Author Topic: Have U2 become all about the money?  (Read 12028 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wolf

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 214
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #135 on: June 30, 2015, 11:32:24 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
The bigger struggle with U2 has been staying a fan DESPITE their post-Pop output. Vertigo and 360 were poor tours in support of poor albums 9it's all relative of course), SOI has redeemed them to some degree. The recent shows I saw in LA were definitely better than their previous 2 tours, but still way too many warhorses and possibly the worst encores of any recent tour.

I loved the Vertigo and 360 tours. I thought the 360 tour was the best thing they had ever done in terms of overall stage design, performance and songs played. HTDAAB is my 3rd favorite U2 album after Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby. HTDAAB is also the winner of 9 Grammy awards including Album Of The Year. No other album has won more Grammy awards than How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb.

My own take: I've been a fan and concert goer since Zoo TV.  Vertigo was probably the last U2 album/tour I really felt passionate about.  Part of this might be their declining powers--in particular, I found NLOTH to be the worst thing they'd ever done.  Part of this might just be me getting older, a little jaded, a little less impressed with stadium and arena concert flash.  I saw 360 early in the tour, and while I was happy to see it, it was my least favorite show of theirs.  It left me disinclined to see them on the return leg, which was a first for me.  I+E is an improvement--I like the new material more--but there is a weird distance I feel that makes it impossible to enjoy it the same way I used to.  The high ticket costs and diminishing returns mean I likely won't see another show on the return leg for this, either.
The band basically acknowledged this by turning the show into a heritage act to save the latter part of the tour. Maybe if I had not that much to compare it to, I may have liked 360 better but no dice. I'm glad some people liked that tour but for me, it never cut it. I think SOI is their best (good to approaching very good) output in 2000. I'm hoping MSG will once again bring the magic fully back for me!!

           Tour did not need to be saved. It is the highest grossing, highest attended tour in the history of music. Over $736 million grossed and 7.3 million tickets sold at 110 shows setting records everywhere. The last American leg was delayed by a year because of Bono's back injury, but the tickets were purchased in December 2009 by over 90% of the fans based on the set list from the first American leg which had the majority of the songs come from their post 2000 work, far from being a heritage show. The last leg was reconfigured and celebrated the 20th anniversary of the Achtung Baby. No Line On The Horizon was over two years old by that point anyway.

          Check out the Rose Bowl 360 setlist. That is far from being a "heritage set list" for U2. U2 has never been more in demand or popular as a concert attraction on the 360 tour. No artist has ever been that successful on the road.

Offline ultravioletlight

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 771
  • Chicago, IL
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #136 on: June 30, 2015, 11:40:10 PM »
I think this thread is ridiculous. It's about supply and demand. If people are buying tickets for $300, then they should charge $300. What's the problem?

When U2 performs for the last time ever (likely in Dublin), those tickets will be astronomically high. Up into the thousands. Should we be upset at that? No, because thats what people will pay.

And guess what, we'll be the ones flying into Dublin and paying up to get in.

Offline Mr. Red

  • Headache in a Suitcase
  • *
  • Posts: 312
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #137 on: July 01, 2015, 06:39:24 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The bigger struggle with U2 has been staying a fan DESPITE their post-Pop output. Vertigo and 360 were poor tours in support of poor albums 9it's all relative of course), SOI has redeemed them to some degree. The recent shows I saw in LA were definitely better than their previous 2 tours, but still way too many warhorses and possibly the worst encores of any recent tour.

I loved the Vertigo and 360 tours. I thought the 360 tour was the best thing they had ever done in terms of overall stage design, performance and songs played. HTDAAB is my 3rd favorite U2 album after Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby. HTDAAB is also the winner of 9 Grammy awards including Album Of The Year. No other album has won more Grammy awards than How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb.

My own take: I've been a fan and concert goer since Zoo TV.  Vertigo was probably the last U2 album/tour I really felt passionate about.  Part of this might be their declining powers--in particular, I found NLOTH to be the worst thing they'd ever done.  Part of this might just be me getting older, a little jaded, a little less impressed with stadium and arena concert flash.  I saw 360 early in the tour, and while I was happy to see it, it was my least favorite show of theirs.  It left me disinclined to see them on the return leg, which was a first for me.  I+E is an improvement like the new material more--but there is a weird distance I feel that makes it impossible to enjoy it the same way I used to.  The high ticket costs and diminishing returns mean I likely won't see another show on the return leg for this, either.
The band basically acknowledged this by turning the show into a heritage act to save the latter part of the tour. Maybe if I had not that much to compare it to, I may have liked 360 better but no dice. I'm glad some people liked that tour but for me, it never cut it. I think SOI is their best (good to approaching very good) output in 2000. I'm hoping MSG will once again bring the magic fully back for me!!

           Tour did not need to be saved. It is the highest grossing, highest attended tour in the history of music. Over $736 million grossed and 7.3 million tickets sold at 110 shows setting records everywhere. The last American leg was delayed by a year because of Bono's back injury, but the tickets were purchased in December 2009 by over 90% of the fans based on the set list from the first American leg which had the majority of the songs come from their post 2000 work, far from being a heritage show. The last leg was reconfigured and celebrated the 20th anniversary of the Achtung Baby. No Line On The Horizon was over two years old by that point anyway.

          Check out the Rose Bowl 360 setlist. That is far from being a "heritage set list" for U2. U2 has never been more in demand or popular as a concert attraction on the 360 tour. No artist has ever been that successful on the road.

Once again Wolf, you are wonderful at pulling out numbers whether it's U2's number of Grammys, how much they grossed last tour etc. We already know they are in high demand. As someone else mentioned, those things are unimportant. You pulled one paragraph from my text which takes the entire thought out of context. I was speaking from a fans perspective who has been with the band for 30+ years. You don't need to site the history, I'm well aware of it. It seems to me that you may have not been to shows pre 2000?? When comparing 360 with other tours in my experience, it was subpar. Much like all of their post 2000 work with the exception of some tunes which I sited. NLOTH was a failure with no identity (especially live) and the band has fully acknowledged that. You can believe that they "reconfigured" the show for whatever reason but that's not true. They were forced to pull out the greatest hits setlist and abandoned the NLOTH tunes to keep the causal fans happy BECAUSE the tickets were already sold and the new tunes failed live. This is fine, but just not for me. In the future, if you want to be more insightful, maybe you should take posts in their full context and it may provoke more thought on your part and not just become a defense by using numbers, statistics, etc. That is not what's important and does not fully define success. That is what a forum is for. I think you have some decent things to say but it comes across as always being defensive and supporting the band unconditionally. I feel its great to love the band and but also talk about things that may have disappointed us, or whatever. This is just my opinion. Much like my opinion on the 360 greatest hits tour.   

iehomecoming

  • Guest
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #138 on: July 01, 2015, 08:04:06 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The bigger struggle with U2 has been staying a fan DESPITE their post-Pop output. Vertigo and 360 were poor tours in support of poor albums 9it's all relative of course), SOI has redeemed them to some degree. The recent shows I saw in LA were definitely better than their previous 2 tours, but still way too many warhorses and possibly the worst encores of any recent tour.

I loved the Vertigo and 360 tours. I thought the 360 tour was the best thing they had ever done in terms of overall stage design, performance and songs played. HTDAAB is my 3rd favorite U2 album after Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby. HTDAAB is also the winner of 9 Grammy awards including Album Of The Year. No other album has won more Grammy awards than How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb.

Each to their own then I guess eh ?

Htdaab winning Grammies doesn't mean a thing. It's about ones own personal taste.

The fact that it won more Grammies than AB and jt says more about the Grammies than the album's.

360 was an awful silly distracting stage fesign, iny opinion of course, regardless of what numbers say.

As the old saying goes, "small minds think in numbers"


Offline wolf

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 214
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #139 on: July 01, 2015, 08:06:13 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The bigger struggle with U2 has been staying a fan DESPITE their post-Pop output. Vertigo and 360 were poor tours in support of poor albums 9it's all relative of course), SOI has redeemed them to some degree. The recent shows I saw in LA were definitely better than their previous 2 tours, but still way too many warhorses and possibly the worst encores of any recent tour.

I loved the Vertigo and 360 tours. I thought the 360 tour was the best thing they had ever done in terms of overall stage design, performance and songs played. HTDAAB is my 3rd favorite U2 album after Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby. HTDAAB is also the winner of 9 Grammy awards including Album Of The Year. No other album has won more Grammy awards than How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb.

My own take: I've been a fan and concert goer since Zoo TV.  Vertigo was probably the last U2 album/tour I really felt passionate about.  Part of this might be their declining powers--in particular, I found NLOTH to be the worst thing they'd ever done.  Part of this might just be me getting older, a little jaded, a little less impressed with stadium and arena concert flash.  I saw 360 early in the tour, and while I was happy to see it, it was my least favorite show of theirs.  It left me disinclined to see them on the return leg, which was a first for me.  I+E is an improvement like the new material more--but there is a weird distance I feel that makes it impossible to enjoy it the same way I used to.  The high ticket costs and diminishing returns mean I likely won't see another show on the return leg for this, either.
The band basically acknowledged this by turning the show into a heritage act to save the latter part of the tour. Maybe if I had not that much to compare it to, I may have liked 360 better but no dice. I'm glad some people liked that tour but for me, it never cut it. I think SOI is their best (good to approaching very good) output in 2000. I'm hoping MSG will once again bring the magic fully back for me!!

           Tour did not need to be saved. It is the highest grossing, highest attended tour in the history of music. Over $736 million grossed and 7.3 million tickets sold at 110 shows setting records everywhere. The last American leg was delayed by a year because of Bono's back injury, but the tickets were purchased in December 2009 by over 90% of the fans based on the set list from the first American leg which had the majority of the songs come from their post 2000 work, far from being a heritage show. The last leg was reconfigured and celebrated the 20th anniversary of the Achtung Baby. No Line On The Horizon was over two years old by that point anyway.

          Check out the Rose Bowl 360 setlist. That is far from being a "heritage set list" for U2. U2 has never been more in demand or popular as a concert attraction on the 360 tour. No artist has ever been that successful on the road.

Once again Wolf, you are wonderful at pulling out numbers whether it's U2's number of Grammys, how much they grossed last tour etc. We already know they are in high demand. As someone else mentioned, those things are unimportant. .
               Well, the band have always considered it important and I'm happy to see the music I love be so successful.

Quote

You pulled one paragraph from my text which takes the entire thought out of context. I was speaking from a fans perspective who has been with the band for 30+ years. You don't need to site the history, I'm well aware of it. It seems to me that you may have not been to shows pre 2000?? When comparing 360 with other tours in my experience, it was subpar. Much like all of their post 2000 work with the exception of some tunes which I sited.

I have been a U2 fan since 1987. I saw ZOO TV 5 times in 1992, Philadelphia March 10 Spectrum, Hershey Park Stadium August 8, R.F.K. Stadium August 16 Washington D.C. and September 2, 3, 1992 at Veterans Stadium in Philadelphia. I listened to them rehearse every night outside Hershey Park Stadium in the first week of August 1992.

Popmart I saw two shows at Giants Stadium and one show at Franklin Field Philadelphia for a total of 3. So I have seen 9 shows Pre-2000 for your information.

Elevation Tour - 6 shows

Vertigo Tour 5 shows including one stadium show in Dublin

360 tour 3 shows.

I didn't get to see the Joshua Tree Tour in 1987 although I came close. I'm unsure if I even new who U2 were in 1984. But I have been a fan for 28 years and seen over 20 shows.

Quote
NLOTH was a failure with no identity (especially live) and the band has fully acknowledged that.

Well, for your information, NLOTH was 7th biggest selling album of 2009 worldwide. In the United States alone it was the 22nd biggest selling album. How is that a failure?

Quote
You can believe that they "reconfigured" the show for whatever reason but that's not true. They were forced to pull out the greatest hits setlist and abandoned the NLOTH tunes to keep the causal fans happy BECAUSE the tickets were already sold and the new tunes failed live.

Really, and how do YOU know that is not true? How was the Rose Bowl setlist a failure? Please explain that to us? What do you think all the U2 fans who purchased tickets for the 2nd leg were buying tickets for? They were buying tickets for the show that was played in 2009 and the Rose Bowl show everyone saw on youtube where the band played more songs post 2000! What the band played in 2009 and what fans knew they were buying tickets for in December 2009 are indisputable facts.

It was a SURPRISE to EVERYONE when the band opened the last shows of the tour with a setlist that was heavy on Achtung Baby and light on NLOTH. That is not what people were expecting to see though nor what they had actually purchased tickets for back in December 2009.

        If the new tunes failed live as you say, why is the Rose Bowl show the one that was filmed and sold as a prime example of the tour?

No one forced U2 to play the old songs from Achtung Baby on the last 25 shows of the tour. In fact, on the second leg in 2010, the band played unreleased songs like Stingray Guitar which opened the 2010 shows, Glastonberry, North Star, Every Breaking Wave, and Mercy. No greatest hits performance at all with those shows. The idea that the 360 tour on the whole was a greatest hits tour is a MYTH. There were 110 shows on the tour, and only the last 25 could even be debated as falling under that definition.

Offline wolf

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 214
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #140 on: July 01, 2015, 08:16:20 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
The bigger struggle with U2 has been staying a fan DESPITE their post-Pop output. Vertigo and 360 were poor tours in support of poor albums 9it's all relative of course), SOI has redeemed them to some degree. The recent shows I saw in LA were definitely better than their previous 2 tours, but still way too many warhorses and possibly the worst encores of any recent tour.

I loved the Vertigo and 360 tours. I thought the 360 tour was the best thing they had ever done in terms of overall stage design, performance and songs played. HTDAAB is my 3rd favorite U2 album after Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby. HTDAAB is also the winner of 9 Grammy awards including Album Of The Year. No other album has won more Grammy awards than How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb.

Each to their own then I guess eh ?

Htdaab winning Grammies doesn't mean a thing. It's about ones own personal taste.

The fact that it won more Grammies than AB and jt says more about the Grammies than the album's.

360 was an awful silly distracting stage fesign, iny opinion of course, regardless of what numbers say.

As the old saying goes, "small minds think in numbers"

The numbers add something other than my own personal opinion. It shows that a large number of people felt the same way I do. You can find a U2 fan somewhere that has slagged off any tour the band has ever done. But that's their lone opinion.

     My friends and I agreed 360 was the best thing the band ever did. For the 2,000 people who got into the inner ring, they got to experience the band walk around them and over them for two hours. A very unique concert experience allowing thousands of fans to have front row experience if only for a few seconds.

The Grammy awards are voted on by the academy which consist of musicians, song writers, song producers and other people involved in the production of recorded music. Winning the awards is not meaningless and is a reflection of the taste and opinions of the academy. U2 were thrilled to win and I was thrilled to seem them win.

Trash the academy and the Grammy's all you want, but U2 were thrilled to win these awards and I'm happy that they did.

If I thought so less of the bands material and live performances for the past 15 years, I would not be really interested in going on a message board and talking about that fact. I like to talk about things I enjoy and like, not things I find substandard or poor.

iehomecoming

  • Guest
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #141 on: July 01, 2015, 08:36:14 AM »
"The numbers add something other than my own personal opinion. It shows that a large number of people felt the same way I do. "

People feeling the same way YOU DO has no impact on how I feel.

I was at a 360 show, I didn't feel the same way about it you do.

Plus it's all relative, 360 was U2's worst tour (in my opinion), doesn't mean it was the worst tour by any band.

"You can find a U2 fan somewhere that has slagged off any tour the band has ever done. But that's their lone opinion."

My opinion is the ONLY one that matters to me. When I go see a show, it's how much I enjoyed that matters to me, not what others thought.


"My friends and I agreed 360 was the best thing the band ever did. "

My friends and I never go eat Sushi because I don't care for it.

"For the 2,000 people who got into the inner ring, they got to experience the band walk around them and over them for two hours. A very unique concert experience allowing thousands of fans to have front row experience if only for a few seconds."

And ???  You don't get "personal taste" and "opinion" I think.

"The Grammy awards are voted on by the academy which consist of musicians, song writers, song producers and other people involved in the production of recorded music. Winning the awards is not meaningless and is a reflection of the taste and opinions of the academy. U2 were thrilled to win and I was thrilled to seem them win."

The Grammies are meaningless to my enjoyment of U2s music Or anyone else's music. I think HTDAAB is their worst album yet it won more awards than JT and AB.

AB was beaten by an album of Clapton acoustic songs, is that Clapton album better than AB ? Yes to some, no for me. Regarldess of what "the academy" says.


"If I thought so less of the bands material and live performances for the past 15 years, I would not be really interested in going on a message board and talking about that fact."

Relativity. Opinion. Personal Taste.

Have you seen a SOI show yet ? What did you think RELATIVE to others ? To form an opinion you really have to "bethere"


Offline Johnny Feathers

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,027
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #142 on: July 01, 2015, 08:37:53 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
To form an opinion you really have to "bethere"



Ding ding ding ding ding!

Offline Mr. Red

  • Headache in a Suitcase
  • *
  • Posts: 312
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #143 on: July 01, 2015, 08:58:59 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
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
The bigger struggle with U2 has been staying a fan DESPITE their post-Pop output. Vertigo and 360 were poor tours in support of poor albums 9it's all relative of course), SOI has redeemed them to some degree. The recent shows I saw in LA were definitely better than their previous 2 tours, but still way too many warhorses and possibly the worst encores of any recent tour.

I loved the Vertigo and 360 tours. I thought the 360 tour was the best thing they had ever done in terms of overall stage design, performance and songs played. HTDAAB is my 3rd favorite U2 album after Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby. HTDAAB is also the winner of 9 Grammy awards including Album Of The Year. No other album has won more Grammy awards than How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb.

My own take: I've been a fan and concert goer since Zoo TV.  Vertigo was probably the last U2 album/tour I really felt passionate about.  Part of this might be their declining powers--in particular, I found NLOTH to be the worst thing they'd ever done.  Part of this might just be me getting older, a little jaded, a little less impressed with stadium and arena concert flash.  I saw 360 early in the tour, and while I was happy to see it, it was my least favorite show of theirs.  It left me disinclined to see them on the return leg, which was a first for me.  I+E is an improvement like the new material more--but there is a weird distance I feel that makes it impossible to enjoy it the same way I used to.  The high ticket costs and diminishing returns mean I likely won't see another show on the return leg for this, either.
The band basically acknowledged this by turning the show into a heritage act to save the latter part of the tour. Maybe if I had not that much to compare it to, I may have liked 360 better but no dice. I'm glad some people liked that tour but for me, it never cut it. I think SOI is their best (good to approaching very good) output in 2000. I'm hoping MSG will once again bring the magic fully back for me!!

           Tour did not need to be saved. It is the highest grossing, highest attended tour in the history of music. Over $736 million grossed and 7.3 million tickets sold at 110 shows setting records everywhere. The last American leg was delayed by a year because of Bono's back injury, but the tickets were purchased in December 2009 by over 90% of the fans based on the set list from the first American leg which had the majority of the songs come from their post 2000 work, far from being a heritage show. The last leg was reconfigured and celebrated the 20th anniversary of the Achtung Baby. No Line On The Horizon was over two years old by that point anyway.

          Check out the Rose Bowl 360 setlist. That is far from being a "heritage set list" for U2. U2 has never been more in demand or popular as a concert attraction on the 360 tour. No artist has ever been that successful on the road.

Once again Wolf, you are wonderful at pulling out numbers whether it's U2's number of Grammys, how much they grossed last tour etc. We already know they are in high demand. As someone else mentioned, those things are unimportant. .
               Well, the band have always considered it important and I'm happy to see the music I love be so successful.

Quote

You pulled one paragraph from my text which takes the entire thought out of context. I was speaking from a fans perspective who has been with the band for 30+ years. You don't need to site the history, I'm well aware of it. It seems to me that you may have not been to shows pre 2000?? When comparing 360 with other tours in my experience, it was subpar. Much like all of their post 2000 work with the exception of some tunes which I sited.

I have been a U2 fan since 1987. I saw ZOO TV 5 times in 1992, Philadelphia March 10 Spectrum, Hershey Park Stadium August 8, R.F.K. Stadium August 16 Washington D.C. and September 2, 3, 1992 at Veterans Stadium in Philadelphia. I listened to them rehearse every night outside Hershey Park Stadium in the first week of August 1992.

Popmart I saw two shows at Giants Stadium and one show at Franklin Field Philadelphia for a total of 3. So I have seen 9 shows Pre-2000 for your information.

Elevation Tour - 6 shows

Vertigo Tour 5 shows including one stadium show in Dublin

360 tour 3 shows.

I didn't get to see the Joshua Tree Tour in 1987 although I came close. I'm unsure if I even new who U2 were in 1984. But I have been a fan for 28 years and seen over 20 shows.

Quote
NLOTH was a failure with no identity (especially live) and the band has fully acknowledged that.

Well, for your information, NLOTH was 7th biggest selling album of 2009 worldwide. In the United States alone it was the 22nd biggest selling album. How is that a failure?

Quote
You can believe that they "reconfigured" the show for whatever reason but that's not true. They were forced to pull out the greatest hits setlist and abandoned the NLOTH tunes to keep the causal fans happy BECAUSE the tickets were already sold and the new tunes failed live.

Really, and how do YOU know that is not true? How was the Rose Bowl setlist a failure? Please explain that to us? What do you think all the U2 fans who purchased tickets for the 2nd leg were buying tickets for? They were buying tickets for the show that was played in 2009 and the Rose Bowl show everyone saw on youtube where the band played more songs post 2000! What the band played in 2009 and what fans knew they were buying tickets for in December 2009 are indisputable facts.

It was a SURPRISE to EVERYONE when the band opened the last shows of the tour with a setlist that was heavy on Achtung Baby and light on NLOTH. That is not what people were expecting to see though nor what they had actually purchased tickets for back in December 2009.

        If the new tunes failed live as you say, why is the Rose Bowl show the one that was filmed and sold as a prime example of the tour?

No one forced U2 to play the old songs from Achtung Baby on the last 25 shows of the tour. In fact, on the second leg in 2010, the band played unreleased songs like Stingray Guitar which opened the 2010 shows, Glastonberry, North Star, Every Breaking Wave, and Mercy. No greatest hits performance at all with those shows. The idea that the 360 tour on the whole was a greatest hits tour is a MYTH. There were 110 shows on the tour, and only the last 25 could even be debated as falling under that definition.

Ok..but again, you miss the point. And again, you get defensive with all these ridiculous numbers, facts, etc. When I talk about the band, it's relative to their own output... period... and my feelings about their music (not the masses) That's what I'm comparing to. Not other bands because U2 holds such a higher standard for me. So, tell us why the 360 tour resonated so much for you compared to all the other shows,  other than the band "walking" around you. What's your feelings about there music? Do you feel they have been fresh and innovative post 2000? Take down your defenses and contribute to the forum in a thoughtful way. We don't need to be reminded about grammys, bono's back surgery, their gross profits, etc. We can go to Wikipedia for that. C'mom, give it a whirl!!

Let me give you a little example: When I say NLOTH had no identity that's my feeling about that record. MOS is the only song that resonates with me. Your response is... NLOTH was the 7th biggest selling album in 2009.....how is that a failure?  Well, ok. To be expected from the biggest band on the planet. Of course people bought the record no matter what. That does not counter the opinion that it was a failure for U2 standards and the songs were dropped during the tour because of it. They were terrible live. Even the band in retrospect doesn't support the record. So, the 7th biggest selling album holds zero meaning.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2015, 09:19:26 AM by Mr. Red »

Offline So Cruel

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,163
  • it ain't no sin to be glad that you're alive
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #144 on: July 01, 2015, 09:32:58 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
To form an opinion you really have to "bethere"



Ding ding ding ding ding!

haha, as I'm reading Wolf's posts i'm sitting thinking "wait, i've heard this all before"

Offline Mr. Red

  • Headache in a Suitcase
  • *
  • Posts: 312
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #145 on: July 01, 2015, 09:39:30 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
To form an opinion you really have to "bethere"



Ding ding ding ding ding!

haha, as I'm reading Wolf's posts i'm sitting thinking "wait, i've heard this all before"

So Cruel, could you please validate and confirm the statement "wait, i've heard this all before" with some Wikipedia facts. Just the facts please, I'm not interested in your feelings or well thought out opinions. I only want you to defend that statement!! All of my friends use the statement "i've heard this all before" so, I feel validated now!!
« Last Edit: July 01, 2015, 09:42:07 AM by Mr. Red »

Offline wolf

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 214
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #146 on: July 01, 2015, 09:43:13 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
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
The bigger struggle with U2 has been staying a fan DESPITE their post-Pop output. Vertigo and 360 were poor tours in support of poor albums 9it's all relative of course), SOI has redeemed them to some degree. The recent shows I saw in LA were definitely better than their previous 2 tours, but still way too many warhorses and possibly the worst encores of any recent tour.

I loved the Vertigo and 360 tours. I thought the 360 tour was the best thing they had ever done in terms of overall stage design, performance and songs played. HTDAAB is my 3rd favorite U2 album after Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby. HTDAAB is also the winner of 9 Grammy awards including Album Of The Year. No other album has won more Grammy awards than How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb.

My own take: I've been a fan and concert goer since Zoo TV.  Vertigo was probably the last U2 album/tour I really felt passionate about.  Part of this might be their declining powers--in particular, I found NLOTH to be the worst thing they'd ever done.  Part of this might just be me getting older, a little jaded, a little less impressed with stadium and arena concert flash.  I saw 360 early in the tour, and while I was happy to see it, it was my least favorite show of theirs.  It left me disinclined to see them on the return leg, which was a first for me.  I+E is an improvement like the new material more--but there is a weird distance I feel that makes it impossible to enjoy it the same way I used to.  The high ticket costs and diminishing returns mean I likely won't see another show on the return leg for this, either.
The band basically acknowledged this by turning the show into a heritage act to save the latter part of the tour. Maybe if I had not that much to compare it to, I may have liked 360 better but no dice. I'm glad some people liked that tour but for me, it never cut it. I think SOI is their best (good to approaching very good) output in 2000. I'm hoping MSG will once again bring the magic fully back for me!!

           Tour did not need to be saved. It is the highest grossing, highest attended tour in the history of music. Over $736 million grossed and 7.3 million tickets sold at 110 shows setting records everywhere. The last American leg was delayed by a year because of Bono's back injury, but the tickets were purchased in December 2009 by over 90% of the fans based on the set list from the first American leg which had the majority of the songs come from their post 2000 work, far from being a heritage show. The last leg was reconfigured and celebrated the 20th anniversary of the Achtung Baby. No Line On The Horizon was over two years old by that point anyway.

          Check out the Rose Bowl 360 setlist. That is far from being a "heritage set list" for U2. U2 has never been more in demand or popular as a concert attraction on the 360 tour. No artist has ever been that successful on the road.

Once again Wolf, you are wonderful at pulling out numbers whether it's U2's number of Grammys, how much they grossed last tour etc. We already know they are in high demand. As someone else mentioned, those things are unimportant. .
               Well, the band have always considered it important and I'm happy to see the music I love be so successful.

Quote

You pulled one paragraph from my text which takes the entire thought out of context. I was speaking from a fans perspective who has been with the band for 30+ years. You don't need to site the history, I'm well aware of it. It seems to me that you may have not been to shows pre 2000?? When comparing 360 with other tours in my experience, it was subpar. Much like all of their post 2000 work with the exception of some tunes which I sited.

I have been a U2 fan since 1987. I saw ZOO TV 5 times in 1992, Philadelphia March 10 Spectrum, Hershey Park Stadium August 8, R.F.K. Stadium August 16 Washington D.C. and September 2, 3, 1992 at Veterans Stadium in Philadelphia. I listened to them rehearse every night outside Hershey Park Stadium in the first week of August 1992.

Popmart I saw two shows at Giants Stadium and one show at Franklin Field Philadelphia for a total of 3. So I have seen 9 shows Pre-2000 for your information.

Elevation Tour - 6 shows

Vertigo Tour 5 shows including one stadium show in Dublin

360 tour 3 shows.

I didn't get to see the Joshua Tree Tour in 1987 although I came close. I'm unsure if I even new who U2 were in 1984. But I have been a fan for 28 years and seen over 20 shows.

Quote
NLOTH was a failure with no identity (especially live) and the band has fully acknowledged that.

Well, for your information, NLOTH was 7th biggest selling album of 2009 worldwide. In the United States alone it was the 22nd biggest selling album. How is that a failure?

Quote
You can believe that they "reconfigured" the show for whatever reason but that's not true. They were forced to pull out the greatest hits setlist and abandoned the NLOTH tunes to keep the causal fans happy BECAUSE the tickets were already sold and the new tunes failed live.

Really, and how do YOU know that is not true? How was the Rose Bowl setlist a failure? Please explain that to us? What do you think all the U2 fans who purchased tickets for the 2nd leg were buying tickets for? They were buying tickets for the show that was played in 2009 and the Rose Bowl show everyone saw on youtube where the band played more songs post 2000! What the band played in 2009 and what fans knew they were buying tickets for in December 2009 are indisputable facts.

It was a SURPRISE to EVERYONE when the band opened the last shows of the tour with a setlist that was heavy on Achtung Baby and light on NLOTH. That is not what people were expecting to see though nor what they had actually purchased tickets for back in December 2009.

        If the new tunes failed live as you say, why is the Rose Bowl show the one that was filmed and sold as a prime example of the tour?

No one forced U2 to play the old songs from Achtung Baby on the last 25 shows of the tour. In fact, on the second leg in 2010, the band played unreleased songs like Stingray Guitar which opened the 2010 shows, Glastonberry, North Star, Every Breaking Wave, and Mercy. No greatest hits performance at all with those shows. The idea that the 360 tour on the whole was a greatest hits tour is a MYTH. There were 110 shows on the tour, and only the last 25 could even be debated as falling under that definition.

Ok..but again, you miss the point. And again, you get defensive with all these ridiculous numbers, facts, etc. When I talk about the band, it's relative to their own output... period... and my feelings about their music (not the masses) That's what I'm comparing to. Not other bands because U2 holds such a higher standard for me. So, tell us why the 360 tour resonated so much for you compared to all the other shows,  other than the band "walking" around you. What's your feelings about there music? Do you feel they have been fresh and innovative post 2000? Take down your defenses and contribute to the forum in a thoughtful way. We don't need to be reminded about grammys, bono's back surgery, their gross profits, etc. We can go to Wikipedia for that. C'mom, give it a whirl!!

Let me give you a little example: When I say NLOTH had no identity that's my feeling about that record. MOS is the only song that resonates with me. Your response is... NLOTH was the 7th biggest selling album in 2009.....how is that a failure?  Well, ok. To be expected from the biggest band on the planet. Of course people bought the record no matter what. That does not counter the opinion that it was a failure for U2 standards and the songs were dropped during the tour because of it. They were terrible live. Even the band in retrospect doesn't support the record. So, the 7th biggest selling album holds zero meaning.

                Well, if the songs were such a failure live, why did they wait until the last 25 shows of the tour to drop all these songs? Again, your basing your entire opinion of the 360 tour on what they did on the last leg. Not really accurate in my opinion.

                Plus if all it took was to have U2's name on the ticket and U2's name on the album for the album to sell well, POP and Popmart would have been massive successes. That album and tour sold relatively poorly compared to 360 and NLOTH.

              Yes, I do feel the band has been fresh and innovative since 2000. Overall they have in my opinion written their best songs post 2000 than before. The band are smarter, more intelligent, and knows what works better live for them in terms of energy and pacing of the show. I think they did a magnificent job with the new songs. I thought the songs that sounded the best live on 360 were the ones from NLOTH. They sounded better than what was on record and that is always a sign of a well performed song.

Offline wolf

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 214
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #147 on: July 01, 2015, 09:45:12 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
To form an opinion you really have to "bethere"



Ding ding ding ding ding!

haha, as I'm reading Wolf's posts i'm sitting thinking "wait, i've heard this all before"

So Cruel, could you please validate and confirm the statement "wait, i've heard this all before" with some Wikipedia facts. Just the facts please, I'm not interested in your feelings or well thought out opinions. I only want you to defend that statement!! All of my friends use the statement "i've heard this all before" so, I feel validated now!!

Look, I'm free to post my opinion and if it includes stuff you don't like, remember, you don't have to read it. But don't tell me or anyone else what their allowed to post.

Offline So Cruel

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,163
  • it ain't no sin to be glad that you're alive
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #148 on: July 01, 2015, 10:03:59 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
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
The bigger struggle with U2 has been staying a fan DESPITE their post-Pop output. Vertigo and 360 were poor tours in support of poor albums 9it's all relative of course), SOI has redeemed them to some degree. The recent shows I saw in LA were definitely better than their previous 2 tours, but still way too many warhorses and possibly the worst encores of any recent tour.

I loved the Vertigo and 360 tours. I thought the 360 tour was the best thing they had ever done in terms of overall stage design, performance and songs played. HTDAAB is my 3rd favorite U2 album after Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby. HTDAAB is also the winner of 9 Grammy awards including Album Of The Year. No other album has won more Grammy awards than How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb.

My own take: I've been a fan and concert goer since Zoo TV.  Vertigo was probably the last U2 album/tour I really felt passionate about.  Part of this might be their declining powers--in particular, I found NLOTH to be the worst thing they'd ever done.  Part of this might just be me getting older, a little jaded, a little less impressed with stadium and arena concert flash.  I saw 360 early in the tour, and while I was happy to see it, it was my least favorite show of theirs.  It left me disinclined to see them on the return leg, which was a first for me.  I+E is an improvement like the new material more--but there is a weird distance I feel that makes it impossible to enjoy it the same way I used to.  The high ticket costs and diminishing returns mean I likely won't see another show on the return leg for this, either.
The band basically acknowledged this by turning the show into a heritage act to save the latter part of the tour. Maybe if I had not that much to compare it to, I may have liked 360 better but no dice. I'm glad some people liked that tour but for me, it never cut it. I think SOI is their best (good to approaching very good) output in 2000. I'm hoping MSG will once again bring the magic fully back for me!!

           Tour did not need to be saved. It is the highest grossing, highest attended tour in the history of music. Over $736 million grossed and 7.3 million tickets sold at 110 shows setting records everywhere. The last American leg was delayed by a year because of Bono's back injury, but the tickets were purchased in December 2009 by over 90% of the fans based on the set list from the first American leg which had the majority of the songs come from their post 2000 work, far from being a heritage show. The last leg was reconfigured and celebrated the 20th anniversary of the Achtung Baby. No Line On The Horizon was over two years old by that point anyway.

          Check out the Rose Bowl 360 setlist. That is far from being a "heritage set list" for U2. U2 has never been more in demand or popular as a concert attraction on the 360 tour. No artist has ever been that successful on the road.

Once again Wolf, you are wonderful at pulling out numbers whether it's U2's number of Grammys, how much they grossed last tour etc. We already know they are in high demand. As someone else mentioned, those things are unimportant. .
               Well, the band have always considered it important and I'm happy to see the music I love be so successful.

Quote

You pulled one paragraph from my text which takes the entire thought out of context. I was speaking from a fans perspective who has been with the band for 30+ years. You don't need to site the history, I'm well aware of it. It seems to me that you may have not been to shows pre 2000?? When comparing 360 with other tours in my experience, it was subpar. Much like all of their post 2000 work with the exception of some tunes which I sited.

I have been a U2 fan since 1987. I saw ZOO TV 5 times in 1992, Philadelphia March 10 Spectrum, Hershey Park Stadium August 8, R.F.K. Stadium August 16 Washington D.C. and September 2, 3, 1992 at Veterans Stadium in Philadelphia. I listened to them rehearse every night outside Hershey Park Stadium in the first week of August 1992.

Popmart I saw two shows at Giants Stadium and one show at Franklin Field Philadelphia for a total of 3. So I have seen 9 shows Pre-2000 for your information.

Elevation Tour - 6 shows

Vertigo Tour 5 shows including one stadium show in Dublin

360 tour 3 shows.

I didn't get to see the Joshua Tree Tour in 1987 although I came close. I'm unsure if I even new who U2 were in 1984. But I have been a fan for 28 years and seen over 20 shows.

Quote
NLOTH was a failure with no identity (especially live) and the band has fully acknowledged that.

Well, for your information, NLOTH was 7th biggest selling album of 2009 worldwide. In the United States alone it was the 22nd biggest selling album. How is that a failure?

Quote
You can believe that they "reconfigured" the show for whatever reason but that's not true. They were forced to pull out the greatest hits setlist and abandoned the NLOTH tunes to keep the causal fans happy BECAUSE the tickets were already sold and the new tunes failed live.

Really, and how do YOU know that is not true? How was the Rose Bowl setlist a failure? Please explain that to us? What do you think all the U2 fans who purchased tickets for the 2nd leg were buying tickets for? They were buying tickets for the show that was played in 2009 and the Rose Bowl show everyone saw on youtube where the band played more songs post 2000! What the band played in 2009 and what fans knew they were buying tickets for in December 2009 are indisputable facts.

It was a SURPRISE to EVERYONE when the band opened the last shows of the tour with a setlist that was heavy on Achtung Baby and light on NLOTH. That is not what people were expecting to see though nor what they had actually purchased tickets for back in December 2009.

        If the new tunes failed live as you say, why is the Rose Bowl show the one that was filmed and sold as a prime example of the tour?

No one forced U2 to play the old songs from Achtung Baby on the last 25 shows of the tour. In fact, on the second leg in 2010, the band played unreleased songs like Stingray Guitar which opened the 2010 shows, Glastonberry, North Star, Every Breaking Wave, and Mercy. No greatest hits performance at all with those shows. The idea that the 360 tour on the whole was a greatest hits tour is a MYTH. There were 110 shows on the tour, and only the last 25 could even be debated as falling under that definition.

Ok..but again, you miss the point. And again, you get defensive with all these ridiculous numbers, facts, etc. When I talk about the band, it's relative to their own output... period... and my feelings about their music (not the masses) That's what I'm comparing to. Not other bands because U2 holds such a higher standard for me. So, tell us why the 360 tour resonated so much for you compared to all the other shows,  other than the band "walking" around you. What's your feelings about there music? Do you feel they have been fresh and innovative post 2000? Take down your defenses and contribute to the forum in a thoughtful way. We don't need to be reminded about grammys, bono's back surgery, their gross profits, etc. We can go to Wikipedia for that. C'mom, give it a whirl!!

Let me give you a little example: When I say NLOTH had no identity that's my feeling about that record. MOS is the only song that resonates with me. Your response is... NLOTH was the 7th biggest selling album in 2009.....how is that a failure?  Well, ok. To be expected from the biggest band on the planet. Of course people bought the record no matter what. That does not counter the opinion that it was a failure for U2 standards and the songs were dropped during the tour because of it. They were terrible live. Even the band in retrospect doesn't support the record. So, the 7th biggest selling album holds zero meaning.

Very good post Mr. Red, and you hold very similar opinions to mine. I saw 360 2x (Vancouver 1st leg and Seattle last leg). The show was good, but it wasn't great like previous U2 tours and wasn't even close to Zoo TV or Popmart. There was a magic to U2 in their prime live. Bono could take those songs to a different place and make them soar. The last couple of tours they basically play a pretty bare version of the songs and don't take them "higher". 

Boots from Lovetown or Zoo TV or any of the earlier tours blow the boots I have from 360 or from the SOI concerts. For me it's a night & day difference. Bono used to live inside those songs. He looked like a man possessed at times. That just isn't the case now. It's not to say I blame them or that they are bad live; they are good, but not all-time great like they were in their prime. We all get old.

Take a listen to One from Tacoma Zoo TV and then One from Vancouver SOI. It's not even close. Bono just goes off in the last part of the song and takes it to another place in Tacoma '92. This is the U2 I absolutely love and what made them my favorite band ever.

One - Tacoma 1992 - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
One - Vancouver 2015 - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Here's With or Without You (with Bono guitar solo!) from Paris '92. Brilliant! Taking the song to higher ground with the extended solo and Love Will Tear Us Apart coda. Then take a listen to Rose Bowl 360. Bono half talks the verses 'cause he can't sing the song well anymore.

With Or Without You - Paris '92 - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
With Or Without You - LA '09 - You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Offline Mr. Red

  • Headache in a Suitcase
  • *
  • Posts: 312
Re: Have U2 become all about the money?
« Reply #149 on: July 01, 2015, 10:07:59 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
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
The bigger struggle with U2 has been staying a fan DESPITE their post-Pop output. Vertigo and 360 were poor tours in support of poor albums 9it's all relative of course), SOI has redeemed them to some degree. The recent shows I saw in LA were definitely better than their previous 2 tours, but still way too many warhorses and possibly the worst encores of any recent tour.

I loved the Vertigo and 360 tours. I thought the 360 tour was the best thing they had ever done in terms of overall stage design, performance and songs played. HTDAAB is my 3rd favorite U2 album after Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby. HTDAAB is also the winner of 9 Grammy awards including Album Of The Year. No other album has won more Grammy awards than How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb.

My own take: I've been a fan and concert goer since Zoo TV.  Vertigo was probably the last U2 album/tour I really felt passionate about.  Part of this might be their declining powers--in particular, I found NLOTH to be the worst thing they'd ever done.  Part of this might just be me getting older, a little jaded, a little less impressed with stadium and arena concert flash.  I saw 360 early in the tour, and while I was happy to see it, it was my least favorite show of theirs.  It left me disinclined to see them on the return leg, which was a first for me.  I+E is an improvement like the new material more--but there is a weird distance I feel that makes it impossible to enjoy it the same way I used to.  The high ticket costs and diminishing returns mean I likely won't see another show on the return leg for this, either.
The band basically acknowledged this by turning the show into a heritage act to save the latter part of the tour. Maybe if I had not that much to compare it to, I may have liked 360 better but no dice. I'm glad some people liked that tour but for me, it never cut it. I think SOI is their best (good to approaching very good) output in 2000. I'm hoping MSG will once again bring the magic fully back for me!!

           Tour did not need to be saved. It is the highest grossing, highest attended tour in the history of music. Over $736 million grossed and 7.3 million tickets sold at 110 shows setting records everywhere. The last American leg was delayed by a year because of Bono's back injury, but the tickets were purchased in December 2009 by over 90% of the fans based on the set list from the first American leg which had the majority of the songs come from their post 2000 work, far from being a heritage show. The last leg was reconfigured and celebrated the 20th anniversary of the Achtung Baby. No Line On The Horizon was over two years old by that point anyway.

          Check out the Rose Bowl 360 setlist. That is far from being a "heritage set list" for U2. U2 has never been more in demand or popular as a concert attraction on the 360 tour. No artist has ever been that successful on the road.

Once again Wolf, you are wonderful at pulling out numbers whether it's U2's number of Grammys, how much they grossed last tour etc. We already know they are in high demand. As someone else mentioned, those things are unimportant. .
               Well, the band have always considered it important and I'm happy to see the music I love be so successful.

Quote

You pulled one paragraph from my text which takes the entire thought out of context. I was speaking from a fans perspective who has been with the band for 30+ years. You don't need to site the history, I'm well aware of it. It seems to me that you may have not been to shows pre 2000?? When comparing 360 with other tours in my experience, it was subpar. Much like all of their post 2000 work with the exception of some tunes which I sited.

I have been a U2 fan since 1987. I saw ZOO TV 5 times in 1992, Philadelphia March 10 Spectrum, Hershey Park Stadium August 8, R.F.K. Stadium August 16 Washington D.C. and September 2, 3, 1992 at Veterans Stadium in Philadelphia. I listened to them rehearse every night outside Hershey Park Stadium in the first week of August 1992.

Popmart I saw two shows at Giants Stadium and one show at Franklin Field Philadelphia for a total of 3. So I have seen 9 shows Pre-2000 for your information.

Elevation Tour - 6 shows

Vertigo Tour 5 shows including one stadium show in Dublin

360 tour 3 shows.

I didn't get to see the Joshua Tree Tour in 1987 although I came close. I'm unsure if I even new who U2 were in 1984. But I have been a fan for 28 years and seen over 20 shows.

Quote
NLOTH was a failure with no identity (especially live) and the band has fully acknowledged that.

Well, for your information, NLOTH was 7th biggest selling album of 2009 worldwide. In the United States alone it was the 22nd biggest selling album. How is that a failure?

Quote
You can believe that they "reconfigured" the show for whatever reason but that's not true. They were forced to pull out the greatest hits setlist and abandoned the NLOTH tunes to keep the causal fans happy BECAUSE the tickets were already sold and the new tunes failed live.

Really, and how do YOU know that is not true? How was the Rose Bowl setlist a failure? Please explain that to us? What do you think all the U2 fans who purchased tickets for the 2nd leg were buying tickets for? They were buying tickets for the show that was played in 2009 and the Rose Bowl show everyone saw on youtube where the band played more songs post 2000! What the band played in 2009 and what fans knew they were buying tickets for in December 2009 are indisputable facts.

It was a SURPRISE to EVERYONE when the band opened the last shows of the tour with a setlist that was heavy on Achtung Baby and light on NLOTH. That is not what people were expecting to see though nor what they had actually purchased tickets for back in December 2009.

        If the new tunes failed live as you say, why is the Rose Bowl show the one that was filmed and sold as a prime example of the tour?

No one forced U2 to play the old songs from Achtung Baby on the last 25 shows of the tour. In fact, on the second leg in 2010, the band played unreleased songs like Stingray Guitar which opened the 2010 shows, Glastonberry, North Star, Every Breaking Wave, and Mercy. No greatest hits performance at all with those shows. The idea that the 360 tour on the whole was a greatest hits tour is a MYTH. There were 110 shows on the tour, and only the last 25 could even be debated as falling under that definition.

Ok..but again, you miss the point. And again, you get defensive with all these ridiculous numbers, facts, etc. When I talk about the band, it's relative to their own output... period... and my feelings about their music (not the masses) That's what I'm comparing to. Not other bands because U2 holds such a higher standard for me. So, tell us why the 360 tour resonated so much for you compared to all the other shows,  other than the band "walking" around you. What's your feelings about there music? Do you feel they have been fresh and innovative post 2000? Take down your defenses and contribute to the forum in a thoughtful way. We don't need to be reminded about grammys, bono's back surgery, their gross profits, etc. We can go to Wikipedia for that. C'mom, give it a whirl!!

Let me give you a little example: When I say NLOTH had no identity that's my feeling about that record. MOS is the only song that resonates with me. Your response is... NLOTH was the 7th biggest selling album in 2009.....how is that a failure?  Well, ok. To be expected from the biggest band on the planet. Of course people bought the record no matter what. That does not counter the opinion that it was a failure for U2 standards and the songs were dropped during the tour because of it. They were terrible live. Even the band in retrospect doesn't support the record. So, the 7th biggest selling album holds zero meaning.

                Well, if the songs were such a failure live, why did they wait until the last 25 shows of the tour to drop all these songs? Again, your basing your entire opinion of the 360 tour on what they did on the last leg. Not really accurate in my opinion.

                Plus if all it took was to have U2's name on the ticket and U2's name on the album for the album to sell well, POP and Popmart would have been massive successes. That album and tour sold relatively poorly compared to 360 and NLOTH.

              Yes, I do feel the band has been fresh and innovative since 2000. Overall they have in my opinion written their best songs post 2000 than before. The band are smarter, more intelligent, and knows what works better live for them in terms of energy and pacing of the show. I think they did a magnificent job with the new songs. I thought the songs that sounded the best live on 360 were the ones from NLOTH. They sounded better than what was on record and that is always a sign of a well performed song.

Excellent start. Now we are getting somewhere. And I'm not being facetious! For once, I heard a less defensive posture. Growth! And when you think about the unthinkable, you actually disagree with the band which again is growth. You thought the songs that sounded best live on 360 were from NLOTH. The band did not. They dropped most of them and don't back the record now. Who would have ever thought.............
« Last Edit: July 01, 2015, 10:15:51 AM by Mr. Red »