SOE 17: Where The Album Has A Name - The Joshua Tree

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.
2861U2 said:
Seriously. During one of the Chicago 360 shows, my buddy and I were stuck in traffic and completely missed Interpol. Neither of us cared one iota.
Click to expand...

We also got stuck in traffic but we managed to catch Interpol's set. My mom, who was also there, only remembers that they're just loud. that's it
 
aMansAman said:
well, the article cites a radio program. There the host mentions, that Corbijn works together with U2 right now, and that SOE will be released in autumn PRESUMABLY. These were not Antons' words but the radio host said this...
Click to expand...

thank you.. appreciate the clarification
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
I'm baffled as to how many people care about the opening act. The majority of the stadium is still in the parking lot
Click to expand...


Honestly, I don't like to talk about opening bands much but it's always a talking point about any tour rumors. I loved no opening act, U2 don't need one, like PJ. I'm so glad PJ decided last few legs to go solo. But with an Anniversary tour of an important landmark, kinda like PJ20 I think we won't get an intimate U2-only show, especially if the record company or LiveNation have their fingers in this more with the SOE delay. I'm also getting a little frustrated with regurgitating the same ol same ol with U2 until something official comes out so it's nice to name some bands that actually put shit out without pumping the breaks
 
The reason bands opt to not have an opening act is to save money. If they don't have to pay an opening and, they can make more money and even charge a little less for tickets. People will buy tickets for U2 or Pearl Jam with or without an opening band, so it's an unnecessary expense when it all comes down to the bottom line.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
The_acrobat said:
The reason bands opt to not have an opening act is to save money. If they don't have to pay an opening and, they can make more money and even charge a little less for tickets. People will buy tickets for U2 or Pearl Jam with or without an opening band, so it's an unnecessary expense when it all comes down to the bottom line.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Click to expand...
It's also a way of allowing a band to play longer without worrying about curfew... well, in the case of Springsteen and PJ at least. U2, not so much .
 
I love a great opening acts
My first u2 gig was zooropa in 93 in Munich and we had Oakenfold, some big heads show, Stereo MC's and Due Toten Hosen. It was great, all of them were perfect

After that it went downhill - fun loving criminals, four times snow patrol, the thrills (extremely boring). I only liked The Magic Numbers during Vertigo due to their energy.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
I would be perfectly fine without an opening act, but if it's an artist or band I like, I'll gladly sit through it.
 
I've been out of the loop since... Dreamforce, but here's how I see it:

- JT 30th Anniversary Shows. Looks cool, I'll definitely see them if they come to DC, but if not I'll go to MetLife in NJ.
- If they are doing a stadium tour all summer, when will they finish SoE? They won't release it before the shows because that will distract from basking in the glory of the Joshua Tree. They could record between shows, sure, but they still will have to wait months to release it.
- Then they'll look at SoE after the JT shows and overthink it and then they'll promise it's coming out in 2018.

They'll have to wait a few months after the JT shows to drop SoE, so I'm just salty that SoE looks like a no-go until late 2017, if at all. I do think they missed the window at this point (too late to release a companion piece to what will then be a 3 year-old album), but who knows. Very happy that I may get to see them in a stadium though.
 
AtU2 reports rumors of a tour kick off in Vancouver on may 12.
We're told that the tour will play exclusively in stadiums and will begin May 12th in Vancouver, BC, Canada. Additional cities on the band's itinerary are rumored to include Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles (Pasadena), Philadelphia, Boston, New York City (NJ, to be precise) and Washington, DC. We don't know what other North America cities, if any, are getting shows. We don't know if there'll be one show or two in any/all cities, but our previous report suggested a pair of shows in Pasadena.
Click to expand...
 
On such a limited run like this, there is no way they'd play both Vancouver AND Seattle, so I'm suspicious of that.
 
I was in Red Zone when Jay Z supported U2 in Sydney. Some fans next to me paid $300 to see Jay Z then left before U2 came on! Crazy.

The only support band I've enjoyed was BB King for Lovetown Tour. It made sense and was fun. Other like Fatima Mansions, PJ Harvey, Weddings Parties Anything, B.A.D. II, Kanye West etc were of no real interest.

I'd rather no support band. Especially if I got 15-30 mins more U2!
 
chocky said:
I was in Red Zone when Jay Z supported U2 in Sydney. Some fans next to me paid $300 to see Jay Z then left before U2 came on! Crazy.

The only support band I've enjoyed was BB King for Lovetown Tour. It made sense and was fun. Other like Fatima Mansions, PJ Harvey, Weddings Parties Anything, B.A.D. II, Kanye West etc were of no real interest.

I'd rather no support band. Especially if I got 15-30 mins more U2!
Click to expand...
Lol what a bunch of dumbarsses those fans were! Lol some people have more money than brains!
 
Good grief. Tickets are expensive in Australia in general, aren't they? Big deal if an Aussie Jay-Z fan paid money to see Jay-Z because he was there, even if he happened to be an opener.
 
If they are stadium shows, I guarantee there will be at least one opening act, maybe more.

I'm fine with Mumford, never seen them before and the banjo thing will work for a Joshua Tree show.

Given that very active bands these days are doing special album related shows, U2 doing something for one of the biggest albums of all time isn't a stretch and doesn't make them a "heritage" act. The amount of hand wringing over this is comical.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
It's also a way of allowing a band to play longer without worrying about curfew... well, in the case of Springsteen and PJ at least. U2, not so much .
Click to expand...

The Springsteen shows I saw had 2 opening acts, didn't stop the main sets being ~4 hours.

I agree generally a support act won't make a bit of difference to whether people attend a show or not, but it might be part of the overall decision.

I'm guessing there also might be a cultural difference in some cities where you can only get to the venue by car, you expect to get caught in traffic and have half-written off seeing opening acts altogether, therefore you don't miss them much.
 
I can just about guarantee you that if U2 are in fact coming to Cleveland this summer, it's going to be on June 7th, or possibly the day before or after. The reason I think this is because I have tickets for Tom Petty on June 7th in Columbus, and it would just make sense that the 1st time in 12 years my favorite band play in Ohio would be on the same date that I have tickets for my 2nd favorite band!

That's just how my luck is, I can about guarantee it!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

N
Hello From Alberta, Canada
Replies
4
Views
444
NormB
N
N
Hello!
Replies
2
Views
854
Hewson
Hewson
Scorpionac
Songs that would fit better on SOI vs. SOE?
Replies
1
Views
449
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
W
A Boy Falls From the Sky is some U2's best work
Replies
3
Views
2K
zoocarolina
Z
dan_smee
New Album Discussion 1 - Songs of..... - Unreasonable guitar album
62 63 64
Replies
2K
Views
112K
CedarwoodAWT
C

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom