@U2 Forum

U2 => Tours => Topic started by: Tumbling Dice on April 27, 2010, 10:54:36 AM

Title: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 27, 2010, 10:54:36 AM
I chose not to go and see U2's two most recent European tours because of their decision to only play stadium venues. 

Has anybody else refused to go and see a U2 tour because they were only playing stadiums?


 
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: u2fannewyorkinok on April 27, 2010, 10:58:57 AM
No. I've seen them twice in arenas and twice in stadiums. I really enjoyed the stadium concert in Norman last October. It really came off as very intimate considering there were over 60k people there. They didn't have anyone on the top tier so everyone could see and it was very friendly. Plus Adam, Bono, and The Edge all spent considerable time moving around the outer ring.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: CharityDance on April 27, 2010, 01:28:32 PM
I saw the Vertigo tour in a couple stadiums in Europe and found it unbelievably powerful.  I saw the 360 tour in a couple stadiums in the US and found it unrewarding.  Whether this is US/Europe or Vertigo/360 or both, I'm not sure.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 27, 2010, 01:37:21 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I chose not to go and see U2's two most recent European tours because of their decision to only play stadium venues. 

Has anybody else refused to go and see a U2 tour because they were only playing stadiums?


 

Having said that, looking back I regret not seeing Pop-Mart but i don't feel particularly deprived by missing out on Vertigo or 360.


Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: U2-obsessed and proud on April 27, 2010, 01:58:23 PM
Well you're missing out on some great music, your loss I guess
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 27, 2010, 02:01:30 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Well you're missing out on some great music, your loss I guess

Well I'll get the great music in crystal clear sound on the DVD release, I guess. :P

 
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: U2-obsessed and proud on April 27, 2010, 02:03:40 PM
But nothing can compare to being there, the feel of being at a U2 show
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 27, 2010, 02:06:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But nothing can compare to being there, the feel of being at a U2 show

That's my point, I loved the 'feel' of being at an Elevation show but I didn't much enjoy the 'feel' of standing like cattle in a field at a Zoo TV show, but that's just me.

Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: An Cat Dubh on April 27, 2010, 02:11:32 PM
I wouldn't not go just because they are stadiums only. I just wanna' see the band play live. End of!

I categorically prefer indoor shows, because I think they are much more intimate, powerful, better atmosphere's etc etc.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Domenico of Lovetown on April 27, 2010, 03:11:09 PM
I have really enjoyed the stadium shows.  Upper tier seating is a nightmare, but the floor is exceptional.  Sitting anywhere at a Popmart show was a joy.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: eddyjedi on April 27, 2010, 04:52:57 PM
As long as it's a GA ticket that's all that matters.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: hurricane hugo on April 27, 2010, 05:00:35 PM
U2 is better in stadiums than they are in arenas, so more stadium tours, pls!

#@!
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 27, 2010, 05:03:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 is better in stadiums than they are in arenas, so more stadium tours, pls!

#@!

On DVD's they are but not from the audience.  Let's all pray that the next tour is an Arena tour and I mean Arena's in Europe and not just North America.

Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: An Cat Dubh on April 27, 2010, 05:22:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 is better in stadiums than they are in arenas, so more stadium tours, pls!

#@!

I disagree totally. I think they are much better in arenas. Bono in particular needs to have a connection with the audience and I think he finds that easier in smaller venues.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: StrongGirl on April 27, 2010, 05:44:16 PM
I prefer arenas over stadiums , but since I missed so many tours, I had to see 360 no matter what!  ;D
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: satellitedog01 on April 27, 2010, 06:13:02 PM
I had some very bad luck with my 2 Vertigo shows (effin bad at the Munich one), after my very good luck at an Elevation date(which started out as a disaster), and promised myself not to go to a stadium gig anymore. Actually, I love  theater sized gigs the most.
Intimate, but the sound is usually good.
1000-4000 capacity is great both on sound and energy.

As there aren't any other stadium acts I love, it's not a big deal.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: liewerizon on April 27, 2010, 06:35:12 PM
If given the choice, I prefer arenas to stadium shows. I like the intimate setting that smaller venues like arenas offer, not to mention that they sound better indoor (for me anyway). I would NOT refuse to see U2 just because they only do stadium shows though. Seeing them from anywhere in the stadium is better than NOT seeing them at all.

There are only a handful of bands that can put on great stadium shows, Bono and the lads are one of them.

I wonder, for those that had seen ZooTV, were they better indoor or outdoor?
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: briscoetheque on April 27, 2010, 07:30:15 PM
They haven't played arenas in Australia for 21 years.

I'd kill for an arena show.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Domenico of Lovetown on April 28, 2010, 06:42:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played arenas in Australia for 21 years.

I'd kill for an arena show.

I'd kill for the memory of an indoor Lovetown show.  Didn't they play something like six or seven in a row in Melbourne back in 1989?
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: virgin_prune on April 28, 2010, 06:55:56 AM

Strangely, I saw U2 at The Astoria in London on the warm up to Elevation. It holds around 2,000 people - I can honestly say they weren't that good.

Arenas are much better for U2. I was inside the heart for Elevation at MSG and it was great!

Football stadiums are generally pretty naff for any band.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: mariamontreal on April 28, 2010, 11:38:42 AM
I too prefer arenas, much more intimacy and  even those who don't have great seats it's still intimate .I saw Bon Jovi 20-03-10 at the Bell Center as I have many other times ,I was on th efloor 8 rows from the stage , he was right in front of me . Smiled and looked at me was very close( knock down gorgeous) . I just prefer arenas than stadiums , even for the show in Montreal , I got RZ tickets , and VIP seats 1st night, but even that's goinfg to be a fight for my place and look how expensive ,1000.00 two nights one ticket, me , myself and I .Compare to a floor ticket best seat in the house at 135.00 big difference . But I will go to any length for U2. Just love them .... 
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 28, 2010, 11:56:08 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played arenas in Australia for 21 years.

I'd kill for an arena show.

I do believe you would. :D ;)

Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: JTBaby on April 28, 2010, 12:21:04 PM
Arenas are better. Being able to have the entire crowd see the band, what a concept !

Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 28, 2010, 01:40:32 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Arenas are better. Being able to have the entire crowd see the band, what a concept !



I know, some people still don't get it.

Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: WelshGirl on April 28, 2010, 02:46:47 PM
I do generally prefer arenas, but I certainly wouldn't pass up the chance to see a band or singer I loved just because they were playing stadiums.

And I have been in arenas where if you're sitting at the back (Wembley arena for example) the band look rather like ants and you spend a lot of time watching on the screens. I suppose the issue with stadiums is that you have many more people with that view.

That said, sitting in the top tier to the side of the claw at two 360 shows, with a view of a fairly small looking U2, I had a great time and loved every minute of it. It didn't matter that I wasn't close to the band, it was the music and the general atmosphere which did it for me. Yes, the intimacy of an arena would have made it even better, but I definitely wasn't disappointed with the stadium experience.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: hj on April 28, 2010, 03:01:00 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If given the choice, I prefer arenas to stadium shows. I like the intimate setting that smaller venues like arenas offer, not to mention that they sound better indoor (for me anyway). I would NOT refuse to see U2 just because they only do stadium shows though. Seeing them from anywhere in the stadium is better than NOT seeing them at all.

There are only a handful of bands that can put on great stadium shows, Bono and the lads are one of them.

I wonder, for those that had seen ZooTV, were they better indoor or outdoor?

When I saw ZooTV it was inside a giant arena in Vancouver (my first show, I compare everything to it) and I know when I saw them next it was outside at Commonwealth stadium in Edmonton in 97 for Popmart I thought, "oh they lose a little outside"  It wasn't as intimate as I considered Vancouver to have been.  I remember thinking that for sure.

Since then I have seen only arena shows until last fall when I went to Vegas.  I would say yes, I prefer arena's.  But I would never consider not going to a stadium but I will go out of my way to get to the smallest stadium if I can.

Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: The Exile on April 28, 2010, 03:14:37 PM
I wish they had played ten European shows and ten north America shows in small theaters seating around 1000 people each, and the tickets were made available to fans only (such as the people who participate in forums like this). Then, after 20 shows in 20 weeks, they should have gone back to the studio and released an album that was also intended for fans like us, not the masses.

U2 needs to become a cult band again. It's gonna happen either way, I just hope it is THEY who choose it, rather than it simply happening to them.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 28, 2010, 03:23:50 PM
I saw the Stones at Don Valley stadium in Sheffield in 2006 and I thought that it was an intimate show with a crowd of about 30,000.  I think that was because the venue was a smallish athletics stadium and I had a great seat.  I considered seeing U2 there when the show was announced and was one key away from buying 2 tickets on Ticketmaster at one stage but decided against it.  I still have mixed emotions about that, especially when I was listening to the radio broadcast. :-\  However I wouldn't relish standing in a cavernous football stadium like Wembley watching a musical concert.

I just hope that the next tour is an all arena tour and then I'll spend some money seeing up to 5 shows and I just know that I'll love it.



Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 28, 2010, 03:29:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I wish they had played ten European shows and ten north America shows in small theaters seating around 1000 people each, and the tickets were made available to fans only (such as the people who participate in forums like this). Then, after 20 shows in 20 weeks, they should have gone back to the studio and released an album that was also intended for fans like us, not the masses.

U2 needs to become a cult band again. It's gonna happen either way, I just hope it is THEY who choose it, rather than it simply happening to them.

How about a mixed tour playing stadiums and arena's with two set designs like the Stones have done on their most recent tours and then the fans will have a choice.

 
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: satellitedog01 on April 28, 2010, 03:41:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 needs to become a cult band again. It's gonna happen either way, I just hope it is THEY who choose it, rather than it simply happening to them.

That is probably the wisest formulation of their current state I've ever read. Cool.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 28, 2010, 03:45:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 needs to become a cult band again. It's gonna happen either way, I just hope it is THEY who choose it, rather than it simply happening to them.

That is probably the wisest formulation of their current state I've ever read. Cool.

Since we've gone on a topic detour let me just say that No Line On The Horizon is the best U2 album since Achtung Baby. ;)


Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Domenico of Lovetown on April 28, 2010, 05:36:45 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I wish they had played ten European shows and ten north America shows in small theaters seating around 1000 people each, and the tickets were made available to fans only (such as the people who participate in forums like this). Then, after 20 shows in 20 weeks, they should have gone back to the studio and released an album that was also intended for fans like us, not the masses.

U2 needs to become a cult band again. It's gonna happen either way, I just hope it is THEY who choose it, rather than it simply happening to them.

I like the idea, but theaters with a capacity of 1000 might be a bit extreme.  During the October and War Tours they were primarily playing colleges and universities with arenas that could holt 5000-6000.  That would be a nice experience.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: briscoetheque on April 28, 2010, 07:39:53 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played arenas in Australia for 21 years.

I'd kill for an arena show.

I'd kill for the memory of an indoor Lovetown show.  Didn't they play something like six or seven in a row in Melbourne back in 1989?

Yep.

21 years ago.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Joe90usa on April 28, 2010, 09:19:50 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Strangely, I saw U2 at The Astoria in London on the warm up to Elevation. It holds around 2,000 people - I can honestly say they weren't that good.


By all rights, that should have been a legendary show to see them at that point in their career in a small venue. Instead, they showed up not ready to play and it showed. I would not have passed on that show, but we all know they are never ready to play live when their tours start.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: satellitedog01 on April 29, 2010, 02:01:03 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Strangely, I saw U2 at The Astoria in London on the warm up to Elevation. It holds around 2,000 people - I can honestly say they weren't that good.


By all rights, that should have been a legendary show to see them at that point in their career in a small venue. Instead, they showed up not ready to play and it showed. I would not have passed on that show, but we all know they are never ready to play live when their tours start.

That used to be either down to indecision on how to play songs, or plain laziness/bad organizing skills... Bono should get his voice ready for the grinder... One off performances were rarely great.
BUT, he seems to have learnt his lesson, and has actually done a rather good with doing just that this time around, that surprised me.
Title: YES to stadiums & YES to arenas
Post by: Falling At Your Feet on April 29, 2010, 02:40:08 AM
U2 have been playing stadiums for over 25 years, and will continue to do so into the future.

Unfortunately, anyone who doesen't like stadiums is going to miss a huge chunk of not only U2, but U2 Live.
And U2 live, is where U2 is at,where we get to see them in the flesh and do their thing. I wouldn't miss that for anything.
I think I've learnt more about the band and other U2 fans at live gigs than through any other medium.

I love both types of gigs, and for both, GA standing is the only way.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: virgin_prune on April 29, 2010, 09:40:45 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Strangely, I saw U2 at The Astoria in London on the warm up to Elevation. It holds around 2,000 people - I can honestly say they weren't that good.


By all rights, that should have been a legendary show to see them at that point in their career in a small venue. Instead, they showed up not ready to play and it showed. I would not have passed on that show, but we all know they are never ready to play live when their tours start.

It wasn't so much that they weren't ready - it was the usual slick U2 machine at work. They played ok, bono tried too hard etc.

More that their bombastic music doesn't suit small places. The Cure are the same - arenas suit their epic music.

The Astoria show was quite funny. Salman Rushdie was on the balcony and looked bored witless. I think one of oasis was there too. Unfortunately, I couldn't throw my drink that far...
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: hj on April 29, 2010, 09:52:28 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Salman Rushdie was on the balcony and looked bored witless. I think one of oasis was there too. Unfortunately, I couldn't throw my drink that far...

Is it just me or does Rushdie always looks that way?  He has a perpetual look of general disregard on his face....not bad...just indifferent.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: virgin_prune on April 29, 2010, 09:55:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Salman Rushdie was on the balcony and looked bored witless. I think one of oasis was there too. Unfortunately, I couldn't throw my drink that far...

Is it just me or does Rushdie always looks that way?  He has a perpetual look of general disregard on his face....not bad...just indifferent.

Being intellectually superior to everyone in the building, his look of disregard seems fair...
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: xy on April 29, 2010, 02:36:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I wish they had played ten European shows and ten north America shows in small theaters seating around 1000 people each, and the tickets were made available to fans only (such as the people who participate in forums like this). Then, after 20 shows in 20 weeks, they should have gone back to the studio and released an album that was also intended for fans like us, not the masses.

U2 needs to become a cult band again. It's gonna happen either way, I just hope it is THEY who choose it, rather than it simply happening to them.

How about a mixed tour playing stadiums and arena's with two set designs like the Stones have done on their most recent tours and then the fans will have a choice.

 

They said their tour crew would not do this since the JT third leg was too much work (played arenas and some stadiums).

And while U2 may not be playing stadiums into infinity, I don't think they would play, on a regular basis, venues with a capacity of 1000 people. They might switch to arenas from now on but that's about it.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: hj on April 29, 2010, 02:43:15 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
Salman Rushdie was on the balcony and looked bored witless. I think one of oasis was there too. Unfortunately, I couldn't throw my drink that far...

Is it just me or does Rushdie always looks that way?  He has a perpetual look of general disregard on his face....not bad...just indifferent.

Being intellectually superior to everyone in the building, his look of disregard seems fair...

Could be. He'd be a good poker player I bet.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Domenico of Lovetown on April 29, 2010, 06:44:20 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
They haven't played arenas in Australia for 21 years.

I'd kill for an arena show.

I'd kill for the memory of an indoor Lovetown show.  Didn't they play something like six or seven in a row in Melbourne back in 1989?

Yep.

21 years ago.

I have a feeling they won't be playing arenas in Australia/NZ for some time to come.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: briscoetheque on April 29, 2010, 07:02:00 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
They haven't played arenas in Australia for 21 years.

I'd kill for an arena show.

I'd kill for the memory of an indoor Lovetown show.  Didn't they play something like six or seven in a row in Melbourne back in 1989?

Yep.

21 years ago.

I have a feeling they won't be playing arenas in Australia/NZ for some time to come.

Indeed. Ever.

Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 30, 2010, 07:07:42 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Salman Rushdie was on the balcony and looked bored witless. I think one of oasis was there too. Unfortunately, I couldn't throw my drink that far...

Is it just me or does Rushdie always looks that way?  He has a perpetual look of general disregard on his face....not bad...just indifferent.

He has a medical problem with his eyelids which causes them to look half closed, which gives that impression.

Title: Re: YES to stadiums & YES to arenas
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 30, 2010, 07:15:10 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 have been playing stadiums for over 25 years, and will continue to do so into the future.

Unfortunately, anyone who doesen't like stadiums is going to miss a huge chunk of not only U2, but U2 Live.
And U2 live, is where U2 is at,where we get to see them in the flesh and do their thing. I wouldn't miss that for anything.
I think I've learnt more about the band and other U2 fans at live gigs than through any other medium.

I love both types of gigs, and for both, GA standing is the only way.

I have only seen two U2 concerts (one in an arena the other in a field) and watch their DVD shows sparingly, and so the vast majority of my enjoyment of U2 has been listening to their albums.  I disagree that U2 live is where U2 is at these days.  In fact it would not bother me too much if they hanged up their sexy boots and stopped playing live shows and just concentrated on making sublime music in the studio. :)


Title: Re: YES to stadiums & YES to arenas
Post by: Domenico of Lovetown on April 30, 2010, 07:44:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 have been playing stadiums for over 25 years, and will continue to do so into the future.

Unfortunately, anyone who doesen't like stadiums is going to miss a huge chunk of not only U2, but U2 Live.
And U2 live, is where U2 is at,where we get to see them in the flesh and do their thing. I wouldn't miss that for anything.
I think I've learnt more about the band and other U2 fans at live gigs than through any other medium.

I love both types of gigs, and for both, GA standing is the only way.

I have only seen two U2 concerts (one in an arena the other in a field) and watch their DVD shows sparingly, and so the vast majority of my enjoyment of U2 has been listening to their albums.  I disagree that U2 live is where U2 is at these days.  In fact it would not bother me too much if they hanged up their sexy boots and stopped playing live shows and just concentrated on making sublime music in the studio. :)




I disagree to some degree in that I love seeing U2 live every 4 or 5 years.  That said, I could go for a break in the cycle where we might get a couple of albums over two years similar to R.E.M. circa OOT and Automatic.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: hj on April 30, 2010, 10:26:32 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
Salman Rushdie was on the balcony and looked bored witless. I think one of oasis was there too. Unfortunately, I couldn't throw my drink that far...

Is it just me or does Rushdie always looks that way?  He has a perpetual look of general disregard on his face....not bad...just indifferent.

He has a medical problem with his eyelids which causes them to look half closed, which gives that impression.



Well there you have it.  Not my imagination, an actual reason. 
Thanks, I never knew that. Must be tough going through life looking like a pothead...I suppose that pails to the fatwa in terms of tough though...

Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: LoveSupreme on April 30, 2010, 10:42:02 AM
LOL Hj.
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: singnomore on May 02, 2010, 11:35:45 AM
I prefer arenas (or smaller - Glasgow Barrowlands - legendary!)

However stadiums are where they are at and the 'rush' I get seeing them live makes up for that!
Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: Tumbling Dice on May 02, 2010, 11:46:40 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I prefer arenas (or smaller - Glasgow Barrowlands - legendary!)

However stadiums are where they are at and the 'rush' I get seeing them live makes up for that!

Have a good one in Turin and Rome, singy.  Some of those Italian women are Belissimo. ;)




Title: Re: No To Stadiums.
Post by: singnomore on May 03, 2010, 03:00:37 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I prefer arenas (or smaller - Glasgow Barrowlands - legendary!)

However stadiums are where they are at and the 'rush' I get seeing them live makes up for that!

Have a good one in Turin and Rome, singy.  Some of those Italian women are Belissimo. ;)






I'll do that! Paris could be a winner too!