IPOD and ITunes and selling out

[Johnman33]

All of this IPOD and Itunes stuff is getting out of hand. Hopefully, the marketing did not interfere with the album. Oh, how the simplicty of ATYCLB is even more revered now!!!!

Finally, if people think that U2 sold out then they should wait until the live show. I think the closest U2 ever came to selling out was its suspect perfomances on the 3rd leg of the Elevelation tour. It was funny how a show with 24 songs covering their entire catalog on the first leg mysteriously morphed into an 18-19 song set at best. There are other good if not great bands out there like YES, RUSH, Bruce Springsteen, Fleetwood Mac and the CURE who are infamous for three hour performances.

The bottom line is the the quality and length of the setlist will be the real indicator of a "sellout."

 

[Zoocoustic]

Well, to me, selling out is what every band does at some point. And I just don't see it as a bad thing. I've said it before, they could do a commercial for Wal-Mart and I wouldn't care. It doesn't change the experience I have while listening to their music or attending their shows. At some point in your career you need funding to do what you want to do. If they need to raise money so they can come to Seattle and put on a show, so be it.

Now, the length of the setlist is a completely different matter. I agree that with Elevation their setlists were shorter and I hope they are longer this time around. I don't know that I'm expecting a 3-hour show, but at least a longer show than 99% of the Elevation shows.

 

[WHYWHY]

I agree with you totally Zooacoustic. You must, however, remember that U2 has never done large sets. POP MART and ZOO TV were easily the longest. The JT tour averaged 21 songs a night, sometimes even 20, so I can understand that towards the end of a Northern Hemisphere tour that the band would be tiring out a bit.

Still I agree, I'd like to see at least 21 songs if I went to a U2 concert (not including those little snippets such as Peace on Earth, which Bono would do before Walk On, or SIAM).
And hopefully we'll have quite a number of new songs from the new album in the setlist ... that'll be good too .

WHYWHY.

 

[STING2]

All of this IPOD and Itunes stuff is getting out of hand. Hopefully, the marketing did not interfere with the album. Oh, how the simplicty of ATYCLB is even more revered now!!!!

Finally, if people think that U2 sold out then they should wait until the live show. I think the closest U2 ever came to selling out was its suspect perfomances on the 3rd leg of the Elevelation tour. It was funny how a show with 24 songs covering their entire catalog on the first leg mysteriously morphed into an 18-19 song set at best. There are other good if not great bands out there like YES, RUSH, Bruce Springsteen, Fleetwood Mac and the CURE who are infamous for three hour performances.

The bottom line is the the quality and length of the setlist will be the real indicator of a "sellout."

You forgetting that the length of the set list is often dependent on the artist, most likely the singer's voice. If your able to sing for 6 hours night after night, without any problems, fine. But it would be sheer stupidity to sing for massive lengths of time night after night and strains one's voice. Even sets as short as 90 minutes back on the Unforgettable Fire tour can cause that.

The band and Bono did a great job on Elevation and those shows were the best shows I have ever seen in my life and I have been to more than I can count off the top of my head. Its not about the length of the show, its about the quality of the show.

 

[Johnman33]

Shows

OK,
So what U2 should do is instead of booking 3 shows in the same city on 3 consecutive nights to max out their profit, play one 3 hour show. This way the real fans get one great performance.

 

[Axver]

Re: Shows

OK,
So what U2 should do is instead of booking 3 shows in the same city on 3 consecutive nights to max out their profit, play one 3 hour show. This way the real fans get one great performance.

So you want a LOT of people to miss out? U2 play three shows because that's the amount required to meet demand.

Look at how long their sets have been in the past. They don't fluctuate a lot. U2 are unlikely to change. Sorry, U2 will not play 3 hour sets regularly. Maybe on their last show, but I highly doubt it will occur earlier.

 

[tkramer]

Re: Re: IPOD and ITunes and selling out

You forgetting that the length of the set list is often dependent on the artist, most likely the singer's voice. If your able to sing for 6 hours night after night, without any problems, fine. But it would be sheer stupidity to sing for massive lengths of time night after night and strains one's voice. Even sets as short as 90 minutes back on the Unforgettable Fire tour can cause that.

This is dead on. And this thread title makes no sense. How are you a sellout for playing a one hour, 50 minute show? (that's about as short as the shows got on the last tour) WTF? People stick that stupid term on everything. Elvis should ban the word. And at what point on the first leg did they play a bunch of 24 song setlists? They were almost always between 19-21 songs for the whole tour...Trust me, I just looked.

Anyway...

The music that U2 writes makes it a near physical impossibility to play for three hours plus. Try singing Pride. No one but Bono can even touch that song. Try belting out the "I can feel" line in Vertigo without getting killed by your friends. This stuff is hard.

The only artist I have ever seen sing on and on for nearly three hours and just belt it out to the end is Springsteen, and he's not human. He's another creature. (And don't forget his music may be sung hard, but his range is very, very short.)

Bands like Phish, Fleetwood Mac, etc. either trade off singers on lead or they just don't sing that hard.

I've met Bono, and not only is he human, he's not very tall.

Be happy that he kills himself every night for so called fans. Isn't his very best enough?

 

[Lo-Fi]

You may find that the shorter set lists were caused because Bono's father had died by the 3rd leg of the Elevation Tour, maybe he just wasn't feelin' up to the task of playing 24 song shows.

Give 'em a break, America got 2 legs of the tour as well. A lot of countries didn't even get a show.

 

[WHYWHY]

Such as the poor old Aussies ... oh well I think I'd prefer to see them on this tour than ATYCLB simply because... well really I have no idea... but I would like to see them live in any way possible still

Good thing they've been confirmed to come this time round.... hopefully we'll get a couple of shows in Sydney and Melbourne so I can invest my life savings to see them all .

WHYWHY.

 

[bsp77]

This thread is idiotic. Even more so than most of these sell-out threads. What do you know about performing for 2 hours or 3 hours night after night? And only do one show, are you kidding? In Chicago, I was unable to get tickets to the first show despite waiting in line AND having my wife try online. Luckily they did a total of 4 shows and my wife got through for the second show while I was still in line! All 4 shows sold out immediately.

Hey moderators, how about we create a folder for all the people who just like to whine about U2? I understand saying why you like or do not like certain albums, songs, etc. But some of the constant negativity just boggles the mind.

 

[tkramer]

Does anyone else see the irony in a thread like this being in a forum called peeling off those dollar bills? Everyone who comes to this place is already aware that U2 sells music.

 

[patrinska]

I get the irony, believe me. I am not here to complain about short shows--I've been very lucky to have seen U2 four times, and each show was great in its own way. I do think that artists like U2 should make money, and I've always been impressed with their social conscience as a band. However, I feel like I'm the only person on this entire forum who is disgusted with this whole Apple thing. I am a confirmed technophobe, but am computer literate...and do not want to be forced to try new technology with high price tags. I believe that U2 has sold out with this. I used to love the fact that U2 didn't rely on corporate sponsorship too heavily in the past. I thought it made them and their art that much more authentic. Now, it just feels like U2, brought to you by Apple. I have loved U2 and their music for most of my life, and nothing before has ever made me want to turn my back on them. Now, I feel that U2 has turned their back on me and I don't even know if I want any part of what they are doing. I don't want a $350 toy that says U2 on it. That's almost half my rent. Is there anyone else here that feels the same profound sense of betrayal?

 

[bsp77]

I get the irony, believe me. I am not here to complain about short shows--I've been very lucky to have seen U2 four times, and each show was great in its own way. I do think that artists like U2 should make money, and I've always been impressed with their social conscience as a band. However, I feel like I'm the only person on this entire forum who is disgusted with this whole Apple thing. I am a confirmed technophobe, but am computer literate...and do not want to be forced to try new technology with high price tags. I believe that U2 has sold out with this. I used to love the fact that U2 didn't rely on corporate sponsorship too heavily in the past. I thought it made them and their art that much more authentic. Now, it just feels like U2, brought to you by Apple. I have loved U2 and their music for most of my life, and nothing before has ever made me want to turn my back on them. Now, I feel that U2 has turned their back on me and I don't even know if I want any part of what they are doing. I don't want a $350 toy that says U2 on it. That's almost half my rent. Is there anyone else here that feels the same profound sense of betrayal?

How did they betray you? The music is the same still. If you don't want to spend $350, then don't. It really is not going to give you much that you don't already have except the 25 rarities if you get the digital box set. The rarities might not be a big deal though. I am going to get the ipod because I have been thinking about getting one anyway.

Also, I am not so sure that this is selling out. They are really just selling their own music but in a different manner. Technophobe or not, digital sales is going to increase in popularity. I applaud them for pioneering the new technology, and the sponsorship may help lower ticket prices which is always good.

And try not to be a technophobe if you can help it, most of the stuff is very easy if you are open to it. Years down the road, you don't want to be like one of those old people that you see walk into Best Buy and ask what a DVD is.

 

[tkramer]

I get the irony, believe me. I am not here to complain about short shows--I've been very lucky to have seen U2 four times, and each show was great in its own way. I do think that artists like U2 should make money, and I've always been impressed with their social conscience as a band. However, I feel like I'm the only person on this entire forum who is disgusted with this whole Apple thing. I am a confirmed technophobe, but am computer literate...and do not want to be forced to try new technology with high price tags. I believe that U2 has sold out with this. I used to love the fact that U2 didn't rely on corporate sponsorship too heavily in the past. I thought it made them and their art that much more authentic. Now, it just feels like U2, brought to you by Apple. I have loved U2 and their music for most of my life, and nothing before has ever made me want to turn my back on them. Now, I feel that U2 has turned their back on me and I don't even know if I want any part of what they are doing. I don't want a $350 toy that says U2 on it. That's almost half my rent. Is there anyone else here that feels the same profound sense of betrayal?

I understand you feel that way. But think on these:

thanks to tech moving forward anyone can now download their whole catalog for 150.00 That's .33 a song. That is NOT selling out. That's making it cheaper than ever before to get the bands tunes.

You don't want 350.00 ipod? Neither do I. Same for a 450.00 signed poster, a 30.00 dollar tour program, or whatever else the band has offered me over the years. It's a U2 ipod, nothing else. Don't stress over it.

U2 and Apple did not trade a penny. They went on record and said it. U2 gets max exposure that they could NEVER afford to do themselves, and Apple gets a cool way to tell the public they have the best online music store in the biz. Yes, A MUSIC store. Not fries, not cars, not paper towels. It's a perfect move by the band. It's the same as "get the new U2 album at your nearest record store!" except no one would bat an eye if they saw that...

I'm seeing a patern with the folks that have a problem with this. They are all over 20. (not a bash, I'm 27) They don't see apple as a record store. Trust me, in 5 years all the kids will think apple is a record store the way you and I remember going down to the corner to pick up an album, tape, cd. Time marchs on, and U2 went with it.

ON and on and on...

 

[bsp77]

I understand you feel that way. But think on these:

thanks to tech moving forward anyone can now download their whole catalog for 150.00 That's .33 a song. That is NOT selling out. That's making it cheaper than ever before to get the bands tunes.

You don't want 350.00 ipod? Neither do I. Same for a 450.00 signed poster, a 30.00 dollar tour program, or whatever else the band has offered me over the years. It's a U2 ipod, nothing else. Don't stress over it.

U2 and Apple did not trade a penny. They went on record and said it. U2 gets max exposure that they could NEVER afford to do themselves, and Apple gets a cool way to tell the public they have the best online music store in the biz. Yes, A MUSIC store. Not fries, not cars, not paper towels. It's a perfect move by the band. It's the same as "get the new U2 album at your nearest record store!" except no one would bat an eye if they saw that...

I'm seeing a patern with the folks that have a problem with this. They are all over 20. (not a bash, I'm 27) They don't see apple as a record store. Trust me, in 5 years all the kids will think apple is a record store the way you and I remember going down to the corner to pick up an album, tape, cd. Time marchs on, and U2 went with it.

ON and on and on...

Great post. I am 27 as well.

 

[patrinska]

I'm 29, by the way...

I am not saying that I'm the sort of person who goes out of their way to avoid technology--I am smart enough to keep on top of these things. This whole ipod thing may be awesome for some, but I personally think that it has no value for me. It's not like U2 couldn't have gotten exposure of this sort in any other way--they are U2, after all. The fan base is huge; the fact that this forum exists is testament to that. Any of their new music would have sold bucketloads without this Apple sponsorship.

 

[tkramer]

I'm 29, by the way...

I am not saying that I'm the sort of person who goes out of their way to avoid technology--I am smart enough to keep on top of these things. This whole ipod thing may be awesome for some, but I personally think that it has no value for me. It's not like U2 couldn't have gotten exposure of this sort in any other way--they are U2, after all. The fan base is huge; the fact that this forum exists is testament to that. Any of their new music would have sold bucketloads without this Apple sponsorship.

You're right. Sort of. They might have been able to sell like this some other way, but this way is forward thinking. (ugh, I hate that term) One way they most certainly would NOT have been as successful with is the single sales. Physical single sales are dead. Nearly gone, ka-put in the USA. A physical CD single is hot stuff if it can sell 10,000-25,000 in a week. Vertigo sold 37,000 on I-tunes it's first seven days. That's incredible. All this band is doing is switching from the outdated model (which is the physical) to the up and coming one. They were brilliant to be the first mega rock band to do it.

 

[bsp77]

I'm 29, by the way...

I am not saying that I'm the sort of person who goes out of their way to avoid technology--I am smart enough to keep on top of these things. This whole ipod thing may be awesome for some, but I personally think that it has no value for me. It's not like U2 couldn't have gotten exposure of this sort in any other way--they are U2, after all. The fan base is huge; the fact that this forum exists is testament to that. Any of their new music would have sold bucketloads without this Apple sponsorship.

If that had sold the album on itunes only, I could understand being upset. I would be furious, I love having the tangible album and I hope it never goes away. I have also resisted the ipod (and mp3's in general besides for the occasional download), but decided that I know I will love it. A few years back, I didn't see what the big deal with DVDs was, until I got one. Then I thought it was the greatest thing. TIVO as well, absolutely amazing. I am sure I will love the ipod when I get it (Merry Christmas to me) and not know why I never got one before. But if you don't want one or don't like the apple connection, just don't worry about it. None of this changes their music.

And I really do love that U2 is leading the way on all of this, now when other bands do it (which they will), they will just be following U2.

 

[patrinska]

If that had sold the album on itunes only, I could understand being upset. I would be furious, I love having the tangible album and I hope it never goes away.

I couldn't agree with you more on this point. I think, though, that this is a sort of first step down that slippery slope...having the complete U2 box set only available digitally. What about those of us who might have wanted something tangible to look at and be able to say "this is what I've always wanted from U2--a kick ass box set!"...but I don't even get the opportunity for that now.

 

[bsp77]

I couldn't agree with you more on this point. I think, though, that this is a sort of first step down that slippery slope...having the complete U2 box set only available digitally. What about those of us who might have wanted something tangible to look at and be able to say "this is what I've always wanted from U2--a kick ass box set!"...but I don't even get the opportunity for that now.

I do understand that completely, but I have sullenly accpeted the inevitable. One day it will no longer be as reasonible to have a nice big cd collection or dvd collection. It will turn to digital on-demand.

 

[tkramer]

Being an art director who has worked with web, print, outdoor, etc. I can't tell you how much I love paper. I love to be able to feel things. I wish I could always have it that way. Maybe we will. There's a letterpress (wow, remember those anyone) operator here in Kansas City who is swamped with biz because everyone loves how it looks and feels. It's imperfect. It leaves an indentation with every letter. It's personal. He packs in every lead filled letter by hand. I hope everyone will always feel that way about album art, music, etc...

But reality is that digital is cheap and quick. Those two things mean the most to the music buying public right now.

 

[patrinska]

Being an art director who has worked with web, print, outdoor, etc. I can't tell you how much I love paper. I love to be able to feel things. I wish I could always have it that way. Maybe we will. There's a letterpress (wow, remember those anyone) operator here in Kansas City who is swamped with biz because everyone loves how it looks and feels. It's imperfect. It leaves an indentation with every letter. It's personal. He packs in every lead filled letter by hand. I hope everyone will always feel that way about album art, music, etc...

But reality is that digital is cheap and quick. Those two things mean the most to the music buying public right now.

wow. i love this post. this just nails it for me...i work in a professional photo lab in san francisco in black and white production. we have been forced to downsize because most of our clients are turning to shooting digital. we produce amazing optical prints, but it doesn't seem to matter anymore to the owners. at least it matters to the clientele i've worked hard to get over the past 4 plus years. it's very personal to me also. i hand retouch, and it's never ever 100% perfect...but at least people know that an actual person touched these prints and they weren't just spit out by someone behind a computer terminal.

 

[bsp77]

wow. i love this post. this just nails it for me...i work in a professional photo lab in san francisco in black and white production. we have been forced to downsize because most of our clients are turning to shooting digital. we produce amazing optical prints, but it doesn't seem to matter anymore to the owners. at least it matters to the clientele i've worked hard to get over the past 4 plus years. it's very personal to me also. i hand retouch, and it's never ever 100% perfect...but at least people know that an actual person touched these prints and they weren't just spit out by someone behind a computer terminal.

I would have been a little nicer if I knew this, though I don't think I was too mean. I hope. Maybe you feel betrayed by U2 going digital because you relate it to your business being hurt? Maybe I am psychoanalyzing too much.

 

[patrinska]

I would have been a little nicer if I knew this, though I don't think I was too mean. I hope. Maybe you feel betrayed by U2 going digital because you relate it to your business being hurt? Maybe I am psychoanalyzing too much.

i guess i am a little transparent, huh?

yeah, i think i am taking what U2 is doing a little personally...for me, it's just a big disappointment. i didn't want to hear vertigo on tv in a commercial, or online. i wanted to turn on the radio and hear it there. that's all. i'm pissed about the box set, but there's nothing that will be done about it. i know i'll go to the shows, i'll buy the cd...but that's it. i've lost a great deal of respect for Bono & the boys. i'm just hurt.

 

[bsp77]

Patrinska -

 

[patrinska]

thanks. maybe i'm just too damned sensitive for all of this...

 

[Johnman33]

I get the irony, believe me. I am not here to complain about short shows--I've been very lucky to have seen U2 four times, and each show was great in its own way. I do think that artists like U2 should make money, and I've always been impressed with their social conscience as a band. However, I feel like I'm the only person on this entire forum who is disgusted with this whole Apple thing. I am a confirmed technophobe, but am computer literate...and do not want to be forced to try new technology with high price tags. I believe that U2 has sold out with this. I used to love the fact that U2 didn't rely on corporate sponsorship too heavily in the past. I thought it made them and their art that much more authentic. Now, it just feels like U2, brought to you by Apple. I have loved U2 and their music for most of my life, and nothing before has ever made me want to turn my back on them. Now, I feel that U2 has turned their back on me and I don't even know if I want any part of what they are doing. I don't want a $350 toy that says U2 on it. That's almost half my rent. Is there anyone else here that feels the same profound sense of betrayal?

Damn this is a good thread!
I am with you all the way. Just becuase this is another way to spread their music doesn't take away from the fact that they are selling themselves for Apple. All of a sudden, the whole concept of POPMART doesn't seem too ironic or surreal or funny, because the prophecy has been realized.

Also, selling out to me is playing shorter shows which just include a few recent tracks and the hits. Even though ZOO TV and POPMART had concrete setlists, at least the whole two hour experience was a great show.

"Elevation" started off as an unbelieveable tour and show. When U2 came back to the US for the third leg however, it seemed like the production was stale. The 9-11 aftermath element actually added credence to U2's performance.

Anyway, this is a new album with a new tour... Perhaps, the new technology displayed on the new tour will in some way warrant the Apple partnership.

 

[tkramer]

Anyway, this is a new album with a new tour... Perhaps, the new technology displayed on the new tour will in some way warrant the Apple partnership.

It already has. U2 has embraced what will be the #1 means of album buying in only a few more years. It's ALREADY the #1 source of single sales in the USA. They took a gamble in a time when Madonna is uploading "f%$k you" soundbites on file sharing networks. They said all along they saw it as a way to reach more people and when the right means came along they were going to do it. They hooked up with Apple in part because Apple are the best of the very few download services that are successfully up and running.

I will maintain till this topic finally dies that U2 is ensuring the survival of their music with the younger set well into the next decade. You can't possibly hope that physical sales will compete with the download services in five-ten years time. Don't fault U2 for doing it first. Don't fault them for dragging people kicking and screaming into the next big thing. "OH MY GOD! U2 IS SELLING MUSIC DOWNLOAD! AND WITH APPLE, THAT COMPANY THAT RUNS A MUSIC STORE! WHAT WILL THEY DO NEXT?!"

And if it's the partnership that bothers everyone, what about the 7 CD a couple years ago? You could only get that one from Target. It was an exclusive as well, except that I-tunes is as close as your nearest computer, while Target isn't exactly everywhere. And yes, there were TV spots for it too.

This topic just makes me scratch my head. If U2 were pitching fries for Mc. D's like D. Child we'd have ourselves a topic. U2 selling music and partnering with one of the few available experts in the field of music download isn't a topic of sellout. It's friggin' brilliant.

And the U2 setlist thing reminds me of the mythical bruce springsteen shows. Fans would complain that he only does shows that are 2 hours and 40 minutes or so on average, when he used to do four hour shows every night. Nope. His sets were NEVER that long on average. (Also shows you can't please everyone.) Same with U2. People complain the Elevation shows started at 24 songs or whatever and by the end were down to 17-18. That's simply not true. The tour average was 20-21, and other than the odd off show, you didn't see 23-24 songs in one night. (one notable exception being around the begining of the 3RD LEG when they played Slane) U2's rule of thumb has almost always been a two hour show. MOST of the Popmart shows were 21 songs. MOST of ZOO was 21-22. Finally, I saw a first and third leg show of the tour, (and it's only my opinion but) I disagree with your perception of the show coming back weaker. The band felt some of those shows were among the best they have ever performed. They even wrote a new song about it. You may have heard of it, it's called City of Blinding Lights.

Heck if you want to talk about weak shows that ended too early, look at the early and not so early tours. U2 played 17 songs on average during the UF tour. Ditto for Love Town. So did U2 actually sell out in '86???

You know Larry appeared in a Harley Ad in the 80's, maybe it started then? Or, Or maybe he liked Harleys!!!! Maybe U2 likes Apple! hhmmm...

 

[bsp77]

tkramer - I am not sure why anyone would argue with you on this topic. You explain everything much better than I ever could.

 

[sue4u2]

No one is going to complain about all this new fangled technology on this next tour, when the Edge is playing in your ear or Adam and Larry blow your minds up close. Then there's alway's Bono singing right next to you from across the arena/stadium. If you aren't ready, get there. You won't be disappointed.

Edited to say: I take that back, there will always be someone complaining that we should go back to the "good" old days. And in this day and age, we will be able too..