive, it's not insulting, it's just boring. Ta.

 

[Salome]

That says it all, I'm afraid. It's just so complacent to recycle those songs- it's the second most-heavily featured album in the show for goodness sake! Utter madness.

it was their most successful album since Achtung Baby
yet only 2 songs re-appeared the next tour
one could argue it makes sense for more songs to appear

i really wasn't waiting to listen to Even better .... yet again
Mysterious Ways, End of the world and Ultra Violet did sound better than before
if that makes you feel any better

 

[monsieur fly]

If people who have the gall to criticize the band are whiners then the rest, including you, are wannabe sycophants.

Praise when it is due (the album is really good), criticize when neccessary 9set lists are awful).

I'm with you on this- people who defend the setlists seem to enjoy putting up straw men all the time. Critics are depicted as wacky, rather disloyal anoraks who want the entire Zooropa album to be played back to back. That is to completely misrepresent the positions of most critics. We all recognise the need to play certain staples but we still think they can be more adventurous and there is nothing unreasonable about that conclusion.

 

[monsieur fly]

it was their most successful album since Achtung Baby
yet only 2 songs re-appeared the next tour
one could argue it makes sense for more songs to appear

i really wasn't waiting to listen to Even better .... yet again
Mysterious Ways, End of the world and Ultra Violet did sound better than before
if that makes you feel any better

Most successful? By what yardstick, I wonder?

 

[bigjohn2441]

That says it all, I'm afraid. It's just so complacent to recycle those songs- it's the second most-heavily featured album in the show for goodness sake! Utter madness.

how come nobody bitches about there being 4 songs from TUF? surely that's too many for 1 show.

 

[jimyjazz]

To dismiss those with complains as whiners is very Bushian and doesn't make any valid point about the topic being discussed.

 

[No spoken words]

I'm with you on this- people who defend the setlists seem to enjoy putting up straw men all the time. Critics are depicted as wacky, rather disloyal anoraks who want the entire Zooropa album to be played back to back. That is to completely misrepresent the positions of most critics. We all recognise the need to play certain staples but we still think they can be more adventurous and there is nothing unreasonable about that conclusion.

Bullshit.

It's ok to criticize, who am I to tell people not to?

What grows stale is the same idiots making the same complaints over and over and over. And over.

And, then we have to hear how we that actually still manage to like the tour are blind, sheep, sycophants, etc. That's cool with you?

Neither side is "right" here, but at the end of the day, this is a site dedicated to U2, so, hey, what a surprise, some people are actually positive about the band.

You can always wish for a better set list and still enjoy the shows. That is, if you actually ever attend, which I'm guessing most people in this thread have not.

 

[Salome]

Most successful? By what yardstick, I wonder?

by just about every yardstick but the personal opinion of some people

sales, awards, media exposure, new fans won
take your pick

 

[No spoken words]

To dismiss those with complains as whiners is very Bushian and doesn't make any valid point about the topic being discussed.

But you dismiss everyone that defends the band. Why is that ok? And, here you go again...your points are valid, those that defend the band, no valid points. What's wrong with you? I'm asking that seriously.

 

[monsieur fly]

how come nobody bitches about there being 4 songs from TUF? surely that's too many for 1 show.

Perhaps because we haven't heard some of those songs in a while and perhaps also because a lot of us think TUF was a far better record.

 

[No spoken words]

Perhaps because we haven't heard some of those songs in a while and perhaps also because a lot of us think TUF was a far better record.

You haven't heard Pride or Bad in a while? Really?

ETA - I love Bad and could never hear it enough, but, let's not pretend like it never gets played.

 

[LemonMelon]

Best set of the tour tonight, easily. Really cool. I wish they'd bring back UC and Electrical Storm, but the way they ended the main set was so epic.

 

[No spoken words]

Best set of the tour tonight, easily. Really cool. I wish they'd bring back UC and Electrical Storm, but the way they ended the main set was so epic.

I agree.

 

[monsieur fly]

Bullshit.

It's ok to criticize, who am I to tell people not to?

What grows stale is the same idiots making the same complaints over and over and over. And over.

And, then we have to hear how we that actually still manage to like the tour are blind, sheep, sycophants, etc. That's cool with you?

Neither side is "right" here, but at the end of the day, this is a site dedicated to U2, so, hey, what a surprise, some people are actually positive about the band.

You can always wish for a better set list and still enjoy the shows. That is, if you actually ever attend, which I'm guessing most people in this thread have not.

People are not idiots by virtue of repeating points. It's often the only way for people to be heard on a forum. I wouldn't call a defender of a setlist a sycophant though I would come close to using the word "apologist" as it seems fairly hard to defend the continued absence of Zooropa and Pop material from a setlist when they have been "rested" for so long. Your point about non-attendance is completely irrelevant- one doesn't have to attend a show to form an opinion of it because a good performance of a warhorse will only allay the doubts to a slight extent. Anyhow it does not apply to me since I am going.

 

[monsieur fly]

You haven't heard Pride or Bad in a while? Really?

ETA - I love Bad and could never hear it enough, but, let's not pretend like it never gets played.

I was referring to MLK and TUF

 

[jimyjazz]

But you dismiss everyone that defends the band. Why is that ok? And, here you go again...your points are valid, those that defend the band, no valid points. What's wrong with you? I'm asking that seriously.

Holy fuck. It's not that those who defend the band have arguments without merit, it's that they don't have any points! They just get mad at people who criticize them. Like you - getting mad at critics, but even you admit that the sets could be better. Which is my point. They could be better, and to say otherwise without saying why the current show is as good as can be, or good enough, is retarded. As for going to a show, it is highly likely that I am going to sell my ticket. Then again, a lot could change in the next 3 months.

 

[No spoken words]

People are not idiots by virtue of repeating points. It's often the only way for people to be heard on a forum. I wouldn't call a defender of a setlist a sycophant though I would come close to using the word "apologist" as it seems fairly hard to defend the continued absence of Zooropa and Pop material from a setlist when they have been "rested" for so long. Your point about non-attendance is completely irrelevant- one doesn't have to attend a show to form an opinion of it because a good performance of a warhorse will only allay the doubts to a slight extent. Anyhow it does not apply to me since I am going.

We completely disagree about judging a show until you've attended. I cannot even wrap my brain around being able to render an opinion on a concert when I did not attend. So that's an unbridgeable gap.

And, I do not defend the absence of songs from those albums, or October, or Boy this tour....it's a disappointment to me, very much so. I don't want to hear Stuck or Elevation....but, I'm telling you, I've enjoyed the shows anyway. Do they compare to the JT or Zoo TV shows I was lucky enough to attend? Of course not. But this is my favorite band. Ever. And so getting to hear them play 22 or 23 songs makes me happy, even if it's not perfect. I wonder why that's so hard to understand, or accept.

Thanks, though, for at least typing an intelligent post, I appreciate it even if we do not agree.

 

[monsieur fly]

by just about every yardstick but the personal opinion of some people

sales, awards, media exposure, new fans won
take your pick

Sales? I think a lot of people will find that highly amusing- given Sting's success at the Grammys I wouldn't set too much by awards either. You cannot verify how many new fans they won and there was only greater media exposure because the band made a conscious decision to give more interviews.

 

[Salome]

it seems fairly hard to defend the continued absence of Zooropa and Pop material from a setlist when they have been "rested" for so long.

you really think that one's hard to defend?
ask a random 10% of the attendees of any given concert to write down 10 songs they'd like to hear and it might get obvious to you why the band isn't feverishly practising Last night on earth again

 

[monsieur fly]

We completely disagree about judging a show until you've attended. I cannot even wrap my brain around being able to render an opinion on a concert when I did not attend. So that's an unbridgeable gap.

And, I do not defend the absence of songs from those albums, or October, or Boy this tour....it's a disappointment to me, very much so. I don't want to hear Stuck or Elevation....but, I'm telling you, I've enjoyed the shows anyway. Do they compare to the JT or Zoo TV shows I was lucky enough to attend? Of course not. But this is my favorite band. Ever. And so getting to hear them play 22 or 23 songs makes me happy, even if it's not perfect. I wonder why that's so hard to understand, or accept.

Thanks, though, for at least typing an intelligent post, I appreciate it even if we do not agree.

And the same to you, pal.

 

[No spoken words]

Holy fuck. It's not that those who defend the band have arguments without merit, it's that they don't have any points! They just get mad at people who criticize them. Like you - getting mad at critics, but even you admit that the sets could be better. Which is my point. They could be better, and to say otherwise without saying why the current show is as good as can be, or good enough, is retarded. As for going to a show, it is highly likely that I am going to sell my ticket. Then again, a lot could change in the next 3 months.

I keep making the same point over and over. You keep not reading or understanding it. I cannot help you there, sorry. And if you think I'm literally mad right now, you're giving yourself way too much credit.

And, I'm not "admitting" that they could be better. This is not a trial, you're not a judge or the police or the principal. I'm telling you and anyone else reading that I think they could be better, of course. Simple as that. But so what? Go, or don't go.

 

[Salome]

Sales? I think a lot of people will find that highly amusing- given Sting's success at the Grammys I wouldn't set too much by awards either. You cannot verify how many new fans they won and there was only greater media exposure because the band made a conscious decision to give more interviews.

so you suggest your opinion on their material is indeed a better yardstick then?
whatever floats your boat

 

[monsieur fly]

you really think that one's hard to defend?
ask a random 10% of the attendees of any given concert to write down 10 songs they'd like to hear and it might get obvious to you why the band isn't feverishly practising Last night on earth again

But that is just not a good enough reason by itself. Casual fans might hear LNOE for the first time and like it. I had a similar experience at a Springsteen concert- I wanted BITUSA. I didn't get it but I heard Trapped for the first time and absolutely loved it. You shouldn't take that Zoo Tv question "what do you want?" so literally.

 

[God Part III]

how come nobody bitches about there being 4 songs from TUF? surely that's too many for 1 show.

No it's not.

 

[No spoken words]

But that is just not a good enough reason by itself. Casual fans might hear LNOE for the first time and like it. I had a similar experience at a Springsteen concert- I wanted BITUSA. I didn't get it but I heard Trapped for the first time and absolutely loved it. You shouldn't take that Zoo Tv question "what do you want?" so literally.

Trapped

 

[monsieur fly]

so you suggest your opinion on their material is indeed a better yardstick then?
whatever floats your boat

This is exactly the argument which is constantly used to put fans of Pop and Zooropa back in their little box. ATYCLB and HTDAAB might have the numbers on their side but once you start equating that unreservedly with quality, you embark on a slippery slope in my view.

 

[God Part III]

But that is just not a good enough reason by itself. Casual fans might hear LNOE for the first time and like it. I had a similar experience at a Springsteen concert- I wanted BITUSA. I didn't get it but I heard Trapped for the first time and absolutely loved it. You shouldn't take that Zoo Tv question "what do you want?" so literally.

I see what you're saying, but they're already doing this with TUF and Ultraviolet.
Some casual fans come and want to hear The Fly or Even Better Than The Real Thing or whatever, UV gets played and they love it. Some casuals can't wait to hear New Year's Day, but they don't, instead they hear UF and realise it's the second coming of christ. U2 does this already, they just don't do it with Pop material, and you know what, I'm kinda happy they don't, because LNOE just isn't good enough to be a live staple in a U2 set anymore.

 

[Laura M]

But that is just not a good enough reason by itself. Casual fans might hear LNOE for the first time and like it. I had a similar experience at a Springsteen concert- I wanted BITUSA. I didn't get it but I heard Trapped for the first time and absolutely loved it. You shouldn't take that Zoo Tv question "what do you want?" so literally.

Some songs seemed to bore the living daylights out of the (casual) fans we were seated/standing near. Other songs, like Vertigo, BD, Elevation, SBS really had folk going wild. Like I said before, that's what really made me enjoy the concerts. Some people might love LNOE, I suspect most casual fans would prefer to hear a hit they are familiar with. I don't really care what album those songs are from, if it means playing more tunes from one album, fair enough. I am just glad we went to see them and appreciate the songs we got to hear.

 

[Salome]

But that is just not a good enough reason by itself. Casual fans might hear LNOE for the first time and like it. I had a similar experience at a Springsteen concert- I wanted BITUSA. I didn't get it but I heard Trapped for the first time and absolutely loved it. You shouldn't take that Zoo Tv question "what do you want?" so literally.

unless I'm mistaken you first posted that you couldn't imagine why no one could defend why no Zooropa or POP songs show up on the setlist
and now this is your reasoning behind this: because perhaps it could win over some people?
I'm not saying this couldn't happen, but I do reckon the band has a pretty good idea of what works and what doesn't

This is exactly the argument which is constantly used to put fans of Pop and Zooropa back in their little box. ATYCLB and HTDAAB might have the numbers on their side but once you start equating that unreservedly with quality, you embark on a slippery slope in my view.

I just mentioned All that you can't ... was their most successful album since Achtung
and you wanted to know by which yardstick that would be
so I handed you some options

I love Unforgettable Fire but it wasn't exactly a concert highlight cause most of the crowd couldn't care less
I don't like Vertigo that much, but the stadium almost exploded