Author Topic: Why so much criticism?  (Read 3125 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline StrongGirl

  • Genius of Compression
  • ****
  • Posts: 39,855
  • On BLS I heard the sound of an angel
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #15 on: November 12, 2009, 09:25:53 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 can't please everyone, regardless of what they do, someone's bound to complain!
That's not true, they have been very lazy with the set on this tour , a return to the dark days of ZooTV and Popmart.

Perhaps they just don't feel like going back to the dark days of Zoo and Popmart. It could be as simple as that. The show is still amazing. I went with U2 fanatics, casual U2 fans & one non fan. They were all equally blown away by NYC #2.

Offline indiansummer

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,047
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #16 on: November 12, 2009, 05:01:38 PM »
I agree, every show I went to, I thought was great too. (Although you lucky folk in the States didn't have to listen to Pride every night !!) But the shows would have been better if they made the same effort as they did at MSG in 05.
The latter part of the tour when they played a run of single dates with the exact same set was very poor. At the very least were they not bored playing the same songs every night.
But I still maintain it is lazy, they must have discussed whether to change the songs but to change a couple of songs, or God forbid introduce one that hasn't been played yet clearly takes a lot more time, time they had available as the dates were very spaced out. So lack of time is not an excuse.
It was a real shame that the US leg didn't evolve more than it did.

Offline Vervefloyd

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 297
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #17 on: November 12, 2009, 07:30:23 PM »
I think the complaints are heating up because other bands of or close to U2's size have really started embracing the internet culture - bands of which many of us are huge fans of or maybe even bigger fans of than U2.  Coldplay being an example of a band that embraces the U2 style of live shows.  However, bands such as Pearl Jam, Springsteen, Radiohead and R.E.M play different orders each night and take more songs on the road then U2.  Now people will argue well a U2 show takes more production than those which makes U2 limited in their set list.  But that is complete and utter BS as U2's lack of rotation is self-imposed by the 4 of them.

So I think our set lists complaints are very valid.  While some fans may have left the band because they didn't like the whole Zoo TV and 90's ear and didn't get it, they have in fact pushed me away because of their lack of spontaneity and safeness that has become the 2000's.  I usually attend around 6 shows a tour.  But now i'd rather spend that money on say a springsteen show cause i mean he did bust of the entire River album the other night for the first time ever.  I'm not even sure U2 can play a complete album.  JT is such a famous record, but you can count on two hands the number of performances of tracks 6-11 since 1987 of all the songs combined.  It was great to hear One Tree Hill last tour, but it was played on a couple of times and quickly forgotten.  In God's Country made a couple of acoustic performances on this tour but Bono ridiculously used it as a snippet at the end of Beautiful day instead of taking 1 minute out of their day to figure out the extremely easy 4 chords.  Mothers Of The Disappeared only cuts it in South America apparently.  Exit was made for the live stage but was nothing more than a song from a new album that we will play only on that tour.  Same with Trip Through Your Wires.  And Red Hill Mining Town is what every album gets a song or two never destined for the stage. 

So here is my biggest complaint.  When U2 wrote the Joshua Tree did they know the first 3 tracks were the best and that everyone would fall in love?  Did they know for sure that those were above and beyond and that the rest was filler?  If I recall correctly red hill mining town was a planned single and changed at like the midnight hour for ISHFWILW.  so obviously they weren't sure what would be huge hits.  So why now let those singles decisions guide what has to be played?  Sure its not all greatest hits, but lets not kid ourselves the majority of songs U2 picks for a tour are hit based or singles based and are the same old stuff tour after tour outside of the new material.  and thats all they take on the road.  could U2 play the joshua tree start to finish sure but they would actually have to practice and sound check the stuff.  same set every night shows a get in get out move on to the next city approach.  broadway rotates casts to keep things fresh.  many bands now rotate sets to keep things fresh. 

ive said this on other threads, but U2 made it clear on the boy tour by playing 11 O'Clock, IWF and The Ocean twice in an hour long set that they don't trust a lot of their stuff live.  U2 did have songs not off boy and on boy Shadows and Tall Trees that could have been played.  But they showed right there what they would be except for that brief time on the Lovetown tour where I honestly don't know who they were in 1989.  they didn't care about opening songs they mixed up orders, they even told fans you might not hear the songs you love every night (i.e. sunday bloody sunday and wowy).  and then they went away and recreated their sound but lost the live balls they had on lovetown.  coming out with a damn slide guitar intro to Hawkmoon then if i recall the last full band version of In God's Country.  thats the best tour to collect bootleg wise since there are many different shows and orders.  oh and yeah those 2 or 3 nights on the Unforgettable Fire Tour where they turned back the clock a tour and did those war/october-esque sets in multiple night cities.

wow did i ramble.  but this stuff gets me fired up.

daveyg

  • Guest
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #18 on: November 13, 2009, 06:05:08 AM »
You alos have to factor in to the equation that, unlike Springsteen and Pearl Jam, U2's forte isnt playing on the hop. They need a setlist, and the internet age has only underlined it, along with the U2 annoraks that keep such lists (which amuses me I must admit - I like going to gigs to enjoy the songs - not make a list while Im there to compare)

Offline jrnyc

  • Wanderer
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #19 on: November 13, 2009, 07:09:38 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You alos have to factor in to the equation that, unlike Springsteen and Pearl Jam, U2's forte isnt playing on the hop. They need a setlist, and the internet age has only underlined it, along with the U2 annoraks that keep such lists (which amuses me I must admit - I like going to gigs to enjoy the songs - not make a list while Im there to compare)

Bands like Pearl Jam have a planned set list , they just don't decide to play songs while they are on stage. They do a great job of mixing up the set list. Also, when people defend static set lists, I always hear this BS about lights , etc , etc as why they cant change the set list. PJ has lights , that doesnt stop them. Not only that, they change guitars every song, with 2 guitar players, a bass player and Eddie Vedder also playing guitar sometimes, planning this for the different set lists every night seems to be a far bigger endeavor then U2 changing some lights.

Offline EdgeFest [Zenmaster360]

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,357
  • My blog: mrstheedge.com
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #20 on: November 13, 2009, 07:19:15 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I remember going to U2 gigs going back to the late (and pre-internet) 80s and we had a pretrty much good idea, give or take, of what the set list would have been right through the different periods. And the maoning was there at that stage. It's just not physically in print in front of you as opposed to your friends kitchen between three of you as happened in the late 80s/early 90s with me!

 ;D

Lovely perspective, thanks Davey ;)

Offline DGordon1

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,199
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #21 on: November 13, 2009, 08:13:20 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You alos have to factor in to the equation that, unlike Springsteen and Pearl Jam, U2's forte isnt playing on the hop. They need a setlist, and the internet age has only underlined it, along with the U2 annoraks that keep such lists (which amuses me I must admit - I like going to gigs to enjoy the songs - not make a list while Im there to compare)

Bands like Pearl Jam have a planned set list , they just don't decide to play songs while they are on stage. They do a great job of mixing up the set list. Also, when people defend static set lists, I always hear this BS about lights , etc , etc as why they cant change the set list. PJ has lights , that doesnt stop them. Not only that, they change guitars every song, with 2 guitar players, a bass player and Eddie Vedder also playing guitar sometimes, planning this for the different set lists every night seems to be a far bigger endeavor then U2 changing some lights.

"changing some lights" is a huge operation on a tour like the 360 tour. If it was stripped down, it would be far easier to do so.

Offline jrnyc

  • Wanderer
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #22 on: November 13, 2009, 09:20:52 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 alos have to factor in to the equation that, unlike Springsteen and Pearl Jam, U2's forte isnt playing on the hop. They need a setlist, and the internet age has only underlined it, along with the U2 annoraks that keep such lists (which amuses me I must admit - I like going to gigs to enjoy the songs - not make a list while Im there to compare)

Bands like Pearl Jam have a planned set list , they just don't decide to play songs while they are on stage. They do a great job of mixing up the set list. Also, when people defend static set lists, I always hear this BS about lights , etc , etc as why they cant change the set list. PJ has lights , that doesnt stop them. Not only that, they change guitars every song, with 2 guitar players, a bass player and Eddie Vedder also playing guitar sometimes, planning this for the different set lists every night seems to be a far bigger endeavor then U2 changing some lights.

"changing some lights" is a huge operation on a tour like the 360 tour. If it was stripped down, it would be far easier to do so.

I don't understand this , all this technology , a gazillion dollars invested in the tour , yet they cant program the lights for different songs ??? Makes no sense to me. If they cant change the lights, then leave the lights the same for a different song.

Offline Joe G (Love You Like Mad Magazine)

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,777
  • 2 souls 2 cool 2 B in the realm of certainty
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #23 on: November 13, 2009, 10:15:36 AM »
Separate thread: Are U2 fans spoiled?

Offline Vervefloyd

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 297
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #24 on: November 13, 2009, 02:24:05 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You alos have to factor in to the equation that, unlike Springsteen and Pearl Jam, U2's forte isnt playing on the hop. They need a setlist, and the internet age has only underlined it, along with the U2 annoraks that keep such lists (which amuses me I must admit - I like going to gigs to enjoy the songs - not make a list while Im there to compare)

Bands like Pearl Jam have a planned set list , they just don't decide to play songs while they are on stage. They do a great job of mixing up the set list. Also, when people defend static set lists, I always hear this BS about lights , etc , etc as why they cant change the set list. PJ has lights , that doesnt stop them. Not only that, they change guitars every song, with 2 guitar players, a bass player and Eddie Vedder also playing guitar sometimes, planning this for the different set lists every night seems to be a far bigger endeavor then U2 changing some lights.

"changing some lights" is a huge operation on a tour like the 360 tour. If it was stripped down, it would be far easier to do so.

laying down the ground work for the stage was huge work, landing a man on the moon is huge work.  coming up with lighting for 30-35 additional songs is a walk in the park.  i mean someone did those lights when they appeared on other tours.  you really only have to know the structure of a song and let face it U2 songs have very similar structures and many jam on the breaks at about the same time.  the key is just to have a lighting guy that knows the catalog.  that is not hard at all. 

Offline davis

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 109
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #25 on: November 21, 2009, 09:48:49 AM »
The bitching about setlists always drives me insane.  There concerts are productions--planned out for weeks and months in advance.  They've always chosen songs to play in a particular order so that there are almost acts (as in drama) or movements as the show progresses.  As others have pointed out, the bigger/more complex the production, the harder it is to change things up on the fly. 

For the record, the running order (if not the setlist) changed considerably from the first 360 show to the last. 

Finally, they're not that good as musicians!  They're my favorite band of all time by far, but none of them are virtuosos (consider how much trouble Edge had playing the solo to Unknown Caller early in the tour).  They need lots of practice and repetition to play their songs well.  We get a much better product when they get in a groove on a tour and really start to bang out their performances night after night.

And gosh, besides us fanatics, how many shows on each tour does the average concert-goer see?  I'm sure the answer's 1, so they want to make each night the best it can be. 

In my perfect world no one could ever complain about lack of setlist variety again! 

Offline p8ru2

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,941
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #26 on: November 22, 2009, 08:56:07 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The bitching about setlists always drives me insane. 

...In my perfect world no one could ever complain about lack of setlist variety again! 

LOL!  :D  I agree but that'll never happen!  :P

Offline Vervefloyd

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 297
Re: Why so much criticism?
« Reply #27 on: November 24, 2009, 08:00:11 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The bitching about setlists always drives me insane.  There concerts are productions--planned out for weeks and months in advance.  They've always chosen songs to play in a particular order so that there are almost acts (as in drama) or movements as the show progresses.  As others have pointed out, the bigger/more complex the production, the harder it is to change things up on the fly. 

For the record, the running order (if not the setlist) changed considerably from the first 360 show to the last. 

Finally, they're not that good as musicians!  They're my favorite band of all time by far, but none of them are virtuosos (consider how much trouble Edge had playing the solo to Unknown Caller early in the tour).  They need lots of practice and repetition to play their songs well.  We get a much better product when they get in a groove on a tour and really start to bang out their performances night after night.

And gosh, besides us fanatics, how many shows on each tour does the average concert-goer see?  I'm sure the answer's 1, so they want to make each night the best it can be. 

In my perfect world no one could ever complain about lack of setlist variety again! 

you hit the nail right on the head.  i believe the reason they don't rotate much is because they are not good musicians and it would be a train wreck for them to take 60-70 songs on the road. 

but with that being said I'm not going to stop complaining.  I'd like to see them trust their songs more and work on other songs and show they actually believe in the songs they have written in the past.  cause U2 more than any band I have ever witnessed has run their mouth prior to releasing an album about how great it is and how they broke new ground with it, only to dump the majority of them after the tour finishes.  i also think now more than ever some of us here are seeing our other favorite bands embrace their back catalog like never before and really play up to the internet and their diehards a little more and so now we get more annoyed when U2 plays essentially the same songs in the same order every night and when they do rotate we know its only going to be like 1 of 5 songs that can possibly get played.