U2 Induction Ceremony -- What songs do they play?

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
cmb737 said:


2005 Grammy Awards Achieve Lowest Ratings Since 1995
Tuesday, February 15 2005

Written by Michael Bordash

Although this year's Grammy awards featured Usher, U2, James Brown and J.Lo, viewership was far less than spectacular.

It is estimated that only 18.8 million people watched the Grammys this past Sunday. This represents a 28 percent drop from the 2004 Grammys. The previous two years were on the rise, and may be a harbinger for the upcoming Academy Awards next week.

The Grammys featured live performances by Alicia Keys, Kanye West, Usher with James Brown, U2 and Green Day. In fact Bono said of the night, "I think this is the best Grammys we've ever seen."

Although "Desperate Housewives" drew more viewers than the awards show, when it was over, very few people switched over.

According to an AP report, this trend continues for awards shows, the most recent Emmys, Golden Globes and American Music Awards all had disappointing viewership.

Are people just tired of all the redundant awards shows? It seems there's a new one every season. Spike TV's even giving awards to inanimate objects (read: cars). Perhaps the public is tired of hearing all of the file-sharing nonsense put forth by the RIAA and MPAA. Perhaps we've just given up on the whole "organized media presentation" thing. I like my music underground and my TV based squarely on reality.




Probably half of that amount are U2 fans who already own the album, plan to buy it, don't want it, or have downloaded it illegally.
Click to expand...

And your point is? Even with this past year "low numbers," 18 million people is a lot of viewers who you want to sway. U2 has sold under 3 million albums. To a get a fraction of that 18 million to buy albums would make U2 very happy IMO.
 
Flying FuManchu said:


And your point is? Even with this past year "low numbers," 18 million people is a lot of viewers who you want to sway. U2 has sold under 3 million albums. To a get a fraction of that 18 million to buy albums would make U2 very happy IMO.
Click to expand...

My point was exactly what I said at the end, I would bet that a good chuck of those viewers are already U2 fans that have either bought the album, plan to buy it, steal it, don't want it, have downloaded it...

18 million viewers is nothing. Especially when the Grammy's were broadcast world wide. I don't think anyone at all involved with the Grammy's looked at this year's broadcast as a commercial success.

As a LONG time U2 fan, I wasn't that inspired by U2's performance on the Grammy's. I have a hard time believing that U2 experienced a huge SALES increase due to that one performance. The Beatles cover was embarassing. I can see airplay increase...but honestly if you saw that performance and were not inclined to buy the album would you rush out and get it?

I would be willing to bet that the viewing audience for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame broadcast will be MUCH smaller than even one of the smallest grammy audiences in a long time. Additionally, the ratio of U2 fans to casual music fans will be much greater.
 
Last edited:
I just hope the don't do something dumb like playing ABOY. That would be the suckiest suck.

:no: :huh:
 
I was just reading Axver's comment somewhere else on this site about the 26 December 1989 performance of One Tree Hill being the best live performance of any song, by any group....and I thought that this would be an amazing time to dust off that song. Yeah, I know it's not New Zealand but WTF.

That's what I'd really like to hear....One Tree Hill.


:hyper: :bow: :applaud:

Bravo, Bravo!!
 
for the record on aerosmith, the most revalant period for aerosmith was circa 1993-1994. they were cool, cause it was cool to like the 70's in the 90's. 20 year nostagla trend. and sweet emtion was in the movie, dazed and confused. so they were cool casue they were old. but thier 1993 album get a grip sold 6-7 million copys. so they were def cool cause of right now. so aerosmith had it all ways. they were never as cool before or since. in my mind that was thier prime. not the 70's like the genretic anwser would be. and thier live shows still kicked ass casue they were old but just young enough to still go. since we're talking about rellevance, and all. this is a one rare case where a young person can tell a old person who grew up with aerosmith that , you didn;t see them in thier prime i did. (or soemthing to that effect.). u2 to me has been varing degees of relanvce since 1983 . but to me they have stayed little bit to alot of bit relavent since 83 without fail. aeromsith def was not relavent at all 1981-1986. so as far as them playing a new song, if they get 3 or more songs they should (not could, but should) play one new song. casue it says, hey just casue we're old enoguh to be in here, dosn't mean we're done.
 
Also wouldn't be surprised to hear them play One. Guess we'll know in the next 24 hours or so...
 
If they play a new song, they should definitely do City of Blinding Lights. It's original, it's new, it's epic, it's something definitely not characteristic of a 25-year-old band.

Then again, like Streets, it might be better reserved for large, loud concerts.. who knows
 
why not? havent U2 been stated as saying they dont belive they should even be inducted yet? so wouldnt it be better for them to play one of there new songs and prove they are still as relevent not as 25 years ago?,
 
I think they said they didn't want to be disrespectful by refusing but just didn't feel they were "ready" to be inducted yet. Or words to that effect.
 
Flying FuManchu said:


Then how bout U2 refusing the invite instead?
Click to expand...
Because it's not an "invite". They were voted in this year. They will be inducted this year whether they show up or not.
 
Ths induction is something that will happen to the band one time only, and an important moment so I'm sure they'll put alot of thought into what they'll play. Whether they play all older songs or decide to do one from a few of their different phases including the current one who knows? I'm sure whatever they decide there will people who don't agree with it, but the songs that will be played will be decided by the people who wrote them-'nuff said
 
Flying FuManchu said:
But they could refuse to perform on the show....
Click to expand...

So wait you got upset about breaking an "apparent tradition" but then have no problem with them turning their back on the music industry?:huh:
 
Flying FuManchu said:
But they could refuse to perform on the show....
Click to expand...
And why in the world would they do that?

All Larry said a few months ago was that he didn't feel they should be inducted yet because they have a lot of years left. None of the band members ever gave any indication that they were not honored by the induction, just that they think it's too soon. They have all attended many inductions and they're not about to snub their own by refusing to perform.
 
I was responding to KUEFC09U2 and Zootomic b/c they made it seem like the RnR HOF induction is something U2 don't want b/c they still have some years ahead of them. A few people say a "proper statement" about how they're still "relevant," would be playing a new song. Well, if they don't really "care" for the induction (which wouldn't be the case IMO), then a more powerful statement would be not to play or even appear. It wouldn't be making a powerful statement playing a new song. Refusal to play or not accepting the honor is more of a statement of saying, "Oh, we're relevant," or "We're not 'old'," then slyly promoting their new album.

Of course I don't believe in U2 snubbing the HOF. I believe it is an honor and the RnR HOF is generally a good thing.

I know U2 want to toot their own horn tonight but to do something, that appears, only AEROSMITH of all bands have done (half-assed I might add), just seems lame IMO. It's also saying to other inductees... "Oooh, I'm more relevant then you." I know there are U2 fans who love arrogance or the appearance of arrogance or love the whole "biggest band" thing to the extreme but for me, I like that junk in moderation.
 
Last edited:
Pride, UTEOTW !!!! and Vertigo, according to PLEBA reports that is what was played/ to be or whatever it's 3am over here:huh:
 
I see what you're saying Flying FuManchu, but if that rumor (Pride-UTEOTW-Vertigo) is true, I think it's as much of an effort to show their different "eras" than to promote themselves. Especially seeing as Vertigo is pretty much over in the US right now. Still, I think a better choice to represent their current "era" would be Beautiful Day, and Pride should be replaced with I Will Follow (of course, Streets would be best, but I don't think Bono could handle doing that on such a small stage...)
 
Last edited:
^
Ah well what can we do , I'm listening to Lovetown Bootlegs ah the past was amazing the future is good ableit less so:|
 
Kudos to U2 because if the rumored songs are indeed what they played, they absolutely made the right decision for which three songs to play at this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hollow Island
Vulture: All 234 U2 Songs, Ranked From Worst to Best
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
phommel
P
Headache in a Suitcase
  • Locked
Songs of Songs, Books & Fat Puns - New Album Discussion #8
33 34 35
Replies
1K
Views
53K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
N
NBA 2023-24 Thread
12 13 14
Replies
401
Views
11K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
cobl04
Kiss the Future documentary
Replies
11
Views
3K
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen
P
The Band That Saved My Life - Paulo Vetri's project
Replies
4
Views
2K
Paulo Vetri
P

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom