Author Topic: 76 shows in 5 years...  (Read 4528 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline an tha

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,430
  • You can swallow, or you can spit.
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #15 on: November 20, 2016, 06:06:19 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Well you did ask "what are your thoughts on this?"

Clearly some people feel defensive about the number.

Exactly 'thoughts on the number' not making up their own numbers or questioning why it is even a thread....if people feel defensive over the number then as some have done well articulate a defence of it rather than just attacking the thread.

Offline Neil Young, man!

  • Headache in a Suitcase
  • *
  • Posts: 335
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #16 on: November 20, 2016, 06:17:47 AM »
Most important for me is that the shows are good, and a big part of that is that they tour new material, not just greatest hits. So many staples sound tired these days. I know set lists always used to be static but I think u2 could have more fun if they changed it up a bit more. A big part of that is less choreography and less backing tracks-also good in my book. Gloria, Two Hearts and Electric Co last tour were great examples for me. They could give that same treatment to some newer songs too.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2016, 06:20:08 AM by Neil Young, man! »

Offline an tha

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,430
  • You can swallow, or you can spit.
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #17 on: November 20, 2016, 06:33:15 AM »
To be fair if you expand the date range out to say the turn of the millennium and compare the bands live output to say The Stones as a reasonably comparable heritage act (although of course The Stones are all around 15 years or so older than the members of u2) and to Bruce Springsteen (who is around 10 years older) then they stack up similarly to The Stones but much less prolific than with Springsteen...

If somebody has more accurate numbers then please do correct me..these figures are quickly and roughly cobbled together off wikipedia searches

Stones - 359
u2 - 415
Springsteen - 782

Offline imaginary friend

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,839
  • the vaccine for your wack scene
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #18 on: November 20, 2016, 08:26:03 AM »
That's 76 shows more than any of y'all have played.   :P

Offline So Cruel

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,163
  • it ain't no sin to be glad that you're alive
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #19 on: November 20, 2016, 09:17:33 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
To be fair if you expand the date range out to say the turn of the millennium and compare the bands live output to say The Stones as a reasonably comparable heritage act (although of course The Stones are all around 15 years or so older than the members of u2) and to Bruce Springsteen (who is around 10 years older) then they stack up similarly to The Stones but much less prolific than with Springsteen...

If somebody has more accurate numbers then please do correct me..these figures are quickly and roughly cobbled together off wikipedia searches

Stones - 359
u2 - 415
Springsteen - 782

And Springsteen plays 3-4 hr shows so it's really like triple of what U2 has played. He just seems to love music more then the members of U2 do

Offline DGordon1

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,199
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #20 on: November 20, 2016, 11:07:15 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quite amusing to see some (albeit a small group) people attempting to frame the thread as a criticism, or a negative...."how is this a thread" "it's actually blah, blah, blah" "long live fuzzy math" wah wah wah....

Where in the o.p. does it say "Only 76 shows" or "A mere 76" or suggest it is a poor output?

Seems those getting upset by things are the ones who think the number is low...It may be a very healthy number for a band made up of men in their mid to late 50's...or it may compare very favourably  with other artists who have been around as long as u2 have as a band....but hey don't let that get line of thought get in the way of unbalanced discussion, eh...
 

We'll go on then, what are your thoughts?

Offline MadRob360

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 289
  • Jealousy Is A Disease
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #21 on: November 20, 2016, 11:20:56 AM »
I'd say personally i think U2 could churn out an album within 3 months of starting recording, hit the road for 9 months have a year off and start again, so 2 albums and 2 tours every 4 years. They COULD do this. But just because they could doesn't mean they should, or want to. Bono in particular bangs on about being relevant with current music etc, but imo U2 are relevant anyway. They've been there and done it and got numerous t-shirts for doing so. The only real reason they should be making music and touring now is because they get great pleasure out of doing so, They've made their money, they could retire now and lock themselves away from the world never to be seen again if they wanted to. So, that said 76 shows in 5 years isn't such a bad thing. I'd love to see and hear the band more from a selfish pov i wish they'd hurry up and make records and hit the road. But i wouldn't want them to do it just to please fans, if you're leaving home for 9 months to hit the road, Like they say you need an album worthy of it (or what they feel is worthy). So i want U2 being about more because they're feeling it, feeling the music and wanting to show it off. They second guess and polish records too much in recent times sure, but the guys are in their 50s now, they're gonna want more time with family etc.

Sorry to ramble on....but basically my take on it is yes i'd love it if they'd hurry up and be more confident in themselves and play more live shows (and PLEASE lads do a roxy-style gig in the uk - would love to see U2 play in a small club!) but i'm hapy with their output in general.....would love more variation in the set in terms of songs they've thought about playing but not (drowning man etc) but they aren't a band that need to prove themselves anymore, and lets be honest the music industry on the whole was so much better in the 80's and 90's, it's pretty s***e today! So i'm just glad they still do make music and tour.

Offline an tha

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,430
  • You can swallow, or you can spit.
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #22 on: November 20, 2016, 11:57:45 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quite amusing to see some (albeit a small group) people attempting to frame the thread as a criticism, or a negative...."how is this a thread" "it's actually blah, blah, blah" "long live fuzzy math" wah wah wah....

Where in the o.p. does it say "Only 76 shows" or "A mere 76" or suggest it is a poor output?

Seems those getting upset by things are the ones who think the number is low...It may be a very healthy number for a band made up of men in their mid to late 50's...or it may compare very favourably  with other artists who have been around as long as u2 have as a band....but hey don't let that get line of thought get in the way of unbalanced discussion, eh...
 

We'll go on then, what are your thoughts?

Well the number itself is slightly skewed by coming off the back of a massive tour in 360...

But that said when was the last time a u2 album was over 2 years old and saw the band only play 76 shows (to date) in support of it? That question alone is probably worthy of discussion in my view..

U2 as many say owe nobody anything but for a band who have always had a 'live is where we live' outlook they do seem a little gunshy on the gig front...

Personally i would much prefer them to stop the album, tour, album circular cycle and play more regularly - it would free them from certain expectations, just go out on the road for 3 months for example playing varied set lists even road test a few new tracks, let the experience feed into the writing and recording process...

Then tour when they want to not just because there is a cycle to honour and a new record to tour...just get back to being a band, stop the 3/4 year gap between going out on tour... but that is probably unrealistic for an aged band, a part time band and a band in the twilight of their careers.....but it could be something that invigorates them and helps them extend or refresh their careers/helps their creativity.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2016, 11:59:25 AM by an tha »

Offline singnomore

  • Administrator
  • Airborne Ranger
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,462
  • These city lights, they shine as silver and gold
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #23 on: November 20, 2016, 03:22:24 PM »
Guys - I've removed a couple of posts that don't really add to what the thread is about. So let's stick to the topic as opposed to attempting to trade glancing blows.

Offline il_capo

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,623
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #24 on: November 20, 2016, 03:32:20 PM »
I agree that neither U2 nor any artist owes the public the duty to write and record songs or play shows.   Personally, I am glad they put so much effort into making a great arena show on the last tour, but time is catching up on them and I am not surprised they didn't want to take that show all over the world.  They're rich men approaching their 60s and they could just tour and print money as bands like the Stones are doing, but I appreciate their efforts to base their lives shows on new songs.

They did road-test new material on 360 and if memory serves me well it wasn't very good. 

Offline an tha

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,430
  • You can swallow, or you can spit.
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #25 on: November 20, 2016, 03:49:34 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I agree that neither U2 nor any artist owes the public the duty to write and record songs or play shows.   Personally, I am glad they put so much effort into making a great arena show on the last tour, but time is catching up on them and I am not surprised they didn't want to take that show all over the world.  They're rich men approaching their 60s and they could just tour and print money as bands like the Stones are doing, but I appreciate their efforts to base their lives shows on new songs.

They did road-test new material on 360 and if memory serves me well it wasn't very good.

I just don't think it has to be so rigid.....it is basically a set pattern...album release, tour it for ages, silence, album release, tour it for ages and rinse and repeat.

Maybe the shorter tour after the last album is or  was intended as a step away from that but it appears they may be caught in another circle they get trapped in (the overworking things in the studio one)...

I just feel it would be refreshing if they came out and played shows 'out of the cycle' they could do shortish length tours and it wouldn't matter if they were in a period of writing, recording, or in a period where they weren't really working on anything as such...

I believe that playing and being a band (i mean being on the road and together) is a real trigger for creativity and it is my belief it is inspiration that they may be lacking these days - just playing to people a bit more regularly and being a band could help.

But as I say to ask a band who have worked a certain way for so long to change at this point of their lives and careers is probably unrealistic - other interests/priorities etc....

« Last Edit: November 20, 2016, 03:55:22 PM by an tha »

Offline il_capo

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,623
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #26 on: November 20, 2016, 04:25:24 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I agree that neither U2 nor any artist owes the public the duty to write and record songs or play shows.   Personally, I am glad they put so much effort into making a great arena show on the last tour, but time is catching up on them and I am not surprised they didn't want to take that show all over the world.  They're rich men approaching their 60s and they could just tour and print money as bands like the Stones are doing, but I appreciate their efforts to base their lives shows on new songs.

They did road-test new material on 360 and if memory serves me well it wasn't very good.

I just don't think it has to be so rigid.....it is basically a set pattern...album release, tour it for ages, silence, album release, tour it for ages and rinse and repeat.

Maybe the shorter tour after the last album is or  was intended as a step away from that but it appears they may be caught in another circle they get trapped in (the overworking things in the studio one)...

I just feel it would be refreshing if they came out and played shows 'out of the cycle' they could do shortish length tours and it wouldn't matter if they were in a period of writing, recording, or in a period where they weren't really working on anything as such...

I believe that playing and being a band (i mean being on the road and together) is a real trigger for creativity and it is my belief it is inspiration that they may be lacking these days - just playing to people a bit more regularly and being a band could help.

But as I say to ask a band who have worked a certain way for so long to change at this point of their lives and careers is probably unrealistic - other interests/priorities etc....

Alas it is pretty inevitable that it is rigid – because they’re a huge corporation now and have been for a couple of decades and longer.  They’re no longer “just a band”.  Going out on tour means involving livenation and other corporate entities.  The long silences between records and tours also reflects the fact they live ultra-rich lifestyles which I guess are a bit too comfortable to motivate great art.  Bono also has his political projects, which involve him meeting many other super-rich individuals - the people with the power, not Joe Public.  None of this helps them remain prolific and relevant to the vast majority of their audience.

Playing more regularly would perhaps help keep them in touch with ordinary folk, but not the sort of people our Nige would like: did you notice how international the audience was at the o2 last year?  Compare that to the audience we see in the Red Rocks video.  Does playing live inspire creativity?  Not sure U2 have ever really been big on writing new material while on tour - Zooropa was the last attempt?  Zooropa is a decent album but lacks the intensity of AB or Pop.

Carry on writing reasonable and nuanced posts and maybe we can both avoid more censorship  :P

Offline an tha

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,430
  • You can swallow, or you can spit.
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #27 on: November 20, 2016, 04:29:02 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
I agree that neither U2 nor any artist owes the public the duty to write and record songs or play shows.   Personally, I am glad they put so much effort into making a great arena show on the last tour, but time is catching up on them and I am not surprised they didn't want to take that show all over the world.  They're rich men approaching their 60s and they could just tour and print money as bands like the Stones are doing, but I appreciate their efforts to base their lives shows on new songs.

They did road-test new material on 360 and if memory serves me well it wasn't very good.

I just don't think it has to be so rigid.....it is basically a set pattern...album release, tour it for ages, silence, album release, tour it for ages and rinse and repeat.

Maybe the shorter tour after the last album is or  was intended as a step away from that but it appears they may be caught in another circle they get trapped in (the overworking things in the studio one)...

I just feel it would be refreshing if they came out and played shows 'out of the cycle' they could do shortish length tours and it wouldn't matter if they were in a period of writing, recording, or in a period where they weren't really working on anything as such...

I believe that playing and being a band (i mean being on the road and together) is a real trigger for creativity and it is my belief it is inspiration that they may be lacking these days - just playing to people a bit more regularly and being a band could help.

But as I say to ask a band who have worked a certain way for so long to change at this point of their lives and careers is probably unrealistic - other interests/priorities etc....

Alas it is pretty inevitable that it is rigid – because they’re a huge corporation now and have been for a couple of decades and longer.  They’re no longer “just a band”.  Going out on tour means involving livenation and other corporate entities.  The long silences between records and tours also reflects the fact they live ultra-rich lifestyles which I guess are a bit too comfortable to motivate great art.  Bono also has his political projects, which involve him meeting many other super-rich individuals - the people with the power, not Joe Public.  None of this helps them remain prolific and relevant to the vast majority of their audience.

Playing more regularly would perhaps help keep them in touch with ordinary folk, but not the sort of people our Nige would like: did you notice how international the audience was at the o2 last year?  Compare that to the audience we see in the Red Rocks video.  Does playing live inspire creativity?  Not sure U2 have ever really been big on writing new material while on tour - Zooropa was the last attempt?  Zooropa is a decent album but lacks the intensity of AB or Pop.

Carry on writing reasonable and nuanced posts and maybe we can both avoid more censorship  :P

Haha...i think it was one of my reasonable and nuanced posts (I think i have 3 of them in total now) that woke the button pressers from their slumber - with the unwanted side effect of our banter being censored.... :)

You are right of course about the corporation thing and of course the livenation deal ties their hands a ....would be good to see them turn around and tell them to get lost when the current deal they inked runs out...

They have more money than they could ever hope for or need so why not just unshackle themselves from these big deals and just do things on their own terms/for their art rather than u2 inc. the brand and all the B.S. that comes with it..
« Last Edit: November 20, 2016, 04:33:23 PM by an tha »

Offline riffraff

  • Deep In the Heart
  • ****
  • Posts: 26,226
  • I know that this is not goodbye, my forum friends!
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #28 on: November 20, 2016, 04:32:49 PM »
Yeah, and you guys didn't even mention purple pasties. pah.

Offline an tha

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,430
  • You can swallow, or you can spit.
Re: 76 shows in 5 years...
« Reply #29 on: November 20, 2016, 04:33:58 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yeah, and you guys didn't even mention purple pasties. pah.

PAH!