Author Topic: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread  (Read 3915 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ron2112

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #45 on: May 14, 2018, 10:41:23 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Went to both Vegas shows and walked away pretty disappointed last night. After seeing them 23 times, this will be the last time I see them multiple times on a tour. They sounded great, but your literally watching the same show again.
After seeing them open 'The Joshua Tree Tour' last year in Vancouver, I would've dutifully paid to see the EXACT same show the next night...  I think that your stance here underscores the fact that this is a sub-par U2 show...  Now that the opening night anticipation has fizzled, it's becoming painstakingly clear that it's very probable that this is the worst U2 show ever, but still better than most other's offerings...  that likely has more to do with the state of music these days...  I mean, 'Acrobat' sounds better live than I thought that it would, but if 'Achtung Baby's weakest track is your highlight then you've got problems...:-)

So Acrobat is a weak song and U2 are only good live these days because of the state that music is in...

I think something is painstakingly clear alright...

I think the earlier post was spot on.  "Acrobat" IS a weak song, and there's a reason that the band has avoided playing it all these years.  I mean, if you've listened to a ton of live shows over the years, then yeah, it's different, and from an academic standpoint, hearing "Acrobat" is cool, but I'd rather hear just about any other track from AB.  And I've got to think there are a lot of people scratching their heads when that song is played.

Offline Ron2112

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #46 on: May 14, 2018, 10:48:32 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I found it hard to believe that U2 don't notice this themselves or choose to turn a blind eye on the empty or curtained off sections.  I'm sure it is not going to get easier of future tours.  I think they have over-saturated themselves over the last few years with 3 tours in the last 4 years.

Also after this tour, I think U2 might have lost a lot of the casual fans, who are going to remember that this tour, U2 played a whole lot of new songs that they didn't know, didn't play any JT songs and probably might want to sit out the next tour which might be a good thing (maybe not for U2) but for us die hard fans, in that we might (and I'm probably dreaming) get a tour focused on the core fans rather than the casual fans, in terms of mixing it up more and playing more rarities.


Right question, but wrong conclusion. 

Look......SOE is a sub-par U2 album, and one that clearly isn't setting the music world on fire.  That said, this tour could STILL be packing them in if they weren't charging $375 a seat.  It's just not worth it for this set list.  The JT tour last year was brilliant and perfectly-priced for what it was.  This tour is the opposite of that -- dense, inaccessible set list for twice the price.

If they want to tour for core fans, then they might as well have done a fan-club only tour and STILL charge less per seat because they've already got us for the annual membership fee.

Saint22

  • Guest
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #47 on: May 14, 2018, 10:58:20 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Went to both Vegas shows and walked away pretty disappointed last night. After seeing them 23 times, this will be the last time I see them multiple times on a tour. They sounded great, but your literally watching the same show again.
After seeing them open 'The Joshua Tree Tour' last year in Vancouver, I would've dutifully paid to see the EXACT same show the next night...  I think that your stance here underscores the fact that this is a sub-par U2 show...  Now that the opening night anticipation has fizzled, it's becoming painstakingly clear that it's very probable that this is the worst U2 show ever, but still better than most other's offerings...  that likely has more to do with the state of music these days...  I mean, 'Acrobat' sounds better live than I thought that it would, but if 'Achtung Baby's weakest track is your highlight then you've got problems...:-)

So Acrobat is a weak song and U2 are only good live these days because of the state that music is in...

I think something is painstakingly clear alright...

I think the earlier post was spot on.  "Acrobat" IS a weak song, and there's a reason that the band has avoided playing it all these years.  I mean, if you've listened to a ton of live shows over the years, then yeah, it's different, and from an academic standpoint, hearing "Acrobat" is cool, but I'd rather hear just about any other track from AB.  And I've got to think there are a lot of people scratching their heads when that song is played.

Acrobat, thematically, fits this show perfectly -- the hypocrisy of the human heart. Edge's solo is incredible. It is among Larry's best work.

Not sure I could disagree with you more. There are other rarely-played songs on AB, and they were not the subject of petition after petition. I don't remember anyone tweeting at the band about So Cruel or Tryin' To Throw Your Arms ... though they are both good songs.

U2 shows are meant to be seen ONCE. Gambling that you are going to get a vastly different show night 2 as opposed to night 1 is just that -- a gamble. There's really no precedent for U2 drastically revising shows from night to night -- especially on a tour that is this choreographed.

All due respect, be disappointed all you want, but I sure hope you are disappointed in your own expectations and not the band.

Lastly, people decided not to pay $375 for a seat BEFORE they saw the setlist. Let's watch the revisionist history. The fact of the matter is, U2 have played a lot of shows in North America, the fan base is getting older, and they were just out a year ago.

Offline the_chief

  • Headache in a Suitcase
  • *
  • Posts: 360
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #48 on: May 14, 2018, 11:33:16 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Went to both Vegas shows and walked away pretty disappointed last night. After seeing them 23 times, this will be the last time I see them multiple times on a tour. They sounded great, but your literally watching the same show again.
After seeing them open 'The Joshua Tree Tour' last year in Vancouver, I would've dutifully paid to see the EXACT same show the next night...  I think that your stance here underscores the fact that this is a sub-par U2 show...  Now that the opening night anticipation has fizzled, it's becoming painstakingly clear that it's very probable that this is the worst U2 show ever, but still better than most other's offerings...  that likely has more to do with the state of music these days...  I mean, 'Acrobat' sounds better live than I thought that it would, but if 'Achtung Baby's weakest track is your highlight then you've got problems...:-)

So Acrobat is a weak song and U2 are only good live these days because of the state that music is in...

I think something is painstakingly clear alright...

I think the earlier post was spot on.  "Acrobat" IS a weak song, and there's a reason that the band has avoided playing it all these years.  I mean, if you've listened to a ton of live shows over the years, then yeah, it's different, and from an academic standpoint, hearing "Acrobat" is cool, but I'd rather hear just about any other track from AB.  And I've got to think there are a lot of people scratching their heads when that song is played.

So, their most requested song and the song that was raved about for years on here is now suddenly "weak"

Basically, you're saying it's sh**....

I notice you're new....

Offline space baby

  • Stranger in a Strange Land
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Looking for the one
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #49 on: May 14, 2018, 11:37:30 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

U2 shows are meant to be seen ONCE. Gambling that you are going to get a vastly different show night 2 as opposed to night 1 is just that -- a gamble. There's really no precedent for U2 drastically revising shows from night to night -- especially on a tour that is this choreographed.

The audience is the variable. U2 are professionals and always deliver in my experience. When playing to a hungry audience, they throw it down extra hard. The energy from the crowd is what changes night to night and that's why I enjoy catching multiple shows.

Offline dougie

  • Intellectual Tortoise
  • *
  • Posts: 427
  • A Bozo on the bus going nowhere!
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #50 on: May 14, 2018, 11:38:56 AM »
U2 ALWAYS changed the set every night on the I &E tour. 6 shows in London, 6 different shows. Usually only changing 2-4 songs, but they did.

So, my expectation was they would do the same as EVERY arena show Iíve ever seen (47 arena shows). The band changed a Ďfavorí they were doing for fans going to more than one show. And, I was hoping they were changing/playing different songs for fun and impact too.But, you are right, this tour is meant to be seen once! Wonderful show!

Offline scrittoresabino

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 246
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #51 on: May 14, 2018, 11:53:54 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Acrobat being "easily the weakest song" on AB is your opinion and nothing more.

For me, Acrobat is one of the strongest, and I know people talk about the closing three songs on the album as being a high (if dark) point of their careers.

Hate Acrobat if you want, that's cool, but to ascribe a personal opinion of it that is not widely shared as a sign U2's tour sucks and their careers over is a real stretch and not based on any logic.
Agreed. Edge's solo alone lifts it above half the album.

Also, Achtung Baby is a very eclectic album. There are maybe 3-5 tracks that a good majority rank in their top 3, but after that it seems like opinion on songs is all over that place. Personally, Ive seen a lot of people on this forum show their love for Who's Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses, while that is by far my least favorite.

Saint22

  • Guest
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #52 on: May 14, 2018, 01:24:46 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 ALWAYS changed the set every night on the I &E tour. 6 shows in London, 6 different shows. Usually only changing 2-4 songs, but they did.

So, my expectation was they would do the same as EVERY arena show Iíve ever seen (47 arena shows). The band changed a Ďfavorí they were doing for fans going to more than one show. And, I was hoping they were changing/playing different songs for fun and impact too.But, you are right, this tour is meant to be seen once! Wonderful show!

Right. By drastically, I meant beyond 2-4 songs, but your point is taken.

You obviously aren't one of these fans, but I get really frustrated for -- not at, mind you, FOR -- fans who have unrealistic expectations. It happens every single tour. THIS TOUR -- the new one, the one that is always about to start -- is ALWAYS the one where the setlists are going to wild and wide open and the band is just going to let the music speak and focus less on tech and visuals and they are going to play 3-hour shows. Oh, and if a show was canceled on the last tour, the expectation that city will get an extra-special show this time to make up for it.

I don't know if there's an influx of new, wide-eyed fans who come in every time with these expectations, or if some folks just can't let go and will always be dreamers, but it always makes me cringe to see these expectations. Grandpa over here just smiles and shakes his head. Drowning Man? No, child. Elevation. That's what you are going to get. :)

Offline dougie

  • Intellectual Tortoise
  • *
  • Posts: 427
  • A Bozo on the bus going nowhere!
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #53 on: May 14, 2018, 01:47:36 PM »
Heck, last arena tour they were playing BAD pretty much one of every two shows (some times only once in 4 shows). Donít have to worry about missing your favorite song now.

If they need to sell extra seats in cities, just say their going to play Streets (or insert song here) at one of the two shows😏

Offline Luzita

  • Intellectual Tortoise
  • *
  • Posts: 415
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #54 on: May 14, 2018, 02:21:18 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I found it hard to believe that U2 don't notice this themselves or choose to turn a blind eye on the empty or curtained off sections.  I'm sure it is not going to get easier of future tours.  I think they have over-saturated themselves over the last few years with 3 tours in the last 4 years.

Also after this tour, I think U2 might have lost a lot of the casual fans, who are going to remember that this tour, U2 played a whole lot of new songs that they didn't know, didn't play any JT songs and probably might want to sit out the next tour which might be a good thing (maybe not for U2) but for us die hard fans, in that we might (and I'm probably dreaming) get a tour focused on the core fans rather than the casual fans, in terms of mixing it up more and playing more rarities.


Right question, but wrong conclusion. 

Look......SOE is a sub-par U2 album, and one that clearly isn't setting the music world on fire.  That said, this tour could STILL be packing them in if they weren't charging $375 a seat.  It's just not worth it for this set list.  The JT tour last year was brilliant and perfectly-priced for what it was.  This tour is the opposite of that -- dense, inaccessible set list for twice the price.

If they want to tour for core fans, then they might as well have done a fan-club only tour and STILL charge less per seat because they've already got us for the annual membership fee.

I agree with most of what you said but disagree that SOE is a sub-par album. It may not be setting the music world on fire but itís not doing badly considering. As has been discussed in other threads, U2 are old and they play rock, which is no longer the dominant genre, so getting noticed outside the fandom is an uphill battle for them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline d.darroch

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 585
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #55 on: May 14, 2018, 03:10:17 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 ALWAYS changed the set every night on the I &E tour. 6 shows in London, 6 different shows. Usually only changing 2-4 songs, but they did.

So, my expectation was they would do the same as EVERY arena show I’ve ever seen (47 arena shows). The band changed a ‘favor’ they were doing for fans going to more than one show. And, I was hoping they were changing/playing different songs for fun and impact too.But, you are right, this tour is meant to be seen once! Wonderful show!

Right. By drastically, I meant beyond 2-4 songs, but your point is taken.

You obviously aren't one of these fans, but I get really frustrated for -- not at, mind you, FOR -- fans who have unrealistic expectations. It happens every single tour. THIS TOUR -- the new one, the one that is always about to start -- is ALWAYS the one where the setlists are going to wild and wide open and the band is just going to let the music speak and focus less on tech and visuals and they are going to play 3-hour shows. Oh, and if a show was canceled on the last tour, the expectation that city will get an extra-special show this time to make up for it.

I don't know if there's an influx of new, wide-eyed fans who come in every time with these expectations, or if some folks just can't let go and will always be dreamers, but it always makes me cringe to see these expectations. Grandpa over here just smiles and shakes his head. Drowning Man? No, child. Elevation. That's what you are going to get. :)

That's the thing though. I don't see anyone with unrealistic expectations, complaining that the set isn't drastically different from night one to night two. Sure, we have "write your dream setlist" threads. But they are just lists of dreams, not expectations (other than in the early days, when night one & two of i+e were looking like they'd be completely different). Every post I've read with complains about the lack of variation, people are hoping for one or two changes, no wholesale changes. If people had expectations of drastic changes, then yeah, I'd agree with you. But I don't think one or two changes is too much to ask.

Maybe the band have had issues. Not happy with other rehearsed songs like WGRYWH, ABOY & The Showman. Or maybe they've needed  St Louis & Vegas 2 to be shorter for some reason, technical issues, timing, health, something else. Who knows.

But hopefully we'll know by the conclusion of LA2, whether we'll get a rotation slot or two or not. A couple more days to rehearse a bit & get another song or two up to scratch. Or a couple of days, to chill & relax, before doing it all over again at LA1.

We shall see.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2018, 03:20:13 PM by d.darroch »

Saint22

  • Guest
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #56 on: May 14, 2018, 03:22:02 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Heck, last arena tour they were playing BAD pretty much one of every two shows (some times only once in 4 shows). Donít have to worry about missing your favorite song now.

If they need to sell extra seats in cities, just say their going to play Streets (or insert song here) at one of the two shows😏

Again ... when the tickets went on sale, people had no idea what they were playing. Would you have bet five months ago that Streets would be out on this tour? No one made the decision to go or not go based on the setlist until AFTER the first show, which was only 10 days ago. In all honesty, I think most people assume U2 sells out instantly anyway -- like in the old days -- and don't give it much thought. I'd like to see stats on what percentage of tickets are sold during presales and the first day of general public sales as opposed to all the rest of the the time leading up to the show.

Is there any such thing as a walk-up crowd or a slow-seller any more? Don't you think people have already decided if they want to see this show or not, and the inclusion of Streets or WOWY is kind of irrelevant at this point?

Saint22

  • Guest
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #57 on: May 14, 2018, 03:32:05 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 ALWAYS changed the set every night on the I &E tour. 6 shows in London, 6 different shows. Usually only changing 2-4 songs, but they did.

So, my expectation was they would do the same as EVERY arena show Iíve ever seen (47 arena shows). The band changed a Ďfavorí they were doing for fans going to more than one show. And, I was hoping they were changing/playing different songs for fun and impact too.But, you are right, this tour is meant to be seen once! Wonderful show!

Right. By drastically, I meant beyond 2-4 songs, but your point is taken.

You obviously aren't one of these fans, but I get really frustrated for -- not at, mind you, FOR -- fans who have unrealistic expectations. It happens every single tour. THIS TOUR -- the new one, the one that is always about to start -- is ALWAYS the one where the setlists are going to wild and wide open and the band is just going to let the music speak and focus less on tech and visuals and they are going to play 3-hour shows. Oh, and if a show was canceled on the last tour, the expectation that city will get an extra-special show this time to make up for it.

I don't know if there's an influx of new, wide-eyed fans who come in every time with these expectations, or if some folks just can't let go and will always be dreamers, but it always makes me cringe to see these expectations. Grandpa over here just smiles and shakes his head. Drowning Man? No, child. Elevation. That's what you are going to get. :)

That's the thing though. I don't see anyone with unrealistic expectations, complaining that the set isn't drastically different from night one to night two. Sure, we have "write your dream setlist" threads. But they are just lists of dreams, not expectations (other than in the early days, when night one & two of i+e were looking like they'd be completely different). Every post I've read with complains about the lack of variation, people are hoping for one or two changes, no wholesale changes. If people had expectations of drastic changes, then yeah, I'd agree with you. But I don't think one or two changes is too much to ask.

Maybe the band have had issues. Not happy with other rehearsed songs like WGRYWH, ABOY & The Showman. Or maybe they've needed  St Louis & Vegas 2 to be shorter for some reason, technical issues, timing, health, something else. Who knows.

But hopefully we'll know by the conclusion of LA2, whether we'll get a rotation slot or two or not. A couple more days to rehearse a bit & get another song or two up to scratch. Or a couple of days, to chill & relax, before doing it all over again at LA1.

We shall see.

Correct me if I am wrong, but Las Vegas was the first two-night stand of the tour, right? I wouldn't say there's not going to be any variation at all based on one 2-night run. It feels like they are still figuring out what works best, but given the narrative nature of this tour, they may at some point lock in on a setlist they really like it and play it every single show. At these ticket prices (other than the floor) they have assumed that not that many people are seeing multiple shows.

Heck, maybe they are actively trying to discourage it in the future to free up tickets? That might be a dangerous game to play.

This is just me, but I would rather know for sure I am going to get Gloria instead of worry over whether it is going to be Gloria or All Because Of You, you know what I mean? Give me the setlist with Gloria and Red Flag Day and we are 5 x 5.

Offline d.darroch

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 585
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #58 on: May 14, 2018, 03:34:42 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Went to both Vegas shows and walked away pretty disappointed last night. After seeing them 23 times, this will be the last time I see them multiple times on a tour. They sounded great, but your literally watching the same show again.
After seeing them open 'The Joshua Tree Tour' last year in Vancouver, I would've dutifully paid to see the EXACT same show the next night...  I think that your stance here underscores the fact that this is a sub-par U2 show...  Now that the opening night anticipation has fizzled, it's becoming painstakingly clear that it's very probable that this is the worst U2 show ever, but still better than most other's offerings...  that likely has more to do with the state of music these days...  I mean, 'Acrobat' sounds better live than I thought that it would, but if 'Achtung Baby's weakest track is your highlight then you've got problems...:-)

So Acrobat is a weak song and U2 are only good live these days because of the state that music is in...

I think something is painstakingly clear alright...

I think the earlier post was spot on.  "Acrobat" IS a weak song, and there's a reason that the band has avoided playing it all these years.  I mean, if you've listened to a ton of live shows over the years, then yeah, it's different, and from an academic standpoint, hearing "Acrobat" is cool, but I'd rather hear just about any other track from AB.  And I've got to think there are a lot of people scratching their heads when that song is played.
This is definitely a post that could use an "IMO", instead of an "IS", like you're stating a known fact. Because your opinion certainly differs A LOT, from the majority of fans on Twitter that listed Acrobat as the song they'd most like to hear live, myself included.

And insinuating that you know why the band hasn't played Acrobat before, because it's weak. I have know idea why they haven't played it. I'd assume it's because it's very dark, & Bono hasn't felt like he wanted to immerse himself in those thoughts, night after night, if it was a concert regular. Or it might be because it's very difficult to play (I assume, I'm not a musician) - just look at all bthe guys concentration during that song, & Edges face melting solo. Just assumptions though.

Saint22

  • Guest
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #59 on: May 14, 2018, 03:43:25 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Went to both Vegas shows and walked away pretty disappointed last night. After seeing them 23 times, this will be the last time I see them multiple times on a tour. They sounded great, but your literally watching the same show again.
After seeing them open 'The Joshua Tree Tour' last year in Vancouver, I would've dutifully paid to see the EXACT same show the next night...  I think that your stance here underscores the fact that this is a sub-par U2 show...  Now that the opening night anticipation has fizzled, it's becoming painstakingly clear that it's very probable that this is the worst U2 show ever, but still better than most other's offerings...  that likely has more to do with the state of music these days...  I mean, 'Acrobat' sounds better live than I thought that it would, but if 'Achtung Baby's weakest track is your highlight then you've got problems...:-)

So Acrobat is a weak song and U2 are only good live these days because of the state that music is in...

I think something is painstakingly clear alright...

I think the earlier post was spot on.  "Acrobat" IS a weak song, and there's a reason that the band has avoided playing it all these years.  I mean, if you've listened to a ton of live shows over the years, then yeah, it's different, and from an academic standpoint, hearing "Acrobat" is cool, but I'd rather hear just about any other track from AB.  And I've got to think there are a lot of people scratching their heads when that song is played.
This is definitely a post that could use an "IMO", instead of an "IS", like you're stating a known fact. Because your opinion certainly differs A LOT, from the majority of fans on Twitter that listed Acrobat as the song they'd most like to hear live, myself included.

And insinuating that you know why the band hasn't played Acrobat before, because it's weak. I have know idea why they haven't played it. I'd assume it's because it's very dark, & Bono hasn't felt like he wanted to immerse himself in those thoughts, night after night, if it was a concert regular. Or it might be because it's very difficult to play (I assume, I'm not a musician) - just look at all bthe guys concentration during that song, & Edges face melting solo. Just assumptions though.

IMO, UTEOTW is the weakest song on Achtung Baby -- not that it is a bad song, but someone has to finish last -- and that thing has been played to death and back over the last 25 years.

I'm not a musician either, but I seem to remember speculation that it is in fact a difficult song to perform. It is actually relatively basic when you think about it, which means they don't have anywhere to hide. Edge isn't playing over Dallas and other piped-in guitar parts, Bono's vocals aren't treated, there are no backing vocals to speak of at all, the the rhythm section is out front.

There is nowhere to hide. I just don't think they ever really found a spot for it on ZooTV and there were so many other more popular choices on Achtung Baby, it just got pushed aside.