Author Topic: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?  (Read 10290 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Behind the Barricade

  • Guest
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #45 on: March 26, 2016, 10:29:56 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This tour has to have featured the highest amount of songs with less than 5 plays.

The Troubles
California (I figured this would be a staples)
Crystal Ballroom
Lucifer's Hands
Magnificent
Miracle drug
Stuck in a moment
Zoo Station
When love comes to town
In gods country
Spanish eyes
Two hearts
New Year's Day (WTF?!?!)
Party Girl
11:00 tick tock
The ocean

Volcano and AIWIY played more than 5, but still a shockingly low amount.  Why rehearse a song just to never play it?  "Well, It didn't fit into the show".  B.S.!  It's U2 playing U2 songs at a U2 concert!  What more do you need?

This at least shows that U2 are willing to rehearse different songs and try them out even if they feel they don't work as well as they hoped.  God loves a trier.


Offline boom boom

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,195
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #46 on: March 26, 2016, 11:49:25 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Not sure if you think I was somehow insulting you with that list... not at all, it was an insult at U2 for being too afraid to veer too far from the script.  I don't judge your decision to go to just one show; you have many good points.  Same hits, largely in the same order.  I know 11:00 and Ocean weren't played on the tour, but they still took the time to rehearse the songs, and then just played it once.  WHY?  There are lots of fans that would love to see that song live, including myself. 

 COBL is not worthy of being a nightly staple, it should be rotated with something.  I'm glad they rotated in/out some songs like One and ISHFWILF, I was getting tired of hearing both of those at every show I saw.  One song that I think NEEDS to be given a rest is "Beautiful Day".  I realize its THE SONG that brought them back from the dead (in their own opinion) after the failure of Pop (in their own opinion), but I'm really sick of that one.  More than WOWY, or Streets, or even Pride, I think BD NEEDS a rest.  Maybe rotate it with COBL to keep 2000's U2 represented, as they both are quite similar and serve the same purpose.

NLOTH, Pop and Zooropa are criminally under-appreciated by the band themselves, and it kind of pisses me off.  Flaunt that sh**, it's incredible.  It's pretty bad when Passengers has had more songs in the setlist than Pop has in the last decade.
No, insult taken.  Why 11 oclock tick tock wasn't put into rotation baffles the mind.  Incredible song live, I heard also in '85 UF tour.  What a shame they didn't give it a try again in full rotation on the setlist. 
Agreed with COBL.  They started off rotating it with Miracle Drug for a couple of shows and then dropped that.  COBL needs a total break at least for one tour.  No chance they get rid of BD but at least WOWY and PRIDE need rest at least not sung at every show.  SBS also definitely needs to go.
As much as we want to hear songs from NLOTH, POP and Zooropa, I just don't don't see it happening.  Maybe they bring back acoustic STAY and Staring At The Sun which are songs they are comfortable with playing and easy to rehearse but if not play full band electric I'd rather not see it appear on the set.
They problem with U2 is once they finished touring an album they are done with it and never play any songs from previous albums and only carry over the big tunes and hits which NLOTH, POP and Zooropa didn't have.  Again they may play the occasional song, eg. like Magnificent (only played once) but nothing substantial.  Somehow I don't think anything off NLOTH, and songs like MOFO, PLEASE, LEMON, CRASHED CAR are in the cards for next tour which is very unfortunate.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2016, 12:05:51 PM by boom boom »

Behind the Barricade

  • Guest
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #47 on: March 26, 2016, 02:54:31 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
Honestly, and no joke, I felt like falling asleep whole second half of I&E anyway after most of the new songs were played in the first half.  The rest of the show was like been here, done this and heard all this before practically in the same order tour after tour anyway.  Everyone by now knows my opinion of U2 setlists.  I love NLOTH, Fez would have been great, at least U2 would have saw one person still in their seat.  I'd even take Boots at this stage, at least it is not worn out like all the other warhorses they keep playing.  Just my opinion, probably one of the few.

There are a few people here who would agree with you - me being one of them. Personally I don't like the new album much but it was refreshing to see them stick to playing the new songs. As for the old warhorses I couldn't agree with you more. I didn't bother going to I&E after the complete shambles that was 360 and having looked at the footage and the setlists I think I made the right choice (never mind that I could have taken a vacation on the money I saved from not buying a ticket). Even the older songs they dropped into the first half were predictable save for 2 hearts which was great to see and they played it really well. They also only played it 3 times before dropping it. But that's U2 for you these days - always snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

If anyone wants to call me negative, fine. Responses like that usually replace any kind of logical or consistent argument anyway.
I really wish they stuck with California and Volcano and Troubles and played it more often and even tried SLABT and TIWYCRMN.  Yeah the only surprise of the whole tour Two Hearts, just my luck, never got to hear it at the shows that I went to.  Playing it just 3 times is just sad.  I did get to here it back in '85 on the UF tour.  It should have been a mainstay in their static set from the beginning, at least that would have been something.  You probably made the right choice in not going especially if you didn't like SOI as it would have been a long night for you and I made the wrong one in going for multiple shows when I intended to just see one by now you know based on that 2 night concept that never happened.  Safe to say, I won't make that mistake again, just to costly these days to see the same show with no variety.  But like you said that is U2 these days.  Also agree on 360, but again for me the new songs saved it and at least we got UF, and UV and later Zooropa and HMTMKMKM.  Something better than nothing.  Glad to see not the only one sick of U2 trodding warhorses time and time again with no effort to balance it off with some deep cuts. 
Like you said also, call me negative if you want but that is how I feel about their setlist and I will keep repeating and repeating it until they prove me wrong.  Others can repeat that they love their setlists and enjoy them banging out the same hits and staples and that is a fair opinion just not mine.

Were you moaning about U2's static set-lists back when you claim you saw them on TUF tour back in 1985?

Offline SlyDanner

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,520
  • A white dope on punk staring into the flash.
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #48 on: March 27, 2016, 02:45:40 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Fez would have made a great opener on 360. No exit runs.

actually I agree with you... I love the song.  my only point was that to stick it into the middle of a set on I+E would be asking for trouble... people would not know it... and it would probably be played half-assed like many of the others they tried and dropped.

at the end of the day they have to play to the whole arena, not a small fraction of nerds like us who want to hear the deep stuff.  there's no point in willfully draining the energy from the crowd by playing these songs, unless they can really deliver the goods on playing them strong, putting them in an interesting point in the set, and of course giving us some variability night to night.

I'm resigned to the notion that U2 are not a touring rock show... they are more of a broadway show... 4 characters who are more like actors than rock musicians with a humongous supporting cast without whom there really is no U2 to speak of.

Offline boom boom

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,195
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #49 on: March 27, 2016, 02:59:47 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
Honestly, and no joke, I felt like falling asleep whole second half of I&E anyway after most of the new songs were played in the first half.  The rest of the show was like been here, done this and heard all this before practically in the same order tour after tour anyway.  Everyone by now knows my opinion of U2 setlists.  I love NLOTH, Fez would have been great, at least U2 would have saw one person still in their seat.  I'd even take Boots at this stage, at least it is not worn out like all the other warhorses they keep playing.  Just my opinion, probably one of the few.

There are a few people here who would agree with you - me being one of them. Personally I don't like the new album much but it was refreshing to see them stick to playing the new songs. As for the old warhorses I couldn't agree with you more. I didn't bother going to I&E after the complete shambles that was 360 and having looked at the footage and the setlists I think I made the right choice (never mind that I could have taken a vacation on the money I saved from not buying a ticket). Even the older songs they dropped into the first half were predictable save for 2 hearts which was great to see and they played it really well. They also only played it 3 times before dropping it. But that's U2 for you these days - always snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

If anyone wants to call me negative, fine. Responses like that usually replace any kind of logical or consistent argument anyway.
I really wish they stuck with California and Volcano and Troubles and played it more often and even tried SLABT and TIWYCRMN.  Yeah the only surprise of the whole tour Two Hearts, just my luck, never got to hear it at the shows that I went to.  Playing it just 3 times is just sad.  I did get to here it back in '85 on the UF tour.  It should have been a mainstay in their static set from the beginning, at least that would have been something.  You probably made the right choice in not going especially if you didn't like SOI as it would have been a long night for you and I made the wrong one in going for multiple shows when I intended to just see one by now you know based on that 2 night concept that never happened.  Safe to say, I won't make that mistake again, just to costly these days to see the same show with no variety.  But like you said that is U2 these days.  Also agree on 360, but again for me the new songs saved it and at least we got UF, and UV and later Zooropa and HMTMKMKM.  Something better than nothing.  Glad to see not the only one sick of U2 trodding warhorses time and time again with no effort to balance it off with some deep cuts. 
Like you said also, call me negative if you want but that is how I feel about their setlist and I will keep repeating and repeating it until they prove me wrong.  Others can repeat that they love their setlists and enjoy them banging out the same hits and staples and that is a fair opinion just not mine.

Were you moaning about U2's static set-lists back when you claim you saw them on TUF tour back in 1985?
Yeah, it was my first U2 show but already SBS, NYD and Pride were starting to wear on me. ;D
But seriously after 30 years later and many U2 shows later the hits start to get to you (at least me, maybe not for everyone) and don't have the effect they once did as they have been overplayed to death and when they play them for me it is just the feeling of here we go again. ::)
I would have never of thought on that day of Thursday March 28, 1985, that I would never hear songs like 11 O'clock Tick Tock, Wire, Two Hearts never again. And songs like ASOH just once more on the JT and UF two more times on JT then have to wait some 22 years later on 360 tour. Just makes me want to cry. :'(
Oh yeah, I don't claim to see shows that haven't seen.
Went through the archives and dug this up, and yeah, signed by a particular someone  :
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
« Last Edit: March 28, 2016, 03:34:41 AM by boom boom »

Behind the Barricade

  • Guest
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #50 on: March 27, 2016, 03:23:33 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
Honestly, and no joke, I felt like falling asleep whole second half of I&E anyway after most of the new songs were played in the first half.  The rest of the show was like been here, done this and heard all this before practically in the same order tour after tour anyway.  Everyone by now knows my opinion of U2 setlists.  I love NLOTH, Fez would have been great, at least U2 would have saw one person still in their seat.  I'd even take Boots at this stage, at least it is not worn out like all the other warhorses they keep playing.  Just my opinion, probably one of the few.

There are a few people here who would agree with you - me being one of them. Personally I don't like the new album much but it was refreshing to see them stick to playing the new songs. As for the old warhorses I couldn't agree with you more. I didn't bother going to I&E after the complete shambles that was 360 and having looked at the footage and the setlists I think I made the right choice (never mind that I could have taken a vacation on the money I saved from not buying a ticket). Even the older songs they dropped into the first half were predictable save for 2 hearts which was great to see and they played it really well. They also only played it 3 times before dropping it. But that's U2 for you these days - always snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

If anyone wants to call me negative, fine. Responses like that usually replace any kind of logical or consistent argument anyway.
I really wish they stuck with California and Volcano and Troubles and played it more often and even tried SLABT and TIWYCRMN.  Yeah the only surprise of the whole tour Two Hearts, just my luck, never got to hear it at the shows that I went to.  Playing it just 3 times is just sad.  I did get to here it back in '85 on the UF tour.  It should have been a mainstay in their static set from the beginning, at least that would have been something.  You probably made the right choice in not going especially if you didn't like SOI as it would have been a long night for you and I made the wrong one in going for multiple shows when I intended to just see one by now you know based on that 2 night concept that never happened.  Safe to say, I won't make that mistake again, just to costly these days to see the same show with no variety.  But like you said that is U2 these days.  Also agree on 360, but again for me the new songs saved it and at least we got UF, and UV and later Zooropa and HMTMKMKM.  Something better than nothing.  Glad to see not the only one sick of U2 trodding warhorses time and time again with no effort to balance it off with some deep cuts. 
Like you said also, call me negative if you want but that is how I feel about their setlist and I will keep repeating and repeating it until they prove me wrong.  Others can repeat that they love their setlists and enjoy them banging out the same hits and staples and that is a fair opinion just not mine.

Were you moaning about U2's static set-lists back when you claim you saw them on TUF tour back in 1985?
Yeah, it was my first U2 show but already SBS, NYD and Pride were starting to wear on me. ;D
But seriously after 30 years later and many U2 shows later the hits start to get to you (at least me, maybe not for everyone) and don't have the effect they once did as they have been overplayed to death and when they play them for me it is just the feeling of here we go again. ::)
I would have never of thought on that day of Thursday March 28, 1985, that I would never hear songs like 11 O'clock Tick Tock, Wire, Two Hearts never again. And songs like ASOH just once more on the JT and UF two more times on JT then have to wait some 22 years later on 360 tour. Just makes me want to cry. :'(
Oh yeah, I don't claim to see shows that haven't seen.  Maybe you do.
Went through the archives and dug this up, and yeah, signed by a particular someone  :
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Nice one.  But you don't have to prove anything to me, you know.

The great thing about U2 is that, just like in 1985, they're still playing lots of their new songs and their hits, though these days their concerts last quite a bit longer than they used to back then.  Not bad for a bunch of fiftysomethings. :)


Offline griffen2014

  • Wanderer
  • *
  • Posts: 93
  • What happened your face, of melting in snow
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #51 on: March 27, 2016, 04:44:24 PM »
U2 have a very strong back catalogue. They have to play the favourites - so as not to disappoint their fans... They and we (the fans) want to hear their new material. Hence they have very little space for anything else... I was very happy with setlist for this tour... I felt SOI was particularly strong live .. I hope they play these songs in future tours.

Behind the Barricade

  • Guest
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #52 on: March 27, 2016, 05:02:39 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 have a very strong back catalogue. They have to play the favourites - so as not to disappoint their fans... They and we (the fans) want to hear their new material. Hence they have very little space for anything else... I was very happy with setlist for this tour... I felt SOI was particularly strong live .. I hope they play these songs in future tours.

You see this is what I consider to be the trade off: the band play a good portion of the new album and the hits and warhorses to satisfy most concert-goers, or, like the Rolling Stones, they play more rarities from their back catalogue, and maybe one or two new songs, and the hits and warhorses.  As Bono used to say on the tour - what do you want?

« Last Edit: March 27, 2016, 05:06:17 PM by Behind the Barricade »

Offline SlyDanner

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,520
  • A white dope on punk staring into the flash.
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #53 on: March 27, 2016, 06:13:11 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 have a very strong back catalogue. They have to play the favourites - so as not to disappoint their fans... They and we (the fans) want to hear their new material. Hence they have very little space for anything else... I was very happy with setlist for this tour... I felt SOI was particularly strong live .. I hope they play these songs in future tours.

You see this is what I consider to be the trade off: the band play a good portion of the new album and the hits and warhorses to satisfy most concert-goers, or, like the Rolling Stones, they play more rarities from their back catalogue, and maybe one or two new songs, and the hits and warhorses.  As Bono used to say on the tour - what do you want?

Yes, warhorses/hits are always going to be part of the show.  They just don't need to be the same ones every night.  That's the issue.  Throw in more unexpected stuff each night, and mix up the hits so that every single show does not have to bear the burden of One, WOWY, MW, Pride, BD, COBL etc... like a mix tape on repeat as it was last tour

Behind the Barricade

  • Guest
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #54 on: March 27, 2016, 06:20:48 PM »
These songs are called warhorses for a reason. 

As far as I'm concerned I would have liked one or two rarities as regular fixtures.  I felt this tour needed an Ultraviolet and Unforgettable Fire.  Acrobat and ASOH would have done me nicely.


Offline Volcanogirl

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,836
  • The goal is Elevation !
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #55 on: March 28, 2016, 02:31:35 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
These songs are called warhorses for a reason. 

As far as I'm concerned I would have liked one or two rarities as regular fixtures.  I felt this tour needed an Ultraviolet and Unforgettable Fire.  Acrobat and ASOH would have done me nicely.

I'm sure The Unforgettable fire will make fans happy. Edge could do something special like ASOH or RTSS/van Diemen's land
Ultraviolet and Acrobat are too technical probably.
I liked hearing the old songs, and loved that.

Offline boom boom

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,195
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #56 on: March 28, 2016, 03:29:19 AM »
If U2 just made for example Two hearts and Gloria staples from the beginning in rotatation with electric co and out of control and even throw in 11 o'clock tick tock a few times in the mix maybe it would not be that bad.  Just like 360 had UF and UV as staples for the first half of that tour before switching it up to Zooropa and HMTMKMKM.  Like Slydanner said it is just to much to have one, wowy, MW, Pride, COBL, everynight especially if your going to more than one show.  Just some small little tweaks like that would have made it so much better.
I know when the next tour starts, U2 will continue to play the hits and staples but just hoping at least they make at least 2-3 good choices for deep cuts and make it a staple in the set from the start of the tour and not like Two Hearts which just got played 3 times.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2016, 04:10:19 AM by boom boom »

Behind the Barricade

  • Guest
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #57 on: March 28, 2016, 07:34:37 AM »
I don't even really like THBAO or Magnificent, so for me it's no big deal they didn't make those songs staples in the set.  I'm happy I got Desire and AIWIY at my show instead.  I would have liked The Playboy Mansion to have been a regular fixture, now that would have been interesting.




Offline il_capo

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,623
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #58 on: March 28, 2016, 02:05:21 PM »
We can carry on dreaming about The Playboy Mansion, a song that was only ever snippeted on the Popmart tour.  The song might work in a club, but not in an arena or stadium. 

I think Electric Co/Gloria/OOC was the Ultraviolet/TUF part of the SOI set, in terms of being a choice that chimed with the hardcore fans.  As for NLOTH I think Moment of Surrender works well live and would've made a good ending to the show.

WookieeWarrior10

  • Guest
Re: Why is No Line on the Horizon nonexistent?
« Reply #59 on: March 28, 2016, 09:06:06 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
We can carry on dreaming about The Playboy Mansion, a song that was only ever snippeted on the Popmart tour.  The song might work in a club, but not in an arena or stadium. 

I think Electric Co/Gloria/OOC was the Ultraviolet/TUF part of the SOI set, in terms of being a choice that chimed with the hardcore fans.  As for NLOTH I think Moment of Surrender works well live and would've made a good ending to the show.
I honestly think it feels really cheap that they consider those songs to be deep-cuts. Maybe casual fans aren't too familiar with them, but that doesn't necessarily make it a "deep-cut."