Author Topic: U2 at Bonnaroo. According to /r/bonnaroo the rumors are flooding in  (Read 10933 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline This Dave

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 772
Re: U2 at Bonnaroo. According to /r/bonnaroo the rumors are flooding in
« Reply #75 on: November 18, 2016, 06:30:07 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
I can't really see what's so bad about their Glastonbury performance.  I've watched it a few times, seems like a standard concert they'd have done in 2011.  There were a few "screw ups", but those things happen, and I really doubt many in the audience would've even noticed.  That said, the time to do it would've been the Elevation Tour.  Just watch the Slane DVD and imagine that energy at Glastonbury. 

Also, bands like Muse and Coldplay use backing tracks too, and bring a lot of their personal elements to festivals like Glastonbury all the time.  I think U2 and U2's crew have just gotten used to doing things their own way, having not played festivals since the Unforgettable Fire era.

I don't think it was especially bad...it just wasn't especially good - it was just sort of ok ish.

as for backing...u2's has got out of control in my view - i honestly wonder just how much is live these days - invisible for example on last tour when they stood in the screen - it looked and sounded like hardly any of it bono aside was truly pure live.

What irked me about Invisible was that the (simple but cool) guitar solo was playback and Edge was instead strumming some lazy chords. A real wtf moment and obvious on the DVD.

not seen the dvd but yes i know what you mean...

I don't play, but I don't understand why he had such a simple part pre-recorded.  Have to say that as a fan, I'm not very comfortable with that.

Offline This Dave

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 772
Re: U2 at Bonnaroo. According to /r/bonnaroo the rumors are flooding in
« Reply #76 on: November 18, 2016, 06:42:13 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
All the talk about backing track is ridiculous to be honest. U2 has used BT since TUF and always for the same purpose: Play synth parts and percussions that can't be played live because they are a four piece. Invisible is a different case because there are 2 guitar tracks in the song but only one guy who can play guitar live since Bono's accident. What do you want them to do? If you think U2 don't play live, you need your ears and your eyes checked...

It's not backing tracks per se...the track for "Bad", for example, makes a nice intro and then virtually disappears into the song.  What we are hearing on "Invisible" is the complete opposite. It's the lead part.  The part Edge is actually playing is in the background.  I don't even understand why he's doing that, as the part is so simple.  I've heard stories of other people playing chords in the spotlight as their back up guitarists play the actual solo (Lenny Kravitz is known for this), but that's likely someone who can not reliably play the solo.  That certainly isn't the case for Edge and Invisible.

Offline This Dave

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 772
Re: U2 at Bonnaroo. According to /r/bonnaroo the rumors are flooding in
« Reply #77 on: November 18, 2016, 06:45:43 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
Add in them bringing their own extra screens and walkway - the ridiculous set up time, they were at it all day even during morrisseys set and I heard runours it caused problems (why is it other bands could just plug and play) the accident where their computer rig was crashed into backstage and the ultimately meh reaction to them has in my view turned them off doing another.

Never heard about this before, but that is insane. They never should have brought their own stuff (beyond the instruments/amps etc.). Completely goes against the idea of doing a festival where other artists play before/after you and where everything has been setup by the staff days in advance in such a way that it accommodates all the artists.

I'm sure this gave them a bit of a bad reputation for festivals, too. Deservedly so.

I can't speak to how good they sounded/played at Glastonbury (although I do remember seeing the setlist and not caring for it), but the one thing that did blow me away is that something like a day and a half later, they played a great gig in Michigan (all that travel, playing a huge festival, and then playing a really good set less than 2 days later).

If Glastonbury is how they will approach future festivals, then I'd agree, festivals definitely aren't their thing. Maybe they'll learn from it, figure out how to craft a festival format setlist that honors their whole career, and for gods sake, leave the extra equipment at home. You don't want to appear even more pretentious than people already view you as being.

Wasn't the setlist largely what they were playing at the time on the tour...? All the technical wizadry, myriad of back up tracks, pre recorded parts etc would be all set up for that...

u2 have long since stopped being a plug and play band - be great if they were.

Yes. At that stage of the tour, the had dropped most of NLOTH and had added a bunch of AB songs for the upcoming anniversary documentary.  The "half of this is pre-recorded" version of (ironically) Even Better Than The Real Thing came from that set.

i recall the 'oh real thing was ruined because the backing track was f*****' thing

Which is so strange, because the regular version (say, Popmart) is so great.  In the new version, the pre-recorded stuff is front and center (in their defense, they aren't trying to hide it), and it makes the song more bland, as the bridge is the opening is the verses.  This is common in new pop music, but that's not an argument in favor if you ask me.

Offline tigerfan41

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,781
  • 2017 Concerts: Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit
Re: U2 at Bonnaroo. According to /r/bonnaroo the rumors are flooding in
« Reply #78 on: November 18, 2016, 07:38:48 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
thing is live rock n roll shows aren't really meant to be perfect sound wise imo - mistakes, rough edges, rawness, improvisation etc  make live better for me.....the sheer joy of a band working their way into a song out the blue for example on the spot...

Someone said u2 shows are more like Broadway shows and whilst they are not bad maybe some return to a more pure sound would be a good thing

Completely agree with you there. I don't mind a song sounding considerably different live than it does on the album, because I recognize that live music is never perfect, mistakes happen, but it's all a part of the deal. I am guessing the average concert go-er might be expecting an "album" sound, though, so perhaps that's a reason some artists use backing tracks/pre-recorded bits to get the sound as close to the recorded version as possible.

This is why, even though a lot of people probably dislike them, I really admire Foo Fighters. They do not believe in using backing tracks or anything pre-recorded. Every performance is different, no two versions of the same song sound the same, mistakes are made, but it's a totally live sound. Same thing for some lesser known bands I've seen live. I wish more bands would do this, even if it gets a little messy.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Yes. At that stage of the tour, they had dropped most of NLOTH and had added a bunch of AB songs for the upcoming anniversary documentary.  The "half of this is pre-recorded" version of (ironically) Even Better Than The Real Thing came from that set. 

 ;D That is funny. Well, not funny that they did that, but funny that it was that song. I don't have an issue with adding more AB songs to any setlist, but only if they're gonna plan the darn things live. And by the looks of it, they did keep the only NLOTH song worth keeping, imo (MOS). Sadly, they also kept Boots.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I don't play, but I don't understand why he had such a simple part pre-recorded.  Have to say that as a fan, I'm not very comfortable with that.

I do play and I also do not understand why he had that pre-recorded. The whole song is very basic, verses and solo. Even as a very mediocre guitarist (I play more bass than anything these days), I could play that song with minimal effort. Shouldn't be too hard to replicate live. Also not comfortable with main guitar parts being pre-recorded--no issues with backing guitar pre-recorded, but you should at least be able to play lead live.

I really wonder what the logic was in doing that.